site banner
BurdensomeCount  Singapore is the only country that learned the correct lessons from the British Empire.  7mo ago (astralcodexten.substack.com)   991 thread views

Your Book Review: Zuozhuan

astralcodexten.substack.com
7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Review was not written by me, I just think it offers a fascinating insight into a culture that was stable long term (the Zhou dynasty - pronounced like Joe - lasted 800 years, which is twice as long as we've had modern democracy for) but very very different from the way we live these days in the thought processes of the people.

Korea was also very stable but very dysfunctional. They had this weird, subordinate relationship with China, changing their allegiance as new dynasties and invaders took control. There was this extremely ritualized trade mission that would go to give gifts to the Emperor and get gifts in return. Otherwise there was very little foreign interaction, China and Korea had agreed to prevent any settling near the border.

At home, Korea was run by actual civilian governors, to the point where they could actually have military coups in the 11th or 12th century when everyone else was feudal. One of the bureaucrats was so disrespectful to a general that, allegedly, he set his beard on fire. This caused an attempted coup. And of course, there's the one thing people know about pre-modern Korean history - fending off the Japanese with turtle-ships and heroic generalship. The saviour of Korea, Yi Sun-sin, was incredibly poorly treated. He was tortured and imprisoned twice by the government, who were legendarily corrupt and incompetent. And of course China flooded the peninsula with so many troops that the Japanese army was ground down.

By the late 19th century, Korea was still sending letters to China asking them to fix all their problems with uppity foreigners. Little had changed in centuries. A very strange place, with a very strange history. It seems only natural that today it's still a land of extremes.

They had this weird, subordinate relationship with China, changing their allegiance as new dynasties and invaders took control.

Probably worthwhile to note that this is true mostly of the Joseon period, and less true as you go back from that point, fromTang intervention on behalf of Silla in the Korean Three Kingdoms period + the Silla-Tang war; all the way to Han conquests of parts of the Korean peninsula.

At home, Korea was run by actual civilian governors, to the point where they could actually have military coups in the 11th or 12th century when everyone else was feudal.

China certainly wasn't more feudal than Korea at this point in time (especially 11-12th century), I don't think. There's a good argument that feudalism proper ended in China with the Qin dynasty (221 BC).

And of course China flooded the peninsula with so many troops that the Japanese army was ground down.

IIRC ~150k soldiers were sent during each invasion wave from Japan. Ming China sent something like 50k soldiers each time. The Ming-Joseon side were quite outnumbered when it came down to soldiers (numbers may even out more if you count Korean militia).

There were actual Ming advantages, such as much superior cannon and field artillery. I don't think "flooding the peninsula with so many troops the Japanese were ground down" really is accurate.

Good points. I remember reading somewhere that it was Ming manpower that won but that doesn't seem to match the facts as far as I can see.

Indeed, during the first war they only sent a small force. But over the course of the whole conflict, it was Chinese manpower and support that won the Allied ground campaign. They weren't going to run out of troops, no reverse could force China to the negotiating table.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats