Explain which early Tokugawa reforms did the most to stabilize Japan and perpetuate Tokugawa rule - Essay Example

? History 331  Exam Section II  Fall Part I Explain which early Tokugawa reforms did the most to stabilize Japan and perpetuate Tokugawa rule.  There are two sets of reforms during the early Tokugawa period, which were important stabilizers of Japan and the Tokugawa rule. The first set of reforms is related with the social order, which was established in Japan throughout that period. It is also related with the organization of society and the distribution of political power in the country. The other set of reforms is related to external relations and trade, and the transition to economic seclusion in Japan under the Tokugawa dynasty. At the beginning of the Tokugawa period, Japan was shaken by internal disorder and social unrest. In order to restore stability and order, the Tokugawa rulers established a social hierarchy, based on the principles of Confucianism (Hunter; Murphy). Many samurai were disposed of their land, which was concentrated in the hands of the daimyo. The daimyo were put under the direct control of the Shogunate. The land owners were located in the city of Edo, and this social organization was based on inherited position rather than personal merits. It was horizontal in the sense that at the top there was the Emperor, as well as the Shoguns and the daimyo. The lower layer consisted of samurai, followed by peasants, craftsman and merchants. The social structure during the Edo period was an interesting way for the Tokugawa to stabilize the country and to maintain order. The system was elitist in a way that the resources of the country were vested in the hands of very few people, which were under the control of the Shogunate. This hereditary form of autocracy prevented economic and social disputes and riots over land or economic predominance. The social order established by the Tokugawa was a centralized form of governance, which carried some of the features of European feudalism. Another reform, which created stability during the Tokugawa period, was Japan’s transition from trade openness to seclusion. At the beginning of the Tokugawa rule, foreign trade with Europe and the Americas was restricted (Hunter, Murphy). The reason for this major shift in external relations was the Tokugawa fear from the spread of Catholicism in Europe. Although some historians argue that the restrictions on foreign trade, imposed by Tokugawa set the beginning of Japan’s economic isolation, they were also a form of protectionism which made Japan impervious to foreign influence. Explain which Meiji era reforms did the most to transform Japan into a modern nation and major military power The Meiji period was a benchmark in Japanese modern history, and marked the beginning of Japan’s ascent to economic and military supremacy. Economically, the Meiji period marked a tremendous shift from the policy of isolation and trade protectionism, which was characteristic of the Tokugawa rule. During the Meiji period, Japan opened its economic borders, and adopted open market economy, based on the Western capitalist model (Hunter, Murphy). The rationale behind the adoption of free market economy was to boost independent entrepreneurs, which at the time were the main component of the Japanese private sector. Open market economy increased competition and industrialization, which quickly transformed Japan from economically secluded nation, to one of Asia’s rising economic powers. The implementation of open economy allowed Japan to borrow expertise, knowledge and technology from the developed West, which soon made the country Asia’s leading manufacturer of goods. Other economic reforms included improved banking system and the adoption of unified national currency – the yen. The transformation of Japan in the Meiji period continued with the modernization of the military sector. This period saw the government’s effort to create a small, but well trained army. Army conscription was made compulsory for all men. Japan exchanged military expertise and training with developed nations such as France and USA. Some Japanese students attended French and American military schools. The combination of economic industrialization, market economy and intense military reforms transformed Japan from an isolated feudal state, into a regional economic and military leader. Which country experienced greater internal disorder during the nineteenth century, Tokugawa Japan or Manchu China?  The nineteen century was a turning point in the history of Japan and China, because social and political events in both countries transformed the regional balance of power. In Japan, the nineteenth century saw civil unrest instigated by the discontent of the entrepreneurs, which have been suppressed during the Tokugawa regime (Hunter). Immense population growth, as well as food shortages resulted in a series of famines, which provoked social instability and a major re-distribution of wealth into the hands of a newly emerging upper class. If Japan’s nineteenth century social unrest resulted in swift economic and political modernization, the series of Revolutions which took place in China at that time left a trail of destruction and marked the beginning of China’s imperial demise (Hsu; Thomas; Grasso, Corrin & Kort). In China the early nineteenth century saw a growing anti-Manchu sentiment in all layers of society, which culminated in a series of revolts (1850- 1873) – the Taiping Rebellion, the Guizhou uprising, the Dungan Revolt and the Panthay Rebellion. The revolts shared a common populist platform for social change and sought to end the repressive rule of the Qing dynasty. The Guizhou revolt, which established the Taipin Heavenly Kingdom was the bloodiest and most ferocious one. An estimate of 20-30 million people died during this revolt, which demarcated the beginning of the end of the Chinese empire (Thomas, Hsu). The revolt was also a powerful manifestation of the Chinese’s people desire for social equality. It is in these early stages of the Manchu demise that socialism and later on Maoism gained its ideological and political momentum. The internal disorder in Japan and China in the nineteenth century was instigated by a growing social demand for economic and political reform, but the rebellions in China were much more devastating in their proportions and definitive in their impact. The civil unrest in Japan led to modernization and economic progress. The revolts in China were reformative as well, but their legacy was far more poignant, and they paved the way for China’s even darker period of totalitarian rule. Part II Compare and contrast mid to late 19th century Chinese and Japanese modernization programs and then explain why Japan succeeded n transforming itself into a modern nations while Chinese efforts failed.  The nineteenth century saw the transformation of Japanese and Chinese societies, and the reorganization of the balance of power in the region. After an episode of swift and bloody social unrest, Japan and China took on very different paths of political and economic development. Measures for the modernization of the economy and government were undertaken in China and Japan, and social unrest lead to a radical change of the regime – in Japan the Tokugawa rule was replaced by the Meiji dynasty, and China’s Qing dynasty was soon to be overthrown by the Maoists (Hunter; Murphy). The reason for the Japanese triumph after the modernization was its willingness to accept European expertise and to implement Western technology and development. China however remained sceptical to European democracy and values, which led to a failure in its modernization plan. Another factor, which made Chinese modernization cumbersome, was the fact that it did not attempt to reform its political and economic institutions. In Japan, modernization was a combination of open market economy, based on the Anglo-Saxon model, and the import of European technology and expertise. Open market economy boosted independent entrepreneurship and as a result Japan became a regional economic leader (Hunter). In addition, Japan implemented reforms of its political and economic institutions. This is the major difference between the modes in which Japanese and Chinese modernization took place. In China the so-called Self-strengthening movement was a set of reforms, which concentrated on modernization mainly in terms of technology (Hsu; Grasso, Corrin & Kort). While the proponents of the Self-strengthening movement saw Western technology and expertise as superior, they failed to recognize the need for political and institutional reforms. If Japan underwent a major social and political transformation, enhanced by the adoption of open market economy, China never adopted the basic principles of the Western civilization and European technological inventions were implemented as a framework without content. It is also very important to note that many conservative Confucians saw modernization in China as a potential threat to Chinese sovereignty and a spread of Western influence. In the context of the Opium wars this was a credible fear, which led to another important development - China’s decision to reject European financial aid and to choose slow modernization, based on its own limited resources. In Japan, modernization was far more rapid, and it is important to note that at the end of the Meiji restoration, new political order had been established in Japan. Although the empire was restored, the emperor was no longer an absolute ruler, and he could decide political matters only indirectly (Hsu). Gradually, the foundations of elected parliament and democracy were laid, with a group of imperial advisors acting as representatives of the people. At the end of the Meiji restoration, Japan had a democratic constitution, which stipulated the direct election of the parliament – a major shift from the centralized hierarchical system of feudalism in the Tokugawa period. At the end of its modernization period, Japan had high literacy rate among its population, well developed industrial sector, advanced communication system and well-developed public administration. On the contrary, in China the modernization was only superficial and related to technological developments. Chinese society remained unreformed, and its political, economic and educational institutions - unable to catch up with the fast pace of modernization, which had already transformed Japan. Works Cited: Grasso, June, Corrin, Jay & Kort, Michael. Modernization and Revolution in China. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1991. Print (BOOK) Hsu, Immanuel.C.Y. The Rise of Modern China. 4th Ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 1990. Print. (BOOK). Hunter, Janet. The Emergence of Modern Japan. New York: Longman, 1995. Print (BOOK) Murphy, Rhoads. History of Asia. New York: Longman, 2003. Print (BOOK). Thomas, Stephen.  Foreign Intervention and China's Industrial Development 1870-1911. Boulder: Westview Press., 1984. Print (BOOK) Read More