• Does this explain why Neoconfucian China fell so far behind the West?

    From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 13 02:38:35 2023
    - A nation without dregs and malcontents is orderly, peaceful and pleasant, but perhaps without the seed of things to come.

    Eric Hoffer

    Does that mean that a nation that "...is orderly, peaceful and pleasant..." is least prepared to deal with change and therefore most vulnerable when change occurs?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Mon Mar 13 09:28:13 2023
    On 3/13/23 02:38, gggg gggg wrote:
    - A nation without dregs and malcontents is orderly, peaceful and pleasant,

    but perhaps without the seed of things to come.

    Eric Hoffer

    Does that mean that a nation that "...is orderly, peaceful and pleasant..."

    is least prepared to deal with change and therefore most vulnerable when
    change occurs?

    Yes. I definitely believe that is a big part of the reason
    that China relatively fell behind while the West Grew Rich.

    Much of Chinese life was controlled by the bureaucratic
    Mandarins, who were appointed because they were smart,
    to rule life. This was non hereditary. They lived a
    quite fine life. So there was major bias in them to
    resist change, that could disrupt their grand and
    peaceful lives.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to All on Mon Mar 13 21:25:03 2023
    On Monday, March 13, 2023 at 9:28:16 AM UTC-7, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/13/23 02:38, gggg gggg wrote:
    - A nation without dregs and malcontents is orderly, peaceful and pleasant,

    but perhaps without the seed of things to come.

    Eric Hoffer

    Does that mean that a nation that "...is orderly, peaceful and pleasant..."

    is least prepared to deal with change and therefore most vulnerable when change occurs?
    Yes. I definitely believe that is a big part of the reason
    that China relatively fell behind while the West Grew Rich.

    Much of Chinese life was controlled by the bureaucratic
    Mandarins, who were appointed because they were smart,
    to rule life. This was non hereditary. They lived a
    quite fine life. So there was major bias in them to
    resist change, that could disrupt their grand and
    peaceful lives.

    Is this relevant to Hoffer's quote?:

    - The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

    George Bernard Shaw ("Man and Superman")

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Horny Goat@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Mar 15 21:48:18 2023
    On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 09:28:13 -0700, a425couple
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Much of Chinese life was controlled by the bureaucratic
    Mandarins, who were appointed because they were smart,
    to rule life. This was non hereditary. They lived a
    quite fine life. So there was major bias in them to
    resist change, that could disrupt their grand and
    peaceful lives.

    One could make the identical argument with respect to China most
    anytime in the 50 years following 1949.....

    The opening up of China in recent years is at least as much due to
    pushback from the small merchants who profitted from the minimal
    opening up that occured and were determined to keep it. They were
    successful and were content to let Beijing take credit as long as they
    were content not to roll back the changes.

    That's pretty much the story of Chinese economic gains these last 20
    years at least until COVID in early 2020 put the brakes on.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to The Horny Goat on Thu Mar 16 10:03:37 2023
    XPost: soc.history.war.misc

    On 3/15/23 21:48, The Horny Goat wrote:

    On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 09:28:13 -0700, a425couple
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Much of Chinese life was controlled by the bureaucratic
    Mandarins, who were appointed because they were smart,
    to rule life. This was non hereditary. They lived a
    quite fine life. So there was major bias in them to
    resist change, that could disrupt their grand and
    peaceful lives.

    One could make the identical argument with respect to China most
    anytime in the 50 years following 1949.....


    Well, the testing for entry to the mandarins was based on merit,
    by testing for knowledge and intelligence. We suspect the
    selections in the last 75 years are based on loyalty to the
    Chinese 'communist' party and to Xi.

    Their openness to individual and government profit, seems to
    vary over the decades.

    you might find this informative:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ma

    The opening up of China in recent years is at least as much due to
    pushback from the small merchants who profitted from the minimal
    opening up that occured and were determined to keep it. They were
    successful and were content to let Beijing take credit as long as they
    were content not to roll back the changes.

    That's pretty much the story of Chinese economic gains these last 20
    years at least until COVID in early 2020 put the brakes on.

    My views and opinions are firmly,
    That the quality of life for the average Chinese citizen GREATLY
    improved after 1978. It may be pretty much a dictatorship,
    but it is not stealing all 'product' for just the very politically
    elite few. They are indeed an economic and military power.

    Taiwan is an interesting nut. Two irreconcilable views and opinions.
    Do the 23 million people have the right to self determination?
    Do they really care enough for the US and other world leaders
    to harm themselves?

    from
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan

    Population
    • 1 July 2022 estimate
    Neutral increase 23,894,394[18] (56th)
    • 2010 census
    23,123,866[19]
    • Density
    650/km2 (1,683.5/sq mi) (10th)

    GDP (PPP) 2022 estimate
    • Total
    Increase $1.621 trillion[20] (19th)
    • Per capita
    Increase $69,500[20] (14th)
    GDP (nominal) 2022 estimate
    • Total
    Increase $828.659 billion[20] (21st)
    • Per capita
    Increase $35,513[20] (29th)

    Gini (2017) Negative increase 34.1[21]
    medium

    HDI (2021) Increase 0.926[m][25]
    very high · 19th

    Domestic opinion
    See also: Taiwan independence movement and Chinese unification
    Broadly speaking, domestic public opinion has preferred maintaining the
    status quo, though pro-independence sentiment has steadily risen since
    1994. In June 2021, an annual poll run by the National Chengchi
    University found that 28.2 percent of respondents supported the status
    quo and postponing a decision, 27.5 percent supported maintaining the
    status quo indefinitely, 25.8 percent supported the status quo with a
    move toward independence, 5.9 percent supported the status quo with a
    move toward unification, 5.7 percent gave no response, 5.6 percent
    supported independence as soon as possible, and 1.5 percent supported unification as soon as possible.[355] A referendum question in 2018
    asked if Taiwan's athletes should compete under "Taiwan" in the 2020
    Summer Olympics but did not pass; the New York Times attributed the
    failure to a campaign cautioning that a name change might lead to Taiwan
    being banned "under Chinese pressure".[356]

    The KMT, the largest Pan-Blue party, supports the status quo for the
    indefinite future with a stated ultimate goal of unification. However,
    it does not support unification in the short term with the PRC as such a prospect would be unacceptable to most of its members and the
    public.[357] Ma Ying-jeou, chairman of the KMT and former president of
    the ROC, has set out democracy, economic development to a level near
    that of Taiwan, and equitable wealth distribution as the conditions that
    the PRC must fulfill for unification to occur.[358] Ma stated that the cross-Strait relations are neither between two Chinas nor two states. It
    is a special relationship. Further, he stated that the sovereignty
    issues between the two cannot be resolved at present.[359]

    The Democratic Progressive Party, the largest Pan-Green party,
    officially seeks independence, but in practice also supports the status
    quo because neither independence nor unification seems likely in the
    short or even medium term.[360] In 2017, Taiwanese premier William Lai
    of the Democratic Progressive Party said that he was a "political worker
    who advocates Taiwan independence", but that as Taiwan was already an independent country called the Republic of
    China,[287][291][294][361][362] it had no need to declare independence.[363]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Horny Goat@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Mar 16 12:39:39 2023
    On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 10:03:37 -0700, a425couple
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    My views and opinions are firmly,
    That the quality of life for the average Chinese citizen GREATLY
    improved after 1978. It may be pretty much a dictatorship,
    but it is not stealing all 'product' for just the very politically
    elite few. They are indeed an economic and military power.

    That's what I'm saying - I'm suggesting that MOST of the reforms after
    that were directly related to the explosive growth that China
    displayed and that the impetus for the growth was NOT "top down" but
    rather from below with most of the new millionaires and billionaires
    willing to let the party grab the credit even though Hu in particular
    wanted to clamp down.

    Taiwan is an interesting nut. Two irreconcilable views and opinions.
    Do the 23 million people have the right to self determination?
    Do they really care enough for the US and other world leaders
    to harm themselves?

    Historically there was no single unitary state called China until
    modern times - the Mongols did as much to unify China as anybody else
    and for MOST of the last 2000 years Taiwan was NOT owned by China.
    Definitely by tribal peoples closely related to China but equally not
    ruled by Beijing for most of it.

    Not sure of a good metaphor but think France and Alsace 1871-1918.
    (Something I >do< know something about as one of my great grandmothers
    was an Alsatian born after 1871)

    I personally think the Chinese claim to Taiwan is bogus but in
    practice might makes right even if it doesn't morally.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Sun Mar 26 02:20:35 2023
    On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 1:16:43 AM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
    On Monday, March 13, 2023 at 2:38:36 AM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
    - A nation without dregs and malcontents is orderly, peaceful and pleasant, but perhaps without the seed of things to come.

    Eric Hoffer

    Does that mean that a nation that "...is orderly, peaceful and pleasant..." is least prepared to deal with change and therefore most vulnerable when change occurs?
    According to this:

    - In order to answer the question of why China failed to become a world superpower, it is important to first answer the question of why Eurasia (which includes both China and Europe) was most likely to foster powerful civilizations. Jared Diamond,
    author of Guns, Germs, and Steel, argues persuasively that the geography of the Eurasian continent was the underlying cause of their success on the world stage...

    http://fubini.swarthmore.edu/~ENVS2/kyle/zhenghe3.html

    Not everyone agrees with Diamond:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns%2C_Germs%2C_and_Steel#Criticism

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Sun Mar 26 02:16:42 2023
    On Monday, March 13, 2023 at 2:38:36 AM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
    - A nation without dregs and malcontents is orderly, peaceful and pleasant, but perhaps without the seed of things to come.

    Eric Hoffer

    Does that mean that a nation that "...is orderly, peaceful and pleasant..." is least prepared to deal with change and therefore most vulnerable when change occurs?

    According to this:

    - In order to answer the question of why China failed to become a world superpower, it is important to first answer the question of why Eurasia (which includes both China and Europe) was most likely to foster powerful civilizations. Jared Diamond, author
    of Guns, Germs, and Steel, argues persuasively that the geography of the Eurasian continent was the underlying cause of their success on the world stage...

    http://fubini.swarthmore.edu/~ENVS2/kyle/zhenghe3.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 1 09:18:08 2023
    On Monday, March 13, 2023 at 2:38:36 AM UTC-7, wrote:
    - A nation without dregs and malcontents is orderly, peaceful and pleasant, but perhaps without the seed of things to come.

    Eric Hoffer

    Does that mean that a nation that "...is orderly, peaceful and pleasant..." is least prepared to deal with change and therefore most vulnerable when change occurs?

    - I bless a society that tolerates and supports an eternal childhood for some, a childhood whose playfulness can, in turn, be a blessing to society.

    Allan Bloom

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)