4 ms·

It's ironic that China was in 587 the first to introduce competitive examinations for government positions.

by pg 14y ago

varjag 14y ago
Any distribution system where human examiner is involved is prone to corruption. Doubt it worked that smooth back then either.
- kinghajj 14y ago
  It's worse than that, the exams were pointless because they only tested knowledge of Confucianism.
  - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
    They were useful as filters, if somewhat crude. The tests were partly responsible for advancements in Chinese civilization.
  - continuations 14y ago
    That's not any different from today's liberal arts degrees, which have nothing to do with the careers most people end up going into.
    - wisty 14y ago
      The difference being the Confucianists got jobs which they didn't deserve.
      - dietrichepp 14y ago
        I know you're trying to say that testing for Confucianism is not the same as testing for how well you can do a government post, but these weren't worthless tests. 1) Passing old Chinese tests required literacy, something we want bureaucrats to have. This is a big chunk of what liberal arts degrees are about. (Calligraphy, too, was included in the test.) 2) Studying Confucianism meant that you at least had to think and respond about moral and ethical matters. Again, I'd rather have a bureaucrat who has thought about morality and ethics than one who hasn't. And according to Wikipedia, > The core of Confucianism is humanism, the belief that human beings are teachable, improvable and perfectible through personal and communal endeavour especially including self-cultivation and self-creation. 3) People with liberal arts degrees quite often take posts that are entirely unrelated to their field of study. Saying that "Confucianists got jobs which they didn't deserve" is just a pathetic jab at Chinese culture.
      - continuations 14y ago
        As opposed to liberal arts majors becoming government bureaucrats?
- jimworm 14y ago
  Very true. My partner is currently a schoolteacher in China, and has to go through regular examinations. However if a teacher does not have a politically powerful background, or fails to bribe the appropriate contacts, the result is guaranteed failure and missed promotion opportunities.
meric 14y ago
It's also interesting to note once you consider decline of the largest and most successful Chinese dynasties are associated with re-introduction of government positions being hereditary and/or being for sale. (The less successful ones simply lose in wars, to natural disasters or through economic mismanagement) The Sui dynasty you referred to was an exception, but the next one Tang (618-907), succumbed to military (whose positions were inherited)'s influence on the civil government (by civil government I also mean the part of the government that is selected by meritocracy). The Ming dynasty (1368–1644), succumbed to overt influence on the civil government by corrupt eunuchs (who were forbidden from learning to write/going into politics, and therefore did not achieve their status through examinations). "any senior official who wanted to discuss state matters had to persuade powerful eunuchs with a bribe simply to have his demands or message relayed to the emperor." (wikipedia) The Qing again here is an "exception". It's decline was due to its "Banner Army" soldiers being ineffective; They were the elite fighting force of China at the time, but during times of peace, the soldiers escaped training for their own profit; This decline was (IMO) due to recruiting soldiers not because people would be good soldiers, but because they were biologically related. The armies weren't even effective at putting down internal rebellions (requiring the assistance of european troops, the same factions that have bullied china into unequal treaties - how humiliating.) All these dynasties have fallen either because the influence of the meritocracy part of the government (civil or military) was greatly reduced; This was also correlated with increased levels of corruption (I don't know which caused what). I can see similarities between historical dynasties and the present day PRC government. They first rebelled and eliminated corruption in the KMT government, and have now succumbed to corruption itself.
schuke 14y ago
That's exactly what went wrong with ancient China. Instead of choosing who's most capable of studying, they used it on those who can afford education in the first place to become petty bureaucrats.

It's ironic that China was in 587 the first to introduce competitive examinations for government positions.

by pg 14y ago

It's ironic that China was in 587 the first to introduce competitive examinations for government positions.

Any distribution system where human examiner is involved is prone to corruption. Doubt it worked that smooth back then either.

kinghajj 14y ago
It's worse than that, the exams were pointless because they only tested knowledge of Confucianism.
- seanmcdirmid 14y ago
  They were useful as filters, if somewhat crude. The tests were partly responsible for advancements in Chinese civilization.
- continuations 14y ago
  That's not any different from today's liberal arts degrees, which have nothing to do with the careers most people end up going into.
  - wisty 14y ago
    The difference being the Confucianists got jobs which they didn't deserve.
    - dietrichepp 14y ago
      I know you're trying to say that testing for Confucianism is not the same as testing for how well you can do a government post, but these weren't worthless tests. 1) Passing old Chinese tests required literacy, something we want bureaucrats to have. This is a big chunk of what liberal arts degrees are about. (Calligraphy, too, was included in the test.) 2) Studying Confucianism meant that you at least had to think and respond about moral and ethical matters. Again, I'd rather have a bureaucrat who has thought about morality and ethics than one who hasn't. And according to Wikipedia, > The core of Confucianism is humanism, the belief that human beings are teachable, improvable and perfectible through personal and communal endeavour especially including self-cultivation and self-creation. 3) People with liberal arts degrees quite often take posts that are entirely unrelated to their field of study. Saying that "Confucianists got jobs which they didn't deserve" is just a pathetic jab at Chinese culture.
    - continuations 14y ago
      As opposed to liberal arts majors becoming government bureaucrats?
jimworm 14y ago
Very true. My partner is currently a schoolteacher in China, and has to go through regular examinations. However if a teacher does not have a politically powerful background, or fails to bribe the appropriate contacts, the result is guaranteed failure and missed promotion opportunities.

meric 14y ago

It's also interesting to note once you consider decline of the largest and most successful Chinese dynasties are associated with re-introduction of government positions being hereditary and/or being for sale. (The less successful ones simply lose in wars, to natural disasters or through economic mismanagement) The Sui dynasty you referred to was an exception, but the next one Tang (618-907), succumbed to military (whose positions were inherited)'s influence on the civil government (by civil government I also mean the part of the government that is selected by meritocracy). The Ming dynasty (1368–1644), succumbed to overt influence on the civil government by corrupt eunuchs (who were forbidden from learning to write/going into politics, and therefore did not achieve their status through examinations). "any senior official who wanted to discuss state matters had to persuade powerful eunuchs with a bribe simply to have his demands or message relayed to the emperor." (wikipedia) The Qing again here is an "exception". It's decline was due to its "Banner Army" soldiers being ineffective; They were the elite fighting force of China at the time, but during times of peace, the soldiers escaped training for their own profit; This decline was (IMO) due to recruiting soldiers not because people would be good soldiers, but because they were biologically related. The armies weren't even effective at putting down internal rebellions (requiring the assistance of european troops, the same factions that have bullied china into unequal treaties - how humiliating.) All these dynasties have fallen either because the influence of the meritocracy part of the government (civil or military) was greatly reduced; This was also correlated with increased levels of corruption (I don't know which caused what). I can see similarities between historical dynasties and the present day PRC government. They first rebelled and eliminated corruption in the KMT government, and have now succumbed to corruption itself.

schuke 14y ago

That's exactly what went wrong with ancient China. Instead of choosing who's most capable of studying, they used it on those who can afford education in the first place to become petty bureaucrats.