3 ms·

> It wasn't bullshit. Generally, the merchants and voyagers who reached china were in awe. Well, this was after Rome, and while after the middle ages, still be

> It wasn't bullshit. Generally, the merchants and voyagers who reached china were in awe. Well, this was after Rome, and while after the middle ages, still before the industrial revolution. > It was why europeans wanted to get to china in the first place and not the other way around. The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. "Even decades after the opium wars, europeans were still in awe even while burning and pillaging." Why should they? Even if they are writings about "superior culture" from that time, we had Roman writers write too about "superior Germanic culture" (bellum germanicum). By the way, do you know why the Opium war happened? Besides having the inferior technology on the Chinese side? Do you know what the reasons was? It should be a warning to China today.

elfexec 7y ago
> Well, this was after Rome, and while after the middle ages, still before the industrial revolution. I don't know what you are trying to say here. > The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. No. It says more about Europe than China. It shows that china had what europe needed/wanted/etc. Also, europe wasn't "exploring" at first. They were seeking a path to china/india/etc after their overland access to china ended with the turkish conquest of constantinople and the russian overthrow of the golden horde. It isn't an accident that europe started "exploring" soon after their trade route to china was cut. > Why should they? Ask them. All I said was that they were. You claimed they weren't and I just wanted to correct you. I'm not saying they should've have been or not. I'm just saying they were. > we had Roman writers write too about "superior Germanic culture" (bellum germanicum). And? I'm trying to make sense of your response so far and I can't. > By the way, do you know why the Opium war happened? Besides having the inferior technology on the Chinese side? Do you know what the reasons was? Yes. China has superior products that europe desired and ran a deficit... > It should be a warning to China today. Not quite. Different type of trade system and different environment. The deficit back then aren't the same as it is today. The chinese didn't use the trade deficit to buy british debt/treasuries/etc. As strange as it sounds, but it's china that's really running a deficit and it should be a warning to us. It's naive to think we are in the same situation as in the early 1800s. We are not. The roles are reversed. It's china who is in awe of the west. It's china who wants western goods. It's china who wants to come to the west. It's china that's hungry and ambitious. It's china sending people all over the west to trade, learn, etc.
- bra4you 7y ago
  "I don't know what you are trying to say here." You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. But I mentioned this time frame myself and it was the only time. >> The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. > No. It says more about Europe than China. Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead, the culture had big weaknesses. So big, that they left the world for Europe. What happened to Zheng He? "Yes. China has superior products that europe desired and ran a deficit..." You are right with the deficit. They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) and only wanted to export but never buy anything. Not so different from today. They always said, in the arrogance "we don't need anything!". After the military trouble with the west, they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology.
  - yorwba 7y ago
    > They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) Those products were superior in their respective categories of textiles, beverages and tableware in the sense that wealthy Europeans preferred them over locally made goods. > they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology. Already the Ming dynasty had bought Portuguese cannons and were using them very effectively at first against the invading Jurchens. Of course then the Jurchens got their own cannons, conquered all of China and renamed themselves Manchu, establishing the Qing dynasty. They kept buying Western weapons, ships etc. over the following centuries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Qing_dynasty#Technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Qing_dynasty#T... However, it seems they didn't improve much on the bought technology, or didn't build up high enough production capacity. The British had started experimenting with adding steam engines to their sailboats in time for the First Opium War, which contributed to their defeat of the Chinese fleet (which included bought Western ships). If the Qing had put their energy into building an even larger fleet of steamboats, they might have been able to avoid a repeat of that defeat, but of course I have the benefit of hindsight.
  - elfexec 7y ago
    > You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. Any time before the 1800s? > Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead I thought you said they were never ahead? > the culture had big weaknesses. Every culture has weaknesses. > So big, that they left the world for Europe. What happened to Zheng He? Oh god, no wonder. You learned pop fiction history. What about zheng he? Your comment is as silly as what happened to the US flights to the moon? It's been 50 years since the last moon landing. Why do you ask? Because there is no financial reason for it. The same thing with zheng he. It was a grand naval theatrical performance which didn't pay any dividends. As for europe, you act like "culture" is why europe "explored". Why didn't europe "explore" in 1392 or 1292 or 592 or you get the idea. Didn't europe have culture back then? There was no incentive. It wasn't culture that pushed europe to "explore". It was financial incentive. The collapse of the byzantine empire and the end of the golden horde is why columbus sailed for what? Americas? No. He set sail for the east. > They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) and only wanted to export but never buy anything. A product can be unique and superior. The reason why silk and porcelain were desired was precisely because it was superior to anything in europe. Not only that europe had inferior porcelain knock-offs for hundreds of years. You know how like we have inferior chinese knock-offs today, there were inferior europe knock-offs of chinese products. It's why "fine china" was called "fine china". > They always said, in the arrogance "we don't need anything!". After the military trouble with the west, they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology. More pop fiction history nonsense you learned from a silly documentary. I watched the same documentaries as you. Might I recommend learning to research and think independently rather than parroting stuff you see on tv? Anyways, I'm sure you'll grow out of this phase eventually as you gain more knowledge and experience. Good luck to you with that.

elfexec 7y ago

> Well, this was after Rome, and while after the middle ages, still before the industrial revolution. I don't know what you are trying to say here. > The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. No. It says more about Europe than China. It shows that china had what europe needed/wanted/etc. Also, europe wasn't "exploring" at first. They were seeking a path to china/india/etc after their overland access to china ended with the turkish conquest of constantinople and the russian overthrow of the golden horde. It isn't an accident that europe started "exploring" soon after their trade route to china was cut. > Why should they? Ask them. All I said was that they were. You claimed they weren't and I just wanted to correct you. I'm not saying they should've have been or not. I'm just saying they were. > we had Roman writers write too about "superior Germanic culture" (bellum germanicum). And? I'm trying to make sense of your response so far and I can't. > By the way, do you know why the Opium war happened? Besides having the inferior technology on the Chinese side? Do you know what the reasons was? Yes. China has superior products that europe desired and ran a deficit... > It should be a warning to China today. Not quite. Different type of trade system and different environment. The deficit back then aren't the same as it is today. The chinese didn't use the trade deficit to buy british debt/treasuries/etc. As strange as it sounds, but it's china that's really running a deficit and it should be a warning to us. It's naive to think we are in the same situation as in the early 1800s. We are not. The roles are reversed. It's china who is in awe of the west. It's china who wants western goods. It's china who wants to come to the west. It's china that's hungry and ambitious. It's china sending people all over the west to trade, learn, etc.

bra4you 7y ago
"I don't know what you are trying to say here." You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. But I mentioned this time frame myself and it was the only time. >> The reason why Europe explored more during that time says more about China than Europe. > No. It says more about Europe than China. Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead, the culture had big weaknesses. So big, that they left the world for Europe. What happened to Zheng He? "Yes. China has superior products that europe desired and ran a deficit..." You are right with the deficit. They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) and only wanted to export but never buy anything. Not so different from today. They always said, in the arrogance "we don't need anything!". After the military trouble with the west, they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology.
- yorwba 7y ago
  > They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) Those products were superior in their respective categories of textiles, beverages and tableware in the sense that wealthy Europeans preferred them over locally made goods. > they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology. Already the Ming dynasty had bought Portuguese cannons and were using them very effectively at first against the invading Jurchens. Of course then the Jurchens got their own cannons, conquered all of China and renamed themselves Manchu, establishing the Qing dynasty. They kept buying Western weapons, ships etc. over the following centuries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Qing_dynasty#Technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_Qing_dynasty#T... However, it seems they didn't improve much on the bought technology, or didn't build up high enough production capacity. The British had started experimenting with adding steam engines to their sailboats in time for the First Opium War, which contributed to their defeat of the Chinese fleet (which included bought Western ships). If the Qing had put their energy into building an even larger fleet of steamboats, they might have been able to avoid a repeat of that defeat, but of course I have the benefit of hindsight.
- elfexec 7y ago
  > You pic a time frame, were China was indeed ahead. Any time before the 1800s? > Yes. It basically tells us, that while China was ahead I thought you said they were never ahead? > the culture had big weaknesses. Every culture has weaknesses. > So big, that they left the world for Europe. What happened to Zheng He? Oh god, no wonder. You learned pop fiction history. What about zheng he? Your comment is as silly as what happened to the US flights to the moon? It's been 50 years since the last moon landing. Why do you ask? Because there is no financial reason for it. The same thing with zheng he. It was a grand naval theatrical performance which didn't pay any dividends. As for europe, you act like "culture" is why europe "explored". Why didn't europe "explore" in 1392 or 1292 or 592 or you get the idea. Didn't europe have culture back then? There was no incentive. It wasn't culture that pushed europe to "explore". It was financial incentive. The collapse of the byzantine empire and the end of the golden horde is why columbus sailed for what? Americas? No. He set sail for the east. > They did not have superior products, they had unique products (silk, tea, porcelain) and only wanted to export but never buy anything. A product can be unique and superior. The reason why silk and porcelain were desired was precisely because it was superior to anything in europe. Not only that europe had inferior porcelain knock-offs for hundreds of years. You know how like we have inferior chinese knock-offs today, there were inferior europe knock-offs of chinese products. It's why "fine china" was called "fine china". > They always said, in the arrogance "we don't need anything!". After the military trouble with the west, they realized there was something they should have bought. Technology. More pop fiction history nonsense you learned from a silly documentary. I watched the same documentaries as you. Might I recommend learning to research and think independently rather than parroting stuff you see on tv? Anyways, I'm sure you'll grow out of this phase eventually as you gain more knowledge and experience. Good luck to you with that.