Compare and contrast the attitudes of China and Japan to reform and change ( 1861-1894)

1. Compare and contrast the attitudes of China and Japan to reform and change ( 1861-1894)

2. Introduction • Both Japan and China embarked on journeys of reform and restoration during the 19th Century. In the case of Japan, this period was known as the Meiji Restoration and in China it was the self-strengthening movement. To a certain extent, the two movements which coincided with each other, bear some resemblance to one another however these similarities are overshadowed by an abundance of differences.

3. Similarities • Firstly, both reform movements were triggered by a response to the upheaval caused by the two nations being opened up by foreigners to economic exploitation via gunboat diplomacy. (Unequal Treaties (Kanagawa-1854 Nanjing 1842, Tientsin 1858) • After being brought to their knees the by the foreigners the two nations came to the realisation that they must adopt certain Western ideas and technology in order to become more developed. Furthermore, they wanted to be able to protect themselves from further exploitation by the foreign powers. Japan: “Eastern Ethics, Western Science” and “Use the barbarian to control the barbarian” China: “Why are the Western nations so small yet so strong? Why are we so large yet so weak?”

4. Similarities • 3 spheres affected by reform Economic: Industry( Textile mills... Zaibatsu) Foreign Trade (Maritime Customs Service in China) Infrastructure/Military: (Shanghai Arsenal, Railways, Foochow Dockyards)Adoption of western weapons military techniques (navy)Education: Westernised Curriculum (Mass education) • In both cases the government wanted to retain the strong influence of tradition (Shintoism and Confucianism)

5. Differences • An array of factors limited the self-strengthening movement in China, whilst adding impetus to the Meiji restoration in Japan • Chinese arrogance and belief in their superiority (Middle Kingdom concept) prevented the public from adopting Western ideas. Furthermore, as Mary Wright stresses, China’s overly conservative efforts to retain confucian traditions were not compatible with adoption of Western ideas. The fundamental flaw in this was that confucianism did not respect material gain, the very pillar on which development would be based.  Subsequently, Capitalism could not be introduced successfully in China, which hindered its economic progress as emphasised by Frederic Wakeman Junior • Conversely, Foreign thinking was not unheard of in Japan (Rangaku- Dutch Learning) and the taboo of material gain had began to collapse even during the Tokugawa shogunate, as it facilitated the growth of the merchant class.

6. Differences • Hence Japan was able to introduce political and social reforms:- It became to acceptable to dress as a Westerner- Collapse of feudalism and introduction of Fixed Land Tax System The government became far more centralised and was ruled by an oligarchy despite power being restored to the emperor- Quasi-democratic system with political parties • - Capitalism (Zaibatsu industries) • China was a much vaster land than Japan, making it much more difficult to impose reforms. The reforms only prevailed in areas controlled by the scholarly gentry.

7. Differences;Internal/External Forces impeding reform in China • One of the aims of the self-strengthening movement was to combat the upheaval of civil strife; Taiping, Nian and Muslim Rebellions. • The restoration suffered from a lack of funds to begin with and much of this had to be devoted to putting down these rebellions. • Japan did not have to face this problem (The Samurai rebellion lead by SaigoTakamori was short lived) • Nigel Cameron emphasises that The reform movement in China was further marred by extreme corruption. The scholar gentry spearheading the initiative did it for personal gain, not for the nation’s benefit (double eyed peacock feather award)-”Every dog that barks for Li is fat”

8. Differences; Leadership • Despite power being restored to the emperor, Japan was now lead by a centralised government and an oligarchy. All of the reforms in Japan were synchronised and lead by this government. • On the other hand, in China this was not the case. As Immanuel Hsu and JAG Roberts illustrate, the reformers conducted the reforms for personal gain, hence they were not well coordinated. Furthermore, there was a lack of support from the imperial government.

9. Effects • Japan’s rapid industrial progress was quite remarkable and it soon turned global power. • Conversely, China still spiralled into decline and the imperial government eventually collapsed in 1912 • The effectiveness of the reforms of the two nations could be seen in their foreign policy. Richard Perren highlights that Japan’s reforms allowed it to be more audacious in its foreign policy and engage in imperialism and gunboat diplomacy (Treaty of Kanghwa). Finally, Japan highlighted the superiority of its reform movement in 1895 by defeating China in the Sino-Japanese War.

10. Conclusion • In conclusion, China’s self-strengthening movement was a series of isolated, sporadic reforms marred by poor leadership, civil strife, excessive emphasis on tradition corruption and a lack of funds • Conversely, Japan’s Meiji Restoration had a clear leadership and the reforms there were spanned across far more spheres. The effectiveness of Japan’s reforms manifested themselves in its foreign policy and eventual defeat of the Chinese in 1895.