Can Anyone See The Parallel of Countries That Were Once Governed By Feudalism?

[Kane]

Have you noticed that all countries (besides the United States) that are now considered “Developed Countries” were once under control by a government of feudalism? Think about it, countries of Europe AND Japan. Both once were governed by this system of government and are now the richest and technologically advanced countries in the world.

Some might say that it’s because the region of Europe developed like that, but it really isn’t just Europe. Of all the countries of Asia, the most feudal of all countries is now the richest and developed Asian country. And that country is Japan. Of all countries in Asia, the government that was once most controlled by feudalism is now a economic world power.

Do you think that there is something in feudal governments that triggers modernization? For example, because lords often fought with each other there was always a need to for scientific research to improve weapons and amour.

What do you think?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I think its a poor analogy.

If we use the very loose definition of feudalism as described in high school history books, we find the following:

China was feudalistic longer than Japan. So was Korea. Japanese feudalism ended in 1868, and Chinese and Korean feudalism survived up to or into the 20th century. European feudalism began its final decline during "The Enlightenment" of the 17th century. Russian feudalism ended with the October revolution in 1917.

Feudalism and isolationism held Japan back until Commodore Perry's entry into Japan in the mid-nineteenth century. While she was culturally sophisticated, Japan was technologically backward until Perry arrived. In a stunning effort towards modernization she went from a country armed with matchlocks and swords to a world power in about fifty years.

For a first rate explanation of why Western culture had its ascendancy, see Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel".

For an explanation of why some developing nations missed the boat, read Juan Enriquez's excellent book, "As The Future Catches You."


Regards,


Steve

 

[loki09789]

I think it has more to do with 'stability' than any particular form of civilizational structure.

Current anthro/archeologists have theorized that we grew from a revisiting/rediscovery of inventions/ideas that the greeks/romans had already either assimalated or invented but were lost because of economic/political falls and the fire at the Libarary of Alexandria. Beyond the Renaissance's influence on art/philosophy/religion (Enlightenment already mentioned).

I don't remember the inventors name, but there are those who theorize that Greeks, while under Roman rule, were responsible for some pretty 'modern' creations including a steam enging. It never really made it beyond an entertaining bauble from what we know now. Theorists say that this and other inventions weren't really explored for 'modernizing' their world because slave labor was so plentiful, who needed to fix what wasn't broken. Labor was cheap and easy to get and replace; and life was already really good for the 'powers that be' and they didn't have that fire in the belly to get more, they were enjoying what they had...until they fell: Greeks, Romans....

In contrast, I would say that the series of Plagues that reduced the population through Europe and the British Isles was more a factor than the particular type of government. The peasant class went from being 'cheap labor' and were essentially slaves in all ways except name to a hot commodity because the logisitical and agricultural work still needed to be done by someone to support the feudal manor as a market, but now the Nobles/land owners had to 'deal' with the peasants to entice them to stay where they were or lure them to the Noble's manor. THis lead to educational opportunities for more 'common' people, more political clout, and the immergence of a tradesman 'middle class' of common people. When you have more more educated and influencial minds in the mix, you will increase the odds of good ideas being created and also implemented.

To summarize in the capitolistic propaganda of our fathers, "necessity was the mother of invention" in both structure and social change as well as actual inventions/innovations of how business was done.

A modern example of this is H. Ford. Everyone knows that he is known as the father of the automobile industry but the emphasis should be on INDUSTRY and not Automobile. He wasn't the only car maker/innovator but he was the one who could make it faster, cheaper and promote it better than the other guy. Feudal manors were trying to do the same thing within their open air markets. If they could get peasant types to 'invent' agricultural/trade ideas that would make their produce and products better, easier/faster to make AND get to market - they win and the other nobles loose. Some nobles kept people around through intimidation, but generally the nobles who rewarded commoners who improve the market power of their manor kept the cream of the crop so to speak.

I would say that current 'modernization' would be more easily correlated to nations - which were really stabilized or 'nationalized' well after feudalistic practices. Feudalism was too unstable and created too much 'in fighting' for much innovation to occur - though there were some advances in agriculture from what I remember. That is why it has been termed the 'Dark Ages' and not just called the Medieval period.

Can't say that I know much about the eastern growth beyond the fact that Japan had to be bullied into the modern age, but then grabbed it by the throat and ran with it. China industrialized, IMO for similiar reasons but instead of American Capitolism it was the Chinese 'cultural revolution' that drove that particular change. SOmeone else might know more about that than I do though.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Good to see a solid Marxist argument, repeating the contention that modern capitalism necessarily evolved from the internal contradictions of feudalism.

One note is that Marxist theory is notoriously inadequate to the tasks of describing, "Oriental despotism," which was not at all like feudalism.

Of course, the presupposition that modern capitalism represents the end-state and highest possible achievement of human society is a pretty big presupposition.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

For a first rate explanation of why Western culture had its ascendancy, see Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel".

I second that emotion (as they say)... this book is an excellent historical/compatative examination of why certain cultures dominated other cultures over the course of human history.

And the author's a physiologist! Woo! (OK, that last cheer was just for myself.)

 

[Rich Parsons]

Have you noticed that all countries (besides the United States) that are now considered “Developed Countries” were once under control by a government of feudalism? Think about it, countries of Europe AND Japan. Both once were governed by this system of government and are now the richest and technologically advanced countries in the world.

Some might say that it’s because the region of Europe developed like that, but it really isn’t just Europe. Of all the countries of Asia, the most feudal of all countries is now the richest and developed Asian country. And that country is Japan. Of all countries in Asia, the government that was once most controlled by feudalism is now a economic world power.

Do you think that there is something in feudal governments that triggers modernization? For example, because lords often fought with each other there was always a need to for scientific research to improve weapons and amour.

What do you think?

1941 through 1945 WWII was faught with the allies against the axis.

After the U.S.A. and the Russians entered Germany and occupied it, the U.S.A. dropped to bombs onto Japan that in essence caused the end of WWII.

After this war, our Country went in and tried to stabilize and rebuild. West Germany the basis of most of the German Economy even after the reunification, and Japan both received our money and technology. Most of their industry base is now at most 60 years old. Here in the US some companies have mills and factories that are 100 years old.

Both of the heavy industry and consumer markets are the result of our rebuilding and also of our education that many of our own companies did not begin to inact until the 1980's through the 1990's, where in Japan they were in place in the 1950's as well as in Germany.

Just my opinion and analogy on how I read history.

:asian: