"1421: The Year China Discovered America" is the dumbest book ever. - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

End of Roman society, feudalism, rise of religious power, beginnings of the nation-state, renaissance (476 - 1492 CE).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
Then do so and i concede they're different.

However, you cant deny that such types of transitions between dynasties in empires-whether that of Qing against the Ming was one of them or not- is how things usually take place.
Since thats how it did go across most nations and most of history. Except when its by marriage ofcourse.
Last edited by anasawad on 04 Feb 2017 17:51, edited 1 time in total.
No no no, saying that i only need to know anything about the Qing empire to tell its different isn't an argument.
Change of Dynasties also usually means change of the system of governing and ruling and even in many cases the social structure.

The argument is about the Jurchen and the Han under the Ming.
If they're not one nation then the difference would be seen within that period. (as in integrated with each other)
A new dynasty coming and changing the system doesn't mean anything other than different political and social philosophy.
And that can be seen all over the world with changes of ruling dynasties.

If you want to follow that path then i can easily take the history of different Persian empires to show how the system and social structures and even religion and general common culture changed with each one.
Last edited by anasawad on 04 Feb 2017 17:57, edited 1 time in total.
But you see, if you knew anything about the Qing you would already know that the Chinese resented Manchu cultural institutions.

Did you know that or not?

Further you would be familiar with the bloody nationalist revolution that deposed the Manchus in 1911. Were you aware of these events?
But i do know that the Arabs hated the rule of the Umayyads for most of their leaders except one for example.
Doesn't tell much other than that the ruling dynasty is terrible at its job.
This can be seen even outside of empires where the new ruling entity changes the social structures and institutions drastically.
Not an argument.

Explain why when they were under the Ming dynasty they were different nations and not part of one nation.
And why didn't they rise up against it before the economic conditions went south.

I am aware of the revolutions that took place in the 20th century.
If it was as different as you make it seem then their rule wont last nearly 300 years.
And the only problems it seemed to have is mainly external by Europeans majorly not internal.

Here, the same reason as before during the Ming rule:
The Taiping Rebellion in the mid-19th century was the first major instance of anti-Manchu sentiment. Amid widespread social unrest and worsening famine, the rebellion not only posed the most serious threat towards Qing rulers, it has also been called the "bloodiest civil war of all time"; during its fourteen-year course from 1850 to 1864 between 20 and 30 million people died.[83] Hong Xiuquan, a failed civil service candidate, in 1851 launched an uprising in Guizhou province, and established the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom with Hong himself as king. Hong announced that he had visions of God and that he was the brother of Jesus Christ. Slavery, concubinage, arranged marriage, opium smoking, footbinding, judicial torture, and the worship of idols were all banned. However, success led to internal feuds, defections and corruption. In addition, British and French troops, equipped with modern weapons, had come to the assistance of the Qing imperial army. It was not until 1864 that Qing armies under Zeng Guofan succeeded in crushing the revolt. After the outbreak of this rebellion, there were also revolts by the Muslims and Miao people of China against the Qing dynasty, most notably in the Miao Rebellion (1854–73) in Guizhou, the Panthay Rebellion (1856–1873) in Yunnan and the Dungan Revolt (1862–77) in the northwest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_dyna ... l_pressure

Same reasons, bad conditions led to uprisings.
In the Ming dynasty, poor conditions and poverty along with bad governance also led to uprisings which led to their fall.
Last edited by anasawad on 04 Feb 2017 18:05, edited 1 time in total.
Conquered ? The Jurchen were the ones to be integrated into the larger culture not the other way around.
When they took control, they were already under cultural influence of the Han Chinese for centuries meaning they moved way closer to their culture than the Han moved towards them.
Which is kinda evident by the fact that they applied a multi ethnic China policy when they took rule.
They already saw themselves and all the other groups as part of a greater China.

'm not trying to inform you on it, 'm simply pointing out that the same conditions that were in place during the Ming fall was also in place during the Qing fall.
Which means they should be factored in as well.
Last edited by anasawad on 04 Feb 2017 18:10, edited 1 time in total.
Well, thats the point. You keep saying they weren't integrated. Show how.
Both sides have to present an argument.
If you explain why and how weren't they integrated with the Han Chinese, then you proof your point that they were actually retaliating against the Han.

If their own leader was raised with a Ming dynasty general, then i assume that there was atleast some type of influence there.
And if the Han were welling to co-operate with them to remove the Ming, then the people back then must've believed that at the very least they can to some extent trust them and if not considered them as part of their own nation then atleast allies.
Do you require me to personally describe the linguistic, cultural, military, political, social and economic distinctions between Han and Jurchen societies, that I am endlessly repeating that you are totally ignoring, perhaps because you don't know anything about them.

Here is a book you could read to help you learn.

Actually you didn't repeat anything or even say anything. You simply kept questioning my argument without putting a counter argument.

You dont need to describe the details. You can if you point out to specific events that for example shows your point.
Or you can simply answer simple questions.

Once ruling out the poor economic conditions the plagued both the Ming and the Qing empires near the time of their fall and the beginning of the uprisings, why did people resent the Qing rule ?
If people resented their rule because of the external forces attacking the empire (i.e Europeans mainly) and the resulting poor economic conditions, then thats a normal revolution, like 10s and maybe even 100s of revolutions that happens all across the world even today.
If that wasn't the reason ? what was it ?

Second, if they didn't want to unite China, why did the made it officially a mutli ethnic empire ?
And if they weren't culturally integrated into the Chinese culture, why did they keep the traditions of the Chinese people like the mandate of heaven for example ?
Military occupation is a military occupation, it doesn't need to please the occupied people to stay in place, it needs soldiers.

And third and finally. If they weren't already integrated, then why did Chinese people (since you separate them) trust them enough to help them overthrow the Ming empire ?

Because these things indicate that indeed they're just like other empires transitioning dynasties in history. So if you have a different explanation, provide it.

What makes you believe it is any different? The[…]

And China is a major, important country in the wo[…]

You've done nothing except talk down to me. I to[…]

Is Marxism old-fashioned?

Well this is conjecture and I suspect not even cl[…]