Be china

>ruled by only one emperor

I just know people are going to stick on this so I'll clarify: only one person at the top at a time. Not one God-Emperor of Mankind.

any economists here? Is this accurate?
I don't like the idea of a wikipedia article, but, nonetheless, this concept does make sense

I think the equilibrium trap is the solution to sustainable civilization.

>Why in the fuck did they not discover industrialization way before europe did?
Because they didnt grt roman/greek knowledge

Mongol Yuans fucked them over and set them back a long time

Atrociously underrated post

I have a BA in economics, it seems plausible.

Oh yes how "cucked" lmao amirite praise kek!

@3442390
what is the point of this post?

SJW's rule the West. OP seems to think China is the one who is "cucked" here. That's a word only /pol/tards use inaccurately with regards to some retarded notion of "civilization" in their posts.

Who gives a fuck about female board members?
China got fucked over for centuries by the west, and by their own emperors.
When they finally get a revolution and democracy it all goes to hell and the warlord period begins, then Japan invades.
Followed by more inner conflicts until Mao gets mainland control, enter famines and cultural revolution, then Deng betraying the ideals of the communist revolution and selling out his people as cheap labour, all for the betterment of the regime and ruling class.

The Chinese people have been hopelessly fucked over for centuries.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_conquest_theory

>being this ahistorical
>never was colonized
>kept language
>kept native religions
>kept folk traditions
>not occupied for five centuries like India
>now richer and more developed than nearly every other nation that was invaded by foreign imperialists
Wow how cucked!

If China only had 1/4 of its population, it'd be better off. More resources and wealth to spread around for 350 million than 1.4 billion.

Then it'd basically be America shoved into East Asia, which I think is your point.

Well wouldn't it be better? There isn't as much population pressure as it is now.

Superior American steel

>is there a bigger cucked nation?
Yeah,

China's neighbors.
>China looms over SEA
>Half of ASEAN is their buttbuddies.
>The other half doesn't care.
>Philippines and Vietnam are the only Anti-Chinese factions.
>They won't ally with each other.
>Philippines' got cucked when Pro-Chink Duterte came to power.

>SK and Japan won't bother teaming up vs. China because fuck one another.

To be fair, do you REALLY want to piss off a giant next door like China if you were mainland SE Asia? At least maritime SE Asia has a moat and the Chinese navy isn't capable of power projection yet.

>They won't ally with each other.
Asians hate one another with a passion.

>SK and Japan won't bother teaming up vs. China because fuck one another.
Can you really blame SK after a history of bad blood with Japan?

This
China at this point is a nationalist country which is communist in name
Even a writer said that if Chiang and Mao was walking through modern China
Chiang would be grinning and smiling while Mao would be crying and dissapointed

>Chiang would be grinning and smiling while Mao would be crying and dissapointed
Lmao, no

The CPP have always had a nationalist bent somewhere. A big deal of why the Sino-Soviet Split happened was because of Chinese nationalism seeing in Soviet leadership/Technocracy over the communist world as Colonialism 2.0

>being this ahistorical

The man pictured in that photo is a soviet "soldier".

Yeah but the CCP under Mao was never Capitalism numbnuts

>somehow does not capitalize on any of these technologies
But they did have gunpowder weapons and got rich exporting silk and porcelain.

>somehow does not capitalize on any of these technologies
The crossbow was employed as a mass infantry weapon for centuries, and gunpowder weapons were part of how Southern Song managed to resist the Mongols for thirty years. Of course the Mongols then took the gunpowder and spread it to the West

What? Everythig I wrote is historically accurate.

If you want to see cucked, take a look at Hong Kong or Chinkapore. Completely cultureless anglo cumrags.

So when does the US get to completely BTFO China then?

Safety nets don't equal communism, retards. China has massive state run industries and the level of control they exert over private business is extreme.

China may not be communist but it certainly is socialist.

>I don't like the idea of a wikipedia article
I hope you realize it's just paraphrasing an academic article.

>somehow does not capitalize on any of these technologies
I'm rather intrigued by this one, is entrepreneurship just a western thing?

Paraphrasing without citations or critical input.

This, a little known fact is that the Manchu elite still rules China, reason for the one child policy to try to reduce the Han Population. God if only they didn't hinde in the huge bowl of Han Chinese ethnic groups, then it would be much easier to hunt down the Manchu filth. Infact, this would probably explain why the Communists went against familiy names too, to make it harder to use historical records to find these filthy manchu demons.

Fucking cotton man. I feel like cotton is the real jew. It destroys everything it touches.

>reason for the one child policy to try to reduce the Han Population
Give me a break. This is not fact but your tin-foiled conspiracy, a typical Han Chauvinism horseshit. "Han" is more cultural / historical identity than bloodline, you moron.

I have news for you user, having the industries owned by the state doesn't make you a socialist country. Wages still exist in china, the workers still aren't the owner of their labor, that's not a socialist country. That's state capitalism.

>Safety nets don't equal communism
I never implied that I merely said that the western """democracies""" actually try to protect the workers (which is one of the goal of communism), something that China doesn't even pretend to do.

I Would say it happened during the Yuan dynasty because it caused a very real disruption of their education system. The Ming did restart it however strong traditionalism in their education system took root at that time. A few 15th century emperors tried to fix that and all of them ended up giving up.

Why do I say it was at that time?

I am basing it on the history of firearms development. Europe over took the Chinese in both small arms and artillery development in the 1420s and the Chinese did not take the lead ever. They had to copy European design repetitively in fact.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breech-loading_swivel_gun
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongyipao

There is details missing in both of those links. The short if it is that two times before the 19th century the Chinese ended up copying European artillery whole sale because it was better then any native design. Then they tried to improve and change the designs that copied to roles. Each time it worked some what but the out come was behind the full spectrum of a European artillery train. Also both times they fell back behind the Europeans.

It is a single area but I would like to point out that it is both a very important area of technology for the era and a field of technology the that Chinese started. If the latter is not saying something important then I would like you to say why.

They had such an enormous pool of cheap peasant labour that there was no incentive to invent any labour saving devices

>somehow does not capitalize on any of these technologies

Nigga they probably had the largest economy of any state for 3000 years in a row.
A moment of weakness and "lol you blew it you never achieved anything because in the short timespan where I am alive you aren't #1 lel".

This would only be the case for a market economy.
A planned economy can and often does ineffective investments for some long term goal.
Example: my village had a train station and trains passed, even though most of the time there were 0 passengers. This was a huge waste of time and money for the train company, but the state guaranteed that should some villager want to go to the city, he can reliably expect the train to be there to take him.
Also bringing electricity and water to villages of like 30 households, which isn't worth it, but a planned economy will do, as the people expect it.

So unless you think imperial China was a free market, that argument is flawed.

>Nigga they probably had the largest economy of any state for 3000 years in a row.

Just no. Rome in the first and second century had a larger estimated GDP, at lest in the figures that I have seen. The Achaemenid Empire, Umayyad Caliphate and Abbasid Caliphate all had periods of time were they had larger economies then china had at the time.

If you make a table with the largest economy in every century for the last 5000 years, China will appear the most.
If you make it a top 5 each century, China will be there in almost every century, minus 2-3 at most. Whats that, 95% of the time they were near the top, probably 80% of the time actually on top?

China isn't a failed state historically, it was just weak in recent memory.

>If you make it a top 5 each century, China will be there in almost every century, minus 2-3 at most. Whats that, 95% of the time they were near the top, probably 80% of the time actually on top?
I love when people just make up random percentages and assume people will take him/her as an expert

It's funny to think there are probably hundreds of western scholars dedicated to unraveling the mystery of how a civilization can fuck up so badly.

For which centuries is this wrong?

how about we start with which centuries is he even talking about and where did he get these numbers from? I know this isn't an academic place and I don't expect it to be but we can at least pretend to know what we're talking about

china was among world leaders in all centuries of history

My understanding of the matter goes as follows

In centuries

20th US
19th British Empire
18th Qing
17th Spanish Empire
16th- 15th Ming
14th far to many ups and down to call
13th Mongol Empire
12th - 11th Song
10th Abbasid Caliphate
9th Tang
8th Abbasid Caliphate/Umayyad Caliphate (Abbasid is a direct successor of the Umayyad)
7th- various Chinese dynasties
6th byzantine empire
5th- 3rd various Chinese dynasties
2nd- 1st Rome

You may have seen different figures. Keep in mind that some people when trying to estimate the historical size of the population and economy of china use the current land of China, not the area earlier Chinese states covered. That changes a lot.

I honestly don't know what you expect me to say. Yes, and?

I'm going to assume you just made up those numbers earlier and stop relying. goodbye chinaboo

>silk
>porcelain
more or less irrelevant to the industrial revolution

>gunpowder
>mass reproduction
not enough to start the industrial revolution

>pottery
>bow
invented in the paleolithic

Those are 20 centuries, the question was about 50 centuries.
And I mean the economic zone of China, so to speak. Just like when talking about Rome or Byzantium you mean their markets, not excluding vassals and very tight allies and so on.

Why didn't they just trade tea and porcelain for Western industrial knowhow?