7 ms·
How Britain’s First Mission to China Went Wrong
- girzel 8y agoTwo of history's most arrogant and sanctimonious cultures, meeting together for the first time. What could possibly go wrong?
- cup 8y agoCan Chinese isolationism really be compared to repugnant UK imperialism?
- girzel 8y agoIn terms of arrogance and sanctimoniousness, yes. Ask the Vietnamese, Tibetans, Koreans, Uighurs and Burmese about Chinese "isolationism". Britain: I now control you. [My boats can reach you.] China: You are now me. [You were on my border, now you're inside my border.] The trappings of colonialism are remarkably similar.
- mistermann 8y agoIf more people had basic knowledge of unbiased history, I think there'd be much less vitriol and silly uninformed opinion based (mistaken as fact-based) disagreements on forums.
- mistermann 8y agoJudging by downvotes, in the spirit of lifelong learning would it then be prudent to conclude that more people having a basic knowledge of history would be a bad thing? Or that it wouldn't decrease opinionated arguing on forums?
- true_religion 8y agoI would call the china situation actual conquest, rather than colonialism. Its the way the usa works as well. Hawaii did not become a colony, but a part of America.
- partycoder 8y agoThe British Empire invaded 9 out of 10 modern countries. No other empire has done this. Now, if what's inside your empire is equivalent to what's outside your empire, what's the motivation to expand? Many empires start from the belief that they're superior to others, even if only philosophically, as a justification to expand.
- HumanDrivenDev 8y agoYou can play the moral equivalence card when the UK has missiles pointed at the Republic of Ireland and bans it from international organisations.
- dang 8y agoTaking HN threads into nationalistic flamewar, for one. Please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- sbmthakur 8y agoThat line makes sense. You could've used better words though.
- jVinc 8y agoWhat a delightful read. Thank you for sharing it.
- gerdesj 8y agoWhen I got here I saw the girzel thread below, shuddered and then read the article. It is actually well worth reading. It gives a real flavour of going into the great unknown from the perspective of one side, with some pretty decent insights from the other side. I think. “Grand Choulaa” - this looks to me like the locals taking the piss. Initially Macartney did not realize that he was supposed to prostrate himself before the emperor. Nor, when it was explained to him, was he willing to do so. Despite his great admiration for the prosperity and civilization of the Qing Empire, he viewed Qianlong as an equal to the king of England Macartney would never have really considered Quianlong as equal to the King of Britain (England and Scotland became Britain a little earlier). I am also sure that Quianlong's people would have had exactly the same notion in reverse for exactly the same reason.
- jcranmer 8y agoBoth sides came out of the meeting thinking the other was a bunch of arrogant pricks, and both were kind of right. For the Chinese, they were astonished that a foreign power had the gall to ask for favors while at the same time demanding special treatment without clear justification. For the British, they were astonished that the Chinese were so short-sighted and resolute in their view that they were justifiable global hegemons. The difference is that the British came away realizing that they didn't actually have to put up with it, not with their military prowess. Undoubtedly, Macartney wanted equality only in the polite diplomatic fiction sense; his demand to have a Chinese official reciprocate to a portrait of King George III had no other purposes than to exalt the achievement of equality to the Chinese. Even had the Qing acquiesced, it would likely have only been a prelude to future downgrading of status.
- coldtea 8y ago>Macartney would never have really considered Quianlong as equal to the King of Britain (England and Scotland became Britain a little earlier). I am also sure that Quianlong's people would have had exactly the same notion in reverse for exactly the same reason. Only one side would be justified, being an ancient civilization (as opposed to a recent-ish tribe that entered written history only after the Roman conquest), and the biggest economy of the world for many millennia...
- tabtab 8y agoIf they only had a copy of "How to Win Friends and Influence Others."
- Nomentatus 8y agoI may have missed the prostration section. Who knows, maybe I coulda saved my first marriage if I'd read that section more closely?
- tabtab 8y agoThat's just a specific case of "kissing up", which WFAIO more or less promotes. It encourages one to gain a "genuine interest" in the person you want influence over, but that's tricky to force. WFAIO lacks a "meta" side that helps one motivate oneself to do the difficult/tedious steps. It's kind of like a diet book that tells you to exercise more and eat more vegetables and whole grains. Good advice, but the motivation for that is the hard part, which it may not cover.
- Nomentatus 8y agoGood analysis. (Meditation was my way to get more interested in others, and maybe more than that.) There is a difference between the WFAIO today and the original (which was more kissy-up) as I remember. In a way it's sorta a book about how narcissists can please other narcissists (without ever getting to maybe benefiting others rather than just pleasing them) - but I must admit that narcissistic-on-narcissistic is the case that is most likely to go wrong.
- tabtab 8y agoI think most of us are narcissists, but just don't realize it. Evolution made us selfish and egotistical, and hid that fact from ourselves. Objectivity regarding self is probably not the optimum survival strategy.
- hangonhn 8y agoExtra Credit History did a really great animated history lesson on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgQahGsYokU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgQahGsYokU
- ksec 8y agoWondering Summary and Animated. And it is not only for history as well. Thanks for the link.
- HumanDrivenDev 8y agoFurthermore, the embassies that came from tributary states like Vietnam and Korea did not come to impress the throne; they came to seek the emperor’s approval, which gave them political power back home. To demonstrate their government’s legitimacy in the eyes of the powerful Qing emperor was (at least in China’s eyes) to argue for their own sovereign’s right to rule in his own country. And to gain this approval, they paid tribute. They readily performed the so-called kowtow before the emperor in the manner of his own ministers—a prescribed ritual of nine kneeling bows to the ground (three sets of three) to humble themselves in his presence. And it made perfect sense to do so, because in their recognizing the supremacy of the emperor of China, the eminent power in Asia, he would recognize their supremacy within their own, smaller countries. ... “When foreigners who come seeking audience with me are sincere and submissive, then I always treat them with kindness,” Qianlong wrote. “But if they come in arrogance, they get nothing.” The more I get to know China and the Chinese, the more I realize that these are still the lenses they see the world through.
- ksec 8y ago....The more I get to know China and the Chinese, the more I realize that these are still the lenses they see the world through. yes. things haven't changed one bit,.
- coldtea 8y ago>The more I get to know China and the Chinese, the more I realize that these are still the lenses they see the world through. So, just like major Western powers see other western countries? (Because for non-western countries, major western powers just see them just as areas to colonize, plunder, and steal from).
- HumanDrivenDev 8y agoThis was the laziest attempt at whataboutism I have seen all year. It didn't even make any sense. Step your game up.
- coldtea 8y ago
- ilamont 8y agoFurthermore, the embassies that came from tributary states like Vietnam and Korea did not come to impress the throne; they came to seek the emperor’s approval, which gave them political power back home. Jesuit missions to China some two centuries earlier wowed Ming officials with technological wonders, high-quality illustrated works, and mathematical and mnemonic tricks. The British may have attempted to follow a similar model to impress the Qing court, not realizing (as noted in TFA) that representatives from other states were expected to behave in a different manner. A great read on the early Jesuit missions to China (as well as insights into the late stages of the Ming Dynasty) is Ross Terrill's The Memory Palace of Matteo Ricci
- juhanima 8y agoWhile this article puts a lot of weight in the formal displays of submission, the denial of the English ambassador in following them and the irritation that caused, I cannot help thinking there could have been other reasons for the Chinese to be reserved. Considering the track record of the East India Company in conquering Bengali piece-by-piece during the decades just before this mission, which the Chinese must have been aware of, I think it's totally understandable they were wary. Which must have been the subtext in them telling that no thanks, we do not want your products and really don't want to give you a permanent foothold on the Chinese soil. The fact that the Brits kept on proceeding nevertheless, turning a large number of Chinese citizens into opium addicts while at it, kind of justifies this stance. Maybe the only mistake the Chinese made was not to start improving their military might at the earliest signs of warning, while they still had time.
- ThefinalResult 8y agolmao, if you read the book, you'll see that this is not in fact the case. The Chinese treatment of the British envoys in fact caused public sentiment in Great Britain to turn against China, because the public had such high hopes for the mission in building friendship. If supposedly what you say is true, then the Imperial court chose the worst possible way to go about it. China's mistake was it's pride.
- Nomentatus 8y agoI think the Chinese were the real losers: "In the early 1820s, the British East India Company began large-scale production of tea in Assam, India, of a tea variety traditionally brewed by the Singpho people.[5]"