Is China the most autistic country in history?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_Revolt_(1862–77)

FUG
meant for

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_Revolt_(1862–77)

>The revolt arose over a pricing dispute involving bamboo poles, when a Han merchant selling to a Hui did not receive the amount demanded for the goods.

>Colonel Bell estimated that the population of the Gansu Province was 15 millions before the revolt, and was reduced to 1 million after, during which 9/10 of Han people and 2/3 of Hui people died.

>create Legalism, a philosophy that teaches that everyone is an asshole and only ludicrous quantities of punishment can keep things running
>it turns out to be true for whole east Asia

Ask Alaska

Alaska was given to the USA to avoid war with Britian. During such a war, Alaska would be too far away and over a sea, so it couldn't be supplied and defended.
Basically the Russians thought "well we aren't keeping that, might as well give it to our friends before our enemies take it".

Only in China. Rest of East Asia actually has morals.

Hell no, vietnamese are arguably even worse

Vietnam is Chinese, China just lost a lot of territory.

There lies your answer. Largest borders on Earth in hostile environments that require massive armies and an iron fist to keep under Russian rule.

Except nobody was about to start a war over Manchuria. It was in no danger.
Alaska was a rotting limb cut off to save the rest of the body, Manchuria was a perfectly functioning one given away for free.

They did not have fetus soup in their menu, unlike Chinks

>writing
Allowed the empire to communicate in a common written script in spite of separate spoken languages and contributed to unity. Also no foreigners barging in and replacing the script.

>Confucianism and Legalism
Again, the Confucian order gave them a stable society that prioritized the group over the individual, with obedience encouraged in subordinates and virtue encouraged in superordinates.

>examination
The reason they studied the Confucian texts is because it dictated how they should live their lives and carry out their roles in government and society. Basic civics. Meanwhile in the West the writings of philosophers like Plato were lost for thousands of years.

>TCM
In the West people still believe in faith healers, naturopathy, chiropractic, homeopathy, and other bullshit like that. Belief in alternative medicines isn't exclusive to China.

>treasure fleet
Like the American trip to the Moon, the treasure fleet was a prestige project to announce the Ming's power to the rest of the region. It had an absolutely awful monetary return on investment and there was good reason to let it rot instead of throwing more money at it.

>dynasties
The Mandate of Heaven was much better than the European Divine Right of Kings, being conditional on the ruler's virtue and prosperity of their reign rather than unconditional power vested in the ruler by YHWH. Since there was no notion of the nation-state in China, merely civilization and the state versus barbarians, naturally if you established the new state you were continuing the civilization, and clearly you had Heaven's mandate.

>dumb shit
Literally every civilization in history has had cults and civil wars and famines.

>mercury
Even Western natural philosophers from the age of enlightenment thought mercury was awesome shit.

>Because they did not need to
autism

CHING CHONG DING DONG
WAT DOES THE CHINAMAN SAY
CHING CHONG PING PONG
ME WASH YOUR CLOTHES TO-DAY

Are you having a stroke?

>two dudes disagree on the price of bamboo
Explain?

See

It's called being a stable civilization only controlled by outsiders very infrequently.

tfw to smart to empire

China was a complete autarchic empire in and of itself you moron.

>>every few decades some dumb shit happens like a Taoist guy tells everyone he can do magic, some dude who failed his exams claims to be the brother of Jesus Christ, two dudes disagree on the price of bamboo, or a fat bastard tells the farmers to kill all the sparrows, and and this instantly creates mass chaos that leaves tens of millions dead
Aren't we due for something like this soon?

The CCP's control is too strong for that now.

>>the first emperor drank himself to death on mercury, then buried himself in a tomb filled with rivers of mercury making a map of china

>making a map of china

that is pretty aesthetic desu

>The Mandate of Heaven was much better than the European Divine Right of Kings, being conditional on the ruler's virtue and prosperity of their reign rather than unconditional power vested in the ruler by YHWH. Since there was no notion of the nation-state in China, merely civilization and the state versus barbarians, naturally if you established the new state you were continuing the civilization, and clearly you had Heaven's mandate.

I actually disagree desu. feels like u could just take the gloves off and do whatever you needed to to become emperor.

Climate change melting all the water in Tibet

>very infrequently
Did you forget that they were getting buttfucked by various nomad groups from like 300bc up until the Ming dynasty?

>hurr Confucianism is great!
Confucianism nonsense is the reason why the Chinese refused to buy large supplies of guns from the west when everyone else was doing it. Then they wound up getting bent over a barrel by Britain and Russia because they failed to modernize.

Funfact: The Chinese were so fucking stubborn about not buying new technology that they ended up owning more new world silver than any other country. This is because they refused to trade for anything else the west had to offer. Fat lot of good that did them.

I feel like Xi has a single, massive fuckup in him somewhere. He'll do almost everything right, as he's done so far, but he'll make one major misstep and it will result in total disaster.

Kind of like George H.W. Bush here in the US.

>Chinese
>qing

What did he mean by this? Could it be he didn't know that the Ming did buy cannons from the spanish alongside their own?

In any case the problem wasn't just one of not buying guns; Qing china was the epitome an antimodernist spirit in their rule and concept of the world, even worse than the ming.

>no true Chinaman argument
Get out of here, Wang. You aren't fooling anyone.

No, I'm pointing out that confucianism didn't stop the ming from buying european weapons and that the problems of the qing dynasty are uniquely rooted in their rule and the fact they built a massive empire shitstomping all the other horseniggers to the curb and believing that this made them king nigga, and not some grand narrative that confucianism is anti progress.

kys my man.

The Ming bought some weapons, but they did not modernize in the same way that everyone else did. They could have easily traded their goods for fuckloads of weaponry instead of hoarding silver like morons. It's not like they didn't have the technology to produce their own weapons in large numbers either.

Buying weapons would not have been good enough, the Chinese simply had no culture of advancing science and the scientific method. For them knowledge was to look to the past and trying to learn from legendary sages what heaven wants, and education was for the purpose of getting a position in government and not the pursuit of knowledge. Their military organization was positively feudal. This is why the Self-Strengthening was doomed, and why even though we threw so much aid at them in WW2, they still failed to dislodge the Japanese.

So why do chinaboos love to suck Confucian cock so much?

Literally noone itt said this.

Blaming confucianism for all of chinas problems is like blaming christianity for the genocide of jews. You don't want to stoop to Goldhagen's level do you?

>every few decades some dumb shit happens like a Taoist guy tells everyone he can do magic, some dude who failed his exams claims to be the brother of Jesus Christ, two dudes disagree on the price of bamboo, or a fat bastard tells the farmers to kill all the sparrows, and and this instantly creates mass chaos that leaves tens of millions dead
I know about Hong Christ and Mao's bird autism but explain the others?

There are some legitimately good points in favor of Confucianism. For example the belief in virtues and meritocracy and nobility of virtue and learning over the nobility of blood. Which is why countries like Singapore and China today are ruled by technocrats who don't believe climate change is a leftist hoax.

Because they're fedora tipping atheists who like that it's not a religion, but a form of humanist philosophy.

Literally search up fetus soup china, that shit is a art project for a exibition collaborated with ai wei wei or some shit

Russia wanted a Goodwill communist Ally against Japan

Climate change denial is rampant in China dude, what the fuck are you on about.

They were too weak after WW2 to make enemies, especially powerful enemies like China and the West.

Sure in the Cold war the 2 blocks were rivals as well, but the USSR wasn't really the archenemy of the US. They were still in contact. Both didn't use really dirty tricks only reserved for your worst enemies like assassinations, like they tried with Hitler.

The last thing the USSR needed was a West which was a real enemy and would have isolated them and forced West Germany to stop trading with them.

Yet China was able to modernize and implement "socialism with Chinese characteristics" while Russia just fell to pieces when they tried to perestroika.

That's because Russia took communism far more seriously than China. Logical, since they were the first communist country.

If you are the captain of the ship called communism you can't simply make a 180° turn and switch ideologies like costumes. Generations have to change. Mentalities have to change. Russians were so accustomed to communism that getting rich or even wealthy was looked down upon and even today still is in large parts of the population.

>If you are the captain of the ship called communism you can't simply make a 180° turn and switch ideologies like costumes.
"It doesn't matter if the cat is black or white..."

For Chinese it doesn't.

For Russians it did.

>It did
>Bread lines in the 90s y'all.

Be glad that it was "only" bread lines and not a civil war. You know what happened the last time Russians tried to change a system in 1917.

So a class conflict? seems like a pretty decent reason to me

>kept the came curriculum for centuries with no modernization even after the language they were written in died and it was no longer for for purpose

You don't know much about the modern history of greece, then, or anyone who has studied latin, apparently.

delet this

Latin, Sanskrit, Ancient Greek, Old Persian, the lis goes on. Most countries with a classical culture do this.

I feel like the word "autism" has lost all definition around these parts.

If my Dynasty Warriors have taught me anything is that first is the Yellow Turban rebellion. Probably.

the cost of autism awareness advocates finally getting through to mainstream/public acceptance. It'll tide over in a few years when people move onto the next buzzword for general inferiority.

Confucianism is shit. Legalism, by contrast, is metal as fuck.

t. Chinaboo

sauce?

what the fuck

Original confucianism isn't bad.

Neoconfucianism is autistic.

Legalism is one of the worst philosophies ever created by humans.

It's just my personal opinion but I think China was culturally pretty unsuited for communism. They had a very strong history of being ruled by educated literati and not communes of dumb peasants, and they make excellent businessmen. But they were definitely suited to authoritarianism.

Tried googling Legalism but I still don't get it. Basically what it says as far as I can tell is that humans are selfish so laws are needed to make sure society runs properly, unlike Confucianism which teaches that people should be inherently moral to make society run without the law telling them.

How is Chinese legalism different from the Western model of the rule of law over the rule of individuals? Don't we also pass laws to punish behaviors detrimental to society?

>created primitive logographic writing
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing
Almost all writings (Sumer / Egypt / mesoamerica ) starts out photographic/logographic

>everyone else switched to phonetic/syllable writing instead
lol nope, Phoenician/Greek/Roman and everyone else didn't "switched" to phonetic,
they have phonetic because they second handed writing scripts, and couldn't figure out original meanings of writings, ended up taking it on phonetic value.

Also, all language with proto-writing gone dead, except chink. That's why you have the only logo graphic remnant

Sounds like standard ethnic riots.

usually standard ethnic riots don't kill millions.

For starters, the philosophy is more holistic than just rule of law. It dictates how society overall should be run. Take for example how it historically arose in the Spring and Autumn Period to the Warring States Period.

In the time period Legalists were active, the foremost desire of most people was to bring an end to the ridiculously severe wars between the Chinese states (resulting from the feudalism after the decline of the Zhou) that were getting even worse as time went on. Just look at the historians' records of that time. In the latter years of this period, battles with 5-figure to 6-figure casualties keep popping up like ants along with the accompanying endless series of atrocities. See the Shiji by Sima Qian and the aftermath of the Battle of Changping.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Changping

The ultimate goal of Legalism was to bring the desired peace to the war-devastated states of Chinese civilization. To enforce peace, state and military hegemony was seen as needed. To enforce hegemony, state power. To enforce state power, the Legalists advocated implementation of strict standards of behavior and measurements, suppression of "parasitic" ideas and activities such as ritual, morality, laziness, partiality, and frivolous music, militaristic culture, and increasing productivity of agriculture (to raise more troops)/materiel production.

To enforce these stringent ideas on society, the Legalists saw unwavering and coldly bureaucratic application of Law as the principle to govern by. Discarding the Confucian emphasis on education as naive, they saw to control society by a system of rewards and punishments. Good behavior is rewarded munificently, bad behavior is utterly rooted out and punished. The ruler's place in this system was to be the supreme arbiter of the Law which the bureaucracy and therefore the entire population of the polity had to obey. The ruler is also urged to use any legal, political, and military mechanisms given at his disposal to root out dissent against lawful behavior committed by the people or his ministers/bureaucrats.

With Legalism, the philosophers do not give a single care about any notion of individual liberty or freedom. Individuals themselves are not acknowledged, they only exist in the context of relationships or collective groups. These were to serve the government foremost. Also, Legalism urges the ruler to reign supreme for the sake of enriching the state, not any notion of "the people". He has no obligation to harm the interests of his own government for the sake of those of commoners. Therefore, war for the sake of furthering state power at the expense of other countries is deemed permissible even when it may inflict harm on his own people.

With this system, the Legalists hoped to form a military juggernaut that would conquer the entire world under one rule. They thought no enemies, foreign or domestic, could resist such a well-organized monster. There would be only One Emperor, One Government, and One Law for all of civilization.

There's just a lot of fucking people in China, there always have been. There's lots of bodies to go around when the swords start swinging or the bullets start flying. It's like Russia used to be, except China never got its back broken as fundamentally as Russia did in the 20th Century.

So it's not just the idea of the rule of law, but also dictates what types of law should be enacted, gotcha.
It sounds like the ancient Chinese did fascism before it was cool, except with extra moral relativism.

I wouldn't really say Fascism is a good analogy. Legalism was to be imposed on all people's of the world regardless of blood or custom. They are wary of the military usurping civilian administration and would never tolerate paramilitary groups like the SS to exist.

Do you seriously not understand the concept behind not needing to build global empires you narrow-minded shit?

As a Confucian, I think Confucianism superior in that it gives room for moral education (which has been shown to be highly, though not totally effective).
But yeah, the whole vibe of the era is one of the reasons why I'm into chink history.

Oops, meant to say, "...resulting from the centralization of former vassal states after the decline of Zhou dynasty feudalism".

So is this "one of the worst philosophies" ever created by humans because of how it has no regard for the individual, or is it because of how completely unworkable it would be in practice thanks to everyone fucking hating the ruler?

Government can survive without individualism. It cannot withstand autistic obsession with punishment and chronic backstabbing.

Dang, just realized the ayylium society in The Three-Body Problem is actually Legalism taken to the extreme.

>“I am tired of Trisolaris. We have nothing in our lives and spirit except the fight for survival.”
>“What’s wrong with that?”
>“There’s nothing wrong, of course. Existence is the premise for everything else. But, Princeps, please examine our lives: Everything is devoted to survival. To permit the survival of the civilization as a whole, there is almost no respect for the individual. Someone who can no longer work is put to death. Trisolaran society exists under a state of extreme authoritarianism. The law has only two outcomes: The guilty are put to death, and the not guilty are released. For me, the most intolerable aspects are the spiritual monotony and desiccation. Anything that can lead to spiritual weakness is declared evil. We have no literature, no art, no pursuit of beauty and enjoyment. We cannot even speak of love.… Princeps, is there meaning to such a life?”
>“The kind of civilization you yearn for once existed on Trisolaris, too. They had free, democratic societies, and they left behind rich cultural legacies. You know barely anything about them. Most details have been sealed away and forbidden from view. But in all the cycles of Trisolaran civilization, this type of civilization was the weakest and most short-lived. A modest Chaotic Era disaster was enough to extinguish them. Look again at the Earth civilization that you wish to save. A society born and bred in the eternal spring of a beautiful hothouse would not be able to survive even a million Trisolaran hours if it were transplanted here.”

logographic writing is more efficient to read.

I don't think you know what moral relativism is.

It's also much more efficient to write and MUCH more efficient to type.

But it's a fucking pain to learn. Even for people brought up on it as children it's a fucking pain to learn.

How about amoralism?

It does have clear morals, user.
>we must unite the world in order to end suffering

>It cannot withstand autistic obsession with punishment
Yeah, why bother punishing people for crimes...

If you don't to build a global Empire you end up becoming part of someone else's global Empire. Therefore a global Empire is necessary.

That's a well-known hoax with 1000's of sources proving it's a hoax.

Hilarious how retarded you people are

China was a global empire.

Unless you simply mean "arranged in small bits scattered across the globe", in which case you will have to explain the advantage such a situation gives over a more consolidated empire.

nice try fucking subhuman mongrel cuck

They both took communism pretty seriously. If anything China had more of a love for communism and stalinism considering how bitter they were when Khrushchev denounced Stalin. Not to mention how the cultural movement moved to punish anyone even remotely "rightist".

The more important thing to consider is how they both handled their transition away from communism and their entry into the global economy.

Russia took the shackles off their media and tried to quickly distribute state assets. But clearly this attempt at "modernization" was going too fast, with the newly unshackled media and the west being the primary conductors. The hardliners and conservatives of the party tried to re-take control and sent tanks into Moscow. They failed to use deadly force and as a result they failed to keep the Soviet Union together.

In China they started to allow private enterprise and slowly entered into the global economy while maintaining the strict control of the media and state. When the Tianamen square protests broke out the hardliners took control of the government and sent the tanks into Beijing. They used deadly force and reinforced their control of the country as a one-party state.

Communism was never the real asset of the Soviet Union or China, if anything it was a lead weight holding them down. The real advantage of those countries was an authoritarian one-party government that could guide the ship of state. Russia threw away this asset, the Chinese held onto it.

It's true for the entire world.

It's one thing to punish crimes, it is another to take it to the level the Legalists advised. During the Qin Dynasty, death was liberally dispensed punishment. For example, a soldier who fails to report to role call once got his entire family executed. Reporting late to labor corvee also resulted in death. Many common crimes were punished with exile to treacherous frontiers or branding. See the reasons why various people rebelled against the Qin.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Gaozu_of_Han
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazexiang_Uprising

>in which case you will have to explain the advantage such a situation gives over a more consolidated empire.
Naval bases and coaling stations for power projection against distant enemies, and access to foreign goods that can't be obtained locally.

this