When was the last time China was technologically superior to the West?

Finn McCool · Jan 22, 2011

I think Zheng He's voyages were actually loss-making enterprises for the Chinese treasury, so the main reason that they were shutdown was that court bureaucrats slashed them to save money after the patron of the voyages, Zhu Di, died. The Confucian-trained mandarins at court looked down on the whole thing; it was expensive, designed to increase foreign trade (something they were skeptical of) and promised to increase Chinese involvement in far-off lands they saw no need to get entangled in. Of course, with hindsight, we know it was a bad decision, but at the time, and to the people making the decision, it was at least justifiable.

delft · Jan 23, 2011

I know I don't know enough about this and probably never will. I imaging that more arguments were considered, but those advanced by Red Moon and Finn McCool were probably the most important. I hope someone will write, or point out, a relevant book on this subject, because it must be important to compare Chinese, Muslim and European history at that time.

Subedei · Jan 25, 2011

Doesn't technological evolution occur in a variety of domains? Thus, isn't it probable that technological advantages and disadvantages obtained across distinct technological domains? If we want to pretend to be professionals on this site, shouldn't we first learn to ask questions that would lead to informative discussions?

Fact: Ancient Egyptian weavers were able to weave linen to a finer resolution than was achieved by western industrial technology until the late 20th century.

Therefore ancient Egypt was technologically superior to the industrial west?

The paradigm of unilinear evolution was discredited 100 years ago. If y'all want to pretend to be professionals, keep up with the professional discourse. If not, admit that this is a layman's discussion board.

solarz · Jan 25, 2011

Subedei said:
Doesn't technological evolution occur in a variety of domains? Thus, isn't it probable that technological advantages and disadvantages obtained across distinct technological domains? If we want to pretend to be professionals on this site, shouldn't we first learn to ask questions that would lead to informative discussions?

Fact: Ancient Egyptian weavers were able to weave linen to a finer resolution than was achieved by western industrial technology until the late 20th century.

Therefore ancient Egypt was technologically superior to the industrial west?

The paradigm of unilinear evolution was discredited 100 years ago. If y'all want to pretend to be professionals, keep up with the professional discourse. If not, admit that this is a layman's discussion board.

If you want to pretend to be a professional, there's a sub-forum for that.

Yes, we all know that there are different fields of technological advancement, but you seem to have missed the implied consensus that we're talking about a general level of technological achievement.

rhino123 · Jan 25, 2011

Finn McCool said:
I think Zheng He's voyages were actually loss-making enterprises for the Chinese treasury, so the main reason that they were shutdown was that court bureaucrats slashed them to save money after the patron of the voyages, Zhu Di, died. The Confucian-trained mandarins at court looked down on the whole thing; it was expensive, designed to increase foreign trade (something they were skeptical of) and promised to increase Chinese involvement in far-off lands they saw no need to get entangled in. Of course, with hindsight, we know it was a bad decision, but at the time, and to the people making the decision, it was at least justifiable.

Agreed with that. This is one thing that I don't really understand about the Chinese. During Zheng He's expedition, some had argued or pointed out that they actually make voyages as far as into latin america. Obviously, Zheng He's navy are much stronger than any of the civilization at that time. Why didn't the CHinese actually colonise those area, as well as the lands in South East Asia?

That will actually bring income to the China rather than draining its resources.

solarz · Jan 25, 2011

rhino123 said:
Agreed with that. This is one thing that I don't really understand about the Chinese. During Zheng He's expedition, some had argued or pointed out that they actually make voyages as far as into latin america. Obviously, Zheng He's navy are much stronger than any of the civilization at that time. Why didn't the CHinese actually colonise those area, as well as the lands in South East Asia?

That will actually bring income to the China rather than draining its resources.

One word: capitalism. Before its advent, trade was not considered very important. Colonization is ultimately all about trade. The reason you would risk life and limb to subjugate the natives and rob their resources is so that you can *trade* those resources to your people back home. Think about what the colonial powers really do in their colonies: they don't build infrastructures or try to govern the colonies. No, their primary goal is trade: spice trade, fur trade, slave trade, opium trade, etc.

Imperial China never did understand the importance of trade. Being traditionally a large land state with a powerful centralized government, the imperial Chinese economy had always been based on taxes instead. Just look at the way the Qing government regarded foreign trade in the 1800's.

montyp165 · Jan 25, 2011

solarz said:
One word: capitalism. Before its advent, trade was not considered very important. Colonization is ultimately all about trade. The reason you would risk life and limb to subjugate the natives and rob their resources is so that you can *trade* those resources to your people back home. Think about what the colonial powers really do in their colonies: they don't build infrastructures or try to govern the colonies. No, their primary goal is trade: spice trade, fur trade, slave trade, opium trade, etc.

Imperial China never did understand the importance of trade. Being traditionally a large land state with a powerful centralized government, the imperial Chinese economy had always been based on taxes instead. Just look at the way the Qing government regarded foreign trade in the 1800's.

Making foreign trade taxable would have been a great income source to add to the government coffers though.

rhino123 · Jan 26, 2011

solarz said:
One word: capitalism. Before its advent, trade was not considered very important. Colonization is ultimately all about trade. The reason you would risk life and limb to subjugate the natives and rob their resources is so that you can *trade* those resources to your people back home. Think about what the colonial powers really do in their colonies: they don't build infrastructures or try to govern the colonies. No, their primary goal is trade: spice trade, fur trade, slave trade, opium trade, etc.

Imperial China never did understand the importance of trade. Being traditionally a large land state with a powerful centralized government, the imperial Chinese economy had always been based on taxes instead. Just look at the way the Qing government regarded foreign trade in the 1800's.

Yes, I agree with your assessment on colonization. That is the problem with the Chinese too. They should have the resources to do enough research into the land that they would sailing to, and what type of resources are available in those lands, then colonise those lands and most probably bring the resources back to China.

Another good way was to colonise another nation, clear huge chunks from that land to grow food there. In time of national crisis, they could actually import food from the colonised lands. Also with taxation, these people from colonised land also had to pay tax to mother China too.

Player 0 · Jan 26, 2011

China historically has been extremely determined to avoid fracturing into smaller states, especially since the fall of the yuan Chinese governments have made a point of maintaining sovereign integrity of China proper.

If they can't be directly controlled by the central government there's no guarantee than a crafty merchant or military officer won't try to carve out his own kingdom and maybe even become an enemy of the empire.

solarz · Jan 26, 2011

Player 0 said:
China historically has been extremely determined to avoid fracturing into smaller states, especially since the fall of the yuan Chinese governments have made a point of maintaining sovereign integrity of China proper.

If they can't be directly controlled by the central government there's no guarantee than a crafty merchant or military officer won't try to carve out his own kingdom and maybe even become an enemy of the empire.

Exactly! Which was why shortly after Shi Lang conquered Taiwan for the Qing, the Qing considered relocating all Taiwan residents to mainland and abandoning the island. They were afraid that Shi Lang would try to carve out his own kingdom.

(Though to be fair, that was exactly what Wu Sangui tried to do a few years earlier...)

When was the last time China was technologically superior to the West?

Finn McCool

Captain

delft

Brigadier

Subedei

Banned Idiot

solarz

Brigadier

rhino123

Pencil Pusher

solarz

Brigadier

montyp165

Senior Member

rhino123

Pencil Pusher

Player 0

Junior Member

solarz

Brigadier