5 ms·

The outcome is the same. They lacked our weapons and immunizations- it would have been hard to catch up in parallel with the Western world. Look at Japan in th

The outcome is the same. They lacked our weapons and immunizations- it would have been hard to catch up in parallel with the Western world. Look at Japan in the 1850s. The isolation of the prior few centuries hurt them.

throw_pm23 4y ago
Were there any positive effects of the long isolation in the case of Japan?
- credit_guy 4y ago
  In an indirect way. (warning: following is highly speculative) - being isolated made Japan backward. Also, Japan does not have natural resources, and is not an agricultural powerhouse. This meant Japan was not a juicy target for the colonial powers. - Still, given enough time, one of them would surely have snatched it - Japan figured out the point above, and decided to not become a colony. It industrialized at a furious pace until it became a half-decent military power - huge stroke of luck, or something else, but Japan destroys a Russian fleet at Tsushima in 1905, and leapfrogs into the ranks of Great Powers - they further gain a lot in WW1 by sitting on the sidelines, and eventually joining the winning side - this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla - this fight does not go well, predictably, so Japan ends up under US occupation for 7 years - another huge stroke of luck: US, instead of sending Japan back to the stone age in retribution, decides to help Japan rebuild, and pumps massive amounts of aid - Japan goes through a second incredibly fast bout of industrialization This story ends around 1990.
  - pasabagi 4y ago
    > huge stroke of luck, or something else .. Tsushima This is very much underselling how outclassed the Russians were on every level of this engagement, except in terms of sheer number of ships (they had more), and technology, which was roughly on par. I think the 'isolation' was pretty advantageous in the sense that they managed to preserve their governmental and cultural structures for a very long time without the disruptive influence of western money and might. I imagine if they had let the Europeans in, the eventual fall of the Shogunate, partly caused by a proxy war between the French and the British (who supported different Daimyo), partly caused by public dissatisfaction about foreign incursion, would have been much earlier. That would have put them in a much less coherent and consequently weaker postion to resist European colonization efforts in the modern era.
  - themaninthedark 4y ago
    Sister comment was made about Tsushima >- this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla We in the US knew we would be getting involved in the war and had done things like oil embargo/trade disruption. The reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbor was because Yamamoto thought the only chance they stood against the US was to win such a decisive battle that we would not be able to fight them. He was trying this again at Midway(I believe) but we had broken their Coms so we were able to out maneuver them. Edit Add: As to if their isolation was helpful or not, I think that it allowed them to preserve and strengthen their culture both the good and bad aspects of it. I think that if a country was to close themselves off and turn inward, it could result in good things as long as they have an internal forces that prevents stagnation. Or to put it another way, progress only seems to happen when there are driving forces, such as competing groups. A strong government i.e. Dictator by nature has to wield control in order to stay in power, in doing so any competing groups must be eliminated as they a a threat to power. This brings about stagnation.
  - heywhatupboys 4y ago
    > - huge stroke of luck, or something else, but Japan destroys a Russian fleet at Tsushima in 1905, and leapfrogs into the ranks of Great Powers > - this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla This summary reeks of the nationalist tendencies of Americans when describing historical events.
    - credit_guy 4y ago
      > This summary reeks of the nationalist tendencies of Americans when describing historical events. Maybe. But it's also a fact. The US warned Japan before the war that if they attacked, the US will strike back and will absolutely crush Japan. And it did happen, just as predicted. In 1945, the Japanse were preparing to defend their homeland with spears. Against soldiers coming in with machine guns, tanks, and, well, atomic bombs.
    - FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
      I don't know. If you manage to take over North America, you tend to win Risk, whoever you are. It's harder to do than the Australian strategy, but you do win if you manage to pull it off. And the United States has basically done it.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    >huge stroke of luck, or something else, but Japan destroys a Russian fleet at Tsushima in 1905, and leapfrogs into the ranks of Great Powers It wasn’t luck, Russia was way behind the other western powers at the time and greatly underestimated Japans capabilities. > this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla “Pearl Harbor” is American revisionism. What actually happened that day was one of the most successful coordinated attacks of the entire war spanning across the pacific, against both the British and American empires simultaneously. The Japanese had imperial ambitions and was up hemmed in by the USSR, Britain, and American in basically all directions. They captured not only the Philippines from the US but also dug in deeply into British SE Asia while destroying basically the entire pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor in the same day. They ended up overextending themselves, but it was necessary from a strategic standpoint to secure the natural resources they needed from those colonies.
ertian 4y ago
Japan is still and independent country full of Japanese people, who held their own against Western militaries within decades of opening. That's a very different from the apocalyptic collapse followed by replacement of the New World. Of course, there's a huge difference between the two: Japan always had some contact with the Old World, and with Old World diseases in particular. America would probably have faced the same wave of disease, even if discovery had happened much later.
AngryData 4y ago
More limited contact could have potentially alleviated some of the overall population loss from disease. If they only got 2 european diseases instead of a dozen, had it sweep through them, then had another 50 years before contact again, it may have made a big difference. It could have been possible to have multiple contact events over a 200 year periods to allow disease resistance to form without losing what may have been 90% of their population in one relatively large swoop.

throw_pm23 4y ago

Were there any positive effects of the long isolation in the case of Japan?

credit_guy 4y ago
In an indirect way. (warning: following is highly speculative) - being isolated made Japan backward. Also, Japan does not have natural resources, and is not an agricultural powerhouse. This meant Japan was not a juicy target for the colonial powers. - Still, given enough time, one of them would surely have snatched it - Japan figured out the point above, and decided to not become a colony. It industrialized at a furious pace until it became a half-decent military power - huge stroke of luck, or something else, but Japan destroys a Russian fleet at Tsushima in 1905, and leapfrogs into the ranks of Great Powers - they further gain a lot in WW1 by sitting on the sidelines, and eventually joining the winning side - this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla - this fight does not go well, predictably, so Japan ends up under US occupation for 7 years - another huge stroke of luck: US, instead of sending Japan back to the stone age in retribution, decides to help Japan rebuild, and pumps massive amounts of aid - Japan goes through a second incredibly fast bout of industrialization This story ends around 1990.
- pasabagi 4y ago
  > huge stroke of luck, or something else .. Tsushima This is very much underselling how outclassed the Russians were on every level of this engagement, except in terms of sheer number of ships (they had more), and technology, which was roughly on par. I think the 'isolation' was pretty advantageous in the sense that they managed to preserve their governmental and cultural structures for a very long time without the disruptive influence of western money and might. I imagine if they had let the Europeans in, the eventual fall of the Shogunate, partly caused by a proxy war between the French and the British (who supported different Daimyo), partly caused by public dissatisfaction about foreign incursion, would have been much earlier. That would have put them in a much less coherent and consequently weaker postion to resist European colonization efforts in the modern era.
- themaninthedark 4y ago
  Sister comment was made about Tsushima >- this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla We in the US knew we would be getting involved in the war and had done things like oil embargo/trade disruption. The reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbor was because Yamamoto thought the only chance they stood against the US was to win such a decisive battle that we would not be able to fight them. He was trying this again at Midway(I believe) but we had broken their Coms so we were able to out maneuver them. Edit Add: As to if their isolation was helpful or not, I think that it allowed them to preserve and strengthen their culture both the good and bad aspects of it. I think that if a country was to close themselves off and turn inward, it could result in good things as long as they have an internal forces that prevents stagnation. Or to put it another way, progress only seems to happen when there are driving forces, such as competing groups. A strong government i.e. Dictator by nature has to wield control in order to stay in power, in doing so any competing groups must be eliminated as they a a threat to power. This brings about stagnation.
- heywhatupboys 4y ago
  > - huge stroke of luck, or something else, but Japan destroys a Russian fleet at Tsushima in 1905, and leapfrogs into the ranks of Great Powers > - this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla This summary reeks of the nationalist tendencies of Americans when describing historical events.
  - credit_guy 4y ago
    > This summary reeks of the nationalist tendencies of Americans when describing historical events. Maybe. But it's also a fact. The US warned Japan before the war that if they attacked, the US will strike back and will absolutely crush Japan. And it did happen, just as predicted. In 1945, the Japanse were preparing to defend their homeland with spears. Against soldiers coming in with machine guns, tanks, and, well, atomic bombs.
  - FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
    I don't know. If you manage to take over North America, you tend to win Risk, whoever you are. It's harder to do than the Australian strategy, but you do win if you manage to pull it off. And the United States has basically done it.
- comte7092 4y ago
  >huge stroke of luck, or something else, but Japan destroys a Russian fleet at Tsushima in 1905, and leapfrogs into the ranks of Great Powers It wasn’t luck, Russia was way behind the other western powers at the time and greatly underestimated Japans capabilities. > this goes to their head, and they proceed to do the most foolish thing at Perl Harbor, and pick a fight with the 800 pound gorilla “Pearl Harbor” is American revisionism. What actually happened that day was one of the most successful coordinated attacks of the entire war spanning across the pacific, against both the British and American empires simultaneously. The Japanese had imperial ambitions and was up hemmed in by the USSR, Britain, and American in basically all directions. They captured not only the Philippines from the US but also dug in deeply into British SE Asia while destroying basically the entire pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor in the same day. They ended up overextending themselves, but it was necessary from a strategic standpoint to secure the natural resources they needed from those colonies.

ertian 4y ago

Japan is still and independent country full of Japanese people, who held their own against Western militaries within decades of opening. That's a very different from the apocalyptic collapse followed by replacement of the New World. Of course, there's a huge difference between the two: Japan always had some contact with the Old World, and with Old World diseases in particular. America would probably have faced the same wave of disease, even if discovery had happened much later.

AngryData 4y ago

More limited contact could have potentially alleviated some of the overall population loss from disease. If they only got 2 european diseases instead of a dozen, had it sweep through them, then had another 50 years before contact again, it may have made a big difference. It could have been possible to have multiple contact events over a 200 year periods to allow disease resistance to form without losing what may have been 90% of their population in one relatively large swoop.