4 ms·

How do you take these statements from the article? [1] More recent literature demonstrates the political effects of Keju. In 1905, the Qing dynasty abolished K

by tgv 3y ago

How do you take these statements from the article? [1] More recent literature demonstrates the political effects of Keju. In 1905, the Qing dynasty abolished Keju, dashing the aspirations of millions and sparking regional rebellions that eventually toppled China’s last imperial regime in 1911. [2] A 2020 study shows that, for every doubling of successful Keju candidates per 10,000 of the population in the Ming-Qing period, there was a 6.9 per cent increase in years of schooling in 2010. [comparison shows a logarithm relation between Keju success and current schooling between regions.] Wrt to [2]: there were only 260 regions, that period ranged over more than 500 years, and the correlation is not particularly good. It seems extremely improbable that all other factors have been excluded (it's just linear relations for a handful of numbers they could find). The logarithmic nature is counter-intuitive: since the exam was very, very selective, you would expect the reverse: a small increase in candidates passing requires many more students below that level, and thus a super-linear increase in schooling. [1] sounds very far-fetched. The linked article is paywalled, but the jump from reducing fairly small hopes of fortune to revolution is too big to accept from statistics that sound similar to those in [2]. The author seems to use it as support for his argument, but in my view, it just turns it into a house of cards. I stopped reading after the second article. Do these things bother you?

rawgabbit 3y ago
I will assume this is a bad English translation of a Chinese article. Nevertheless [1] appears to claim that ending the civil service test caused the fall of the Qing dynasty which is complete nonsense. I assume this is just an inept translation. [2] The claim (in English) is incomprehensible; I assume the author's intention is that when more civil service jobs were awarded more Chinese studied in an attempt to pass the exam. Overall, I believe the English text of the article is poor. I believe he is arguing the civil service test was all pervasive because over a million people took the test annually in an effort to get a very small number of civil jobs. The test itself could be considered an intelligence test because it required intelligence to memorize and elegantly recite the orthodox answers based on Confucian classics. If we want to argue what is deficient about Chinese government or culture during the Ming/Qing period, there are an infinite number of other topics. I would argue overall the Civil Service exam is a net positive for China, not a negative. As an aside, I watch some modern Chinese melodramas. These TV shows seem to argue China's past was marked by corruption, infighting among officials, and poison poison poison. According to these TV shows, ancient Chinese politics consists of everyone trying to poison everyone else. There are TV plots that involve multi-factor poisons. By itself the poisons are benign, but when they are mixed via food & incense & medical prescriptions, they are deadly. That is they blame endless in-fighting for China's predicament. The TV shows often feature characters spouting Confucian euphemisms but have no qualms poisoning or killing women/children for political gain. In short, modern Chinese people think past Chinese politicians were unethical and downright evil.
- d0mine 3y ago
  > politicians were unethical and downright evil Are there any other kind? any place/any time
  - tgv 3y ago
    Yes. Please cut the cynicism. There are quite a few that went into politics because of self-interest, but certainly not all of them. And they are human, too. They have their flaws. And if their ideological and pragmatical stances don't overlap with yours, that doesn't mean they're unethical or evil. Be glad there are at least some who try.
    - d0mine 3y ago
      It might look like cynicism but it was not my intention. The statement about politicians is testable. No faith, specific political views are required, just facts: who voted for what and how it correlates with actual voters--actually, somebody did something along the lines and the conclusions were that politicians do not represent their constituents, at best they represent the very very rich part (it hit a nerve, I saw clumsy attempts to discredit the study in the google results).
ssnistfajen 3y ago
This is the paper used to support the claim in [1]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43866446 https://www.jstor.org/stable/43866446. It can be read via an institution account or that website. The main claim is that regions with higher keju quotas had higher incidences of revolutionary activity in 1911, using what appears to be purely statistical methods. The paper's conclusion did not state the abolition of Keju was the decisive factor in the fall of the imperial dynasty, and acknowledged by quoting Huntington's Political Order in Changing Societies, “necessarily involved the alienation of many groups from the existing order” like all revolutions. So I think the author misappropriated the paper to support their own argument. It's possible that the abolition of Keju increased regional unrest which contributed to higher incidences of rebellion in 1911, but itself did not "spark" rebellions on its own. The 1911 revolution began with the Wuchang uprising which was started by Westernized "New Army" divisions of the Qing Dynasty, an effort that began in 1895 and was not tied to Keju. It ended quickly because Yuan Shikai, the real commander of the remaining loyal New army in the North, realized he could make a powerplay by forcing the imperial court to abdicate the convince the revolutionaries to support him as president instead.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

by tgv 3y ago

rawgabbit 3y ago

I will assume this is a bad English translation of a Chinese article. Nevertheless [1] appears to claim that ending the civil service test caused the fall of the Qing dynasty which is complete nonsense. I assume this is just an inept translation. [2] The claim (in English) is incomprehensible; I assume the author's intention is that when more civil service jobs were awarded more Chinese studied in an attempt to pass the exam. Overall, I believe the English text of the article is poor. I believe he is arguing the civil service test was all pervasive because over a million people took the test annually in an effort to get a very small number of civil jobs. The test itself could be considered an intelligence test because it required intelligence to memorize and elegantly recite the orthodox answers based on Confucian classics. If we want to argue what is deficient about Chinese government or culture during the Ming/Qing period, there are an infinite number of other topics. I would argue overall the Civil Service exam is a net positive for China, not a negative. As an aside, I watch some modern Chinese melodramas. These TV shows seem to argue China's past was marked by corruption, infighting among officials, and poison poison poison. According to these TV shows, ancient Chinese politics consists of everyone trying to poison everyone else. There are TV plots that involve multi-factor poisons. By itself the poisons are benign, but when they are mixed via food & incense & medical prescriptions, they are deadly. That is they blame endless in-fighting for China's predicament. The TV shows often feature characters spouting Confucian euphemisms but have no qualms poisoning or killing women/children for political gain. In short, modern Chinese people think past Chinese politicians were unethical and downright evil.

d0mine 3y ago
> politicians were unethical and downright evil Are there any other kind? any place/any time
- tgv 3y ago
  Yes. Please cut the cynicism. There are quite a few that went into politics because of self-interest, but certainly not all of them. And they are human, too. They have their flaws. And if their ideological and pragmatical stances don't overlap with yours, that doesn't mean they're unethical or evil. Be glad there are at least some who try.
  - d0mine 3y ago
    It might look like cynicism but it was not my intention. The statement about politicians is testable. No faith, specific political views are required, just facts: who voted for what and how it correlates with actual voters--actually, somebody did something along the lines and the conclusions were that politicians do not represent their constituents, at best they represent the very very rich part (it hit a nerve, I saw clumsy attempts to discredit the study in the google results).

ssnistfajen 3y ago

This is the paper used to support the claim in [1]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43866446 https://www.jstor.org/stable/43866446. It can be read via an institution account or that website. The main claim is that regions with higher keju quotas had higher incidences of revolutionary activity in 1911, using what appears to be purely statistical methods. The paper's conclusion did not state the abolition of Keju was the decisive factor in the fall of the imperial dynasty, and acknowledged by quoting Huntington's Political Order in Changing Societies, “necessarily involved the alienation of many groups from the existing order” like all revolutions. So I think the author misappropriated the paper to support their own argument. It's possible that the abolition of Keju increased regional unrest which contributed to higher incidences of rebellion in 1911, but itself did not "spark" rebellions on its own. The 1911 revolution began with the Wuchang uprising which was started by Westernized "New Army" divisions of the Qing Dynasty, an effort that began in 1895 and was not tied to Keju. It ended quickly because Yuan Shikai, the real commander of the remaining loyal New army in the North, realized he could make a powerplay by forcing the imperial court to abdicate the convince the revolutionaries to support him as president instead.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]