Discussion Week 5 - Humanities 112

Intrusions in Asia

Describe the key motives involved in the increased presence of Westerners in India, China, and Japan in the 1700s and 1800s.

The key motives involved in the increased presence of Westerners in India, China, and Japan in the 1700s and 1800s were the desire to acquire interests in the resources and economies. Acquiring major proprietary ownership in these countries allowed investments to multiply wealth that would increase the affluence of their own countries. Various European nations competed for the untapped resources with the motive of financial gain that acted like a stimulus. Economic domination of each would ensure that these goals would be met, acquired and fulfilled.

Further, domination of either country was seen as a coup and triumph. The more Westerners in these countries helped outweighed any consideration for the Chinese or care of China the country. Greed was the primary push, prejudice, racism and discrimination. Also, the ultimate goal was to weaken traditional culture, political leadership and the structure of social systems to ensure the state of a conquered people and country.

Identify the key factors that led to Britain’s successful imposition of its presence and trade policies on China, despite communications like those from Emperor Ch’ien-lung (i.e., Qianlong) and Commissioner Lin Zexu (i.e., Lin Tse-hsu).

The key factors that led to Britain’s successful imposition of its presence and trade policies on China, despite communications like those from Emperor Ch’ien-lung and Commissioner Lin Zeru offering a trading zone in Canton only and a request to forbid the importation of opium in China due to its destructive nature.

Although restrictions were attempted to maintain control over Westerner’s presence and trade policies in China these attempts were overridden by the British’s determination to subjugate the Chinese rights by dominating them and trade and acquiring the high quality materials they had for trade for less than cost. Desire for tea, porcelains and quality silks and property acquisition way below cost was the spur and motivator for force.

Because the Chinese wanted to restrict the import of opium ruthless steps were taken by the British to continue the opium trade because of its lucrativeness and offset of trade. To ensure the continuance of import their military force attacked this country which allowed a state of surrender and dominance to occur.

Exploitation of the Chinese allowed the British to further intrude for sheer financial gain and acquisitional opportunities in this country. The debilitating effect of opium on these people was the reason they sought help to restrict its import and distribution within China because it weakened the people and country. Because the people were suffering with drug addiction this ultimately allowed a task of subjugation to occur with ease and the ability to fight lessening or to defend. Therefore, the British’s invasion and military prowess effectively removed resistance and caused a no contest for the people and caused a serious deterioration of the economy and conditions of living. Many Chinese had to emigrate to survive due to the severe plundering of their country, resources and exploitation and use of them.

As in all cases of an indigenous people with those of a culture more advanced those with more sophistication are apt to exploit and take advantage. In consequence, when a people’s resources are taken there is nothing left for them and therefore comes the opportunity to use them as labor with the cost of paying nothing for wages because they want to survive.

Argue for or against the British policies regarding China in the 1800s, using analogies from our own modern times.

Personally, I am against any form of exploitation of any person or people. I find that this causes preventatives in communication and inter-relational abilities. Not only does it cause the inability to communicate it also summarily cause distrust, skepticism, disbelief and separation of people with rigid barriers held against total cooperation. Can an ally be made of a people broken, degraded and enslaved to opium? What exactly is their purpose to be subjugated and crushed down? Where is the initiative to grow and evolve with nothing if everything is taken from them? Do they have a purpose at all to live?

Although I to am appreciative of personal gain and financial affluency but not at the expense of a race of unique quality being destroyed. The respect of other races will always be a factor in the relations of all and the considerations that unfair trade is destructive, unfriendly and ultimately a destroyer of economy and good relations, tentative trust and honorable intent.

Because of this my views are based on my feelings today that these unscrupulous practices would not be allowed, condoned, followed, or carried out. Alliances that are made are a great stabilizer in world power in modern times. The sheer magnificent minds they have in this country are phenomenal and a great asset to all and not something to be underestimated, sneered at, or mocked with the use of levity. Therefore, I am against the plundering of any people or a country using “might makes right” as a justifier because it is not a good facilitator of moral intent.

Reply to co-student

I agree that the increased presence of Westerners in these countries was motivated by their desire to conquer and dominate them, the country and economy. The spur and financial wealth caused a show and use of force to obtain control. This control as you state occurred irregardless of North America and the other segments of Europe interest.

China although a country of not a complete indigenous culture did not have the military force to protect themselves from the invasion and surrendered Hong Kong I believe to alleviate attacks and utter destruction. Therefore, the British took command pretty much of the trade between India and China and gutted the entire trade process and caused a decline in both of these countries causing large number of the populace to emigrate to survive.

The thought that a little ball of comprised chemical ... could cause so much destruction in a human ability to think, function and become a slave to its intoxicating effect is incredible and unfair to distribute.

Further, I disagree with the total consumption and plunder of a country which leaves nothing for the countrymen themselves.

Thank you.

Felicia