How is it that China was able to unite while Europe, the Middle East and India were not?

Sort of. China might have not made the canals. If the people there had developed a river and coast navigation tradition, that would have changed things.

India was unfortunate in not having a lot of places good for canals, outside of Bengal which did have them. Once railroads showed up, India was always going to become more united. Without them you need a vicious 'road empire', ruling by making sure they can always march to your city and kill you if you mess up. The Mughals and the British were like this.

The Grand Canal connecting the Yellow River and the Yangtze River wasn't built until the Sui dynasty, after two hundred years of northern and southern division that followed the collapse of the Sima Jin dynasty (which coincidentally happened around the same time that Western Rome fell just like how the Three Kingdoms period and the Third Century Crisis happened around the same time)

Hrmmm

I was certain they had the canals earlier than that.

Even so, the peculiarities of how you run a canal versus how you run a sailor tradition seem to make the difference to me.

Napoleon definitely knew about the current(during his time) status of China. He knew enough about China's size/history to claim China as a sleeping giant that's being taken advantage of by the British.

You have to remember, America wasn't a thing during his period. China controlled 1/3 of the world's economy, population, etc.

They did have canals, but the Grand Canal was the big one that made Northern and Southern China linked by waterway.

>How is it that China was able to unite while Europe, the Middle East and India were not?

Because China is an oriental civilization centered around stability and uniformity. The chinese writing system doesn't represent words, like in european cultures, but rather concepts. This is a good technique to integrate and mobilize large masses of people stretching thousands of miles. Whereas in Europe, every culture has multiple languages written in their own words, this creates a highly atomized society.

On the other side, the entire concept for China to be united stems from the fact that "China" literally means "Middle kingdom", that is the place between paradise and the netherworld. So you have an entire mass of people (1/3 of the planetary population) that conceives it's reality, based on the idea that they represent existence itself, and there is none other. This in turn creates a highly inwards looking perception of reality in relation to the chinese and the existence of their state.

On the other spectrum of the entropic scale, you have europeans, which have a highly materialist and extroverted perception of reality (Understanding reality not as thinking of it, but as acting upon it) And based on this scale we can historically determine that there is a center out of which reality is concerned with stability, and a periphery that has no such concerns due to being to far from the center in little atomized units of consciousness groups

Because China doesnt have natural borders. If you control china proper, its easy to extend tour control to the outer parts.

>How different were the cultures of the Warring states?
The States of Pre-Imperial Feudal China was pretty similar to Europe during the medieval ages (or today). They were diverse in language, culture, and at times ethnic makeup, but they shared an overall general culture.

If Europe has the Greco-Roman Christendom thing as a general identity, the Warring States had the concept of the Middle State(s) who are the center of a civilizational trend known as "Huaxia" which for them, stood as the highest form of civilization. Along with a shared history under the Zhou as said.

We do know from Qin Shi Huang's edict that the writing system was radically different per state that the First Emperor called for a single system of writing and measurement.

I should also add however that who gets to be part of "Huaxia" was contested among the states.

For example: many of the states considered the Qin outside of "Huaxia" due to being "tainted" by foreigners, as the Qin Kingdom was originally the Duchy of Qin set up by the Zhou to fight horseniggers in the West. It doesnt help that the Ducal -and later Royal- family received Steppenigger refugees and had princesses from these people marry into their family.

The Qin and other dynasty also held Chu outside of "Huaxia" for their association with Southern tribalnigger barbarians who tattooed themselves.

All the places you mentioned managed to unite at some point in their history. The real question is, why does China keep reuniting itself any time central authority collapses?
An answer to that could be that throughout most of chinese history, the north china plain held the large majority of chinese population in a geographical context devoid of any obstacles to unification. Through that economic and demographic advantage, it wasn't hard for whatever northern state to keep expanding back to full traditional China size and beyond trampling over southern barbarians and western hicks.
Compare to Europe and the Middle East, where you have the economic and demographic centres moving around constantly throughout history and often different places altogether, leading to situations like wealthy italian city states kicking out a vast german empire. All the mountains and seas creating troublesomely large separate polities like Britain and Spain don't help either.
I don't know shit about India, but it wouldn't surprise me if you could tldr: geography it too.

>Muh environmental determinism
By your meme history, China Proper shouldve been split permanently among the borders of the Northern Plains, Mountainous Southern China, Sichuan Basin, and the Northwestern Corridor.

Except it didn't.

Did you even read the post you quoted? It spells specifically why what you say wouldn't happen.

They are smarter than everyone else.

Except Northern China Plains didn't remain forever the center of the main Chinese population. The South held considerable population in itself as well.

In addition it doesn't take into account cultural factors such as the autismal belief of the Chinese on the existential necessity of unification after the Warring States ended. Couple it with Mandate of Heaven memes, no two dynasties could exist side by side in China because the legitimacy of rule in the place is there really could only be one ruler of China. When that's not the case, the people of China always assume that the period was a bad time to be alive in.

The northern China plain is basically a giant battle arena for any smaller states that arise to fight it out for dominance, at which point they crush and dominate the South. Almost all Chinese dynasties start in the north and expand south, the exception being the Ming.

The middle east DID unite a bunch of times dumbass.

edit: HOLY SHIT THIS CAPTCHA MACHINE IS INSANE I JUST DID LIKE 20 OF THEM

>edit:
Please kill yourself, reddit.

Because China, like India or Egypt, is a geopolitically circumscribed agricultural zone. In any circumscribed geopolitical system with a solid agricultural basis, the tendency is to always move toward unified states.

right into my trap the redditor went

>For example: many of the states considered the Qin outside of "Huaxia" due to being "tainted" by foreigners
This has more to do with Qin toting their cultural superiority and the adoption of legalism. The Qin came to reject the Hua elite culture and even went as far as to using a monkey radical character as a homonym for Xia.

Qin wasn't the only one who miscegenated with the Rong-Di(most likely Sino-Tibetans themselves),with the royal house of Ji and the ducal house of Jiang having their origins amongst them.

redditors calling out other redditors. its like newfag influx of 2010 all over again.

imagine being this jealous of white people

Jealous? Nonsense. The core provides stability while the periphery provides innovation. Each influences the other but only after both have come in contact in their respective maximum conscious stretch

Read up on the Shang dynasty. It's earliest form of what you could call the first Chinese state, and where the Han people emerged from who of course would go on to dominate every aspect of Chinese society.

Cao Cao did nothing wrong

inb4 Xia memes

bump

Tyranny. The Chinese are unparalleled among the races of man in their sadism and cruelty, as evidenced by their horrible tortures, callousness towards the dying, and cannibalistic tendencies. The Chinese governments have always been infamous for their draconian laws and brutal leaders. China stayed unified because nobody ever dared to rebel, unless the potential for wealth and power was big enough, which usually meant the entirety of China. Thus nearly every time a dynasty of China collapsed, another despot quickly rose up to conquer and loot the land instead of entertaining what we consider the more civilized ideals of nationalism and freedom.