5 replies to this topic

[Hooly]

Ancient Rome was an 'aristocratic republic' ... ancient Athens a 'democracy' ... Carthage a 'plutocracy' ... Sparta was an 'oligarchy'.

What can the our ancient State of Qin be labeled as? A mere monarchy like Egypt, the Persian Empire or Macedonia? Or something more?

I would say Qin, after Lord Shang's Reformation was the worlds first and perhaps only pure Meritocracy, ... where Merit earned on the battlefield was the only path to glory, honor and wealth. Where aristocrats were sidelined unless being able to prove themselves in battle, where foreign merchants can attain the post of Chancellor, where men were promoted from the ranks to general. I think Lord Shang harnessed that most basic of human instincts, greed, and unleashed it upon the world, with the result being the Unification of China.

[mohistManiac]

Ancient Rome was an 'aristocratic republic' ... ancient Athens a 'democracy' ... Carthage a 'plutocracy' ... Sparta was an 'oligarchy'.

What can the our ancient State of Qin be labeled as? A mere monarchy like Egypt, the Persian Empire or Macedonia? Or something more?

I would say Qin, after Lord Shang's Reformation was the worlds first and perhaps only pure Meritocracy, ... where Merit earned on the battlefield was the only path to glory, honor and wealth. Where aristocrats were sidelined unless being able to prove themselves in battle, where foreign merchants can attain the post of Chancellor, where men were promoted from the ranks to general. I think Lord Shang harnessed that most basic of human instincts, greed, and unleashed it upon the world, with the result being the Unification of China.

The Qin Unification of China had deeper roots than greed. It was motivated out of the literature which had been passing around at the time which called for unification of China. If Qin had been a true meritocracy why would they have need to burn the differing literature from differing schools that it simply didn't appreciate?

[Hooly]

The Qin Unification of China had deeper roots than greed. It was motivated out of the literature which had been passing around at the time which called for unification of China. If Qin had been a true meritocracy why would they have need to burn the differing literature from differing schools that it simply didn't appreciate?

Come on mohistManiac, the Qin 'Burning of the Books' myth has been debunked. Pure Confucian and Han Dynasty propaganda.

And Meritocracy is a means, not an end unto itself. The best way for a state to facilitate conquest and unification, something not unique to China necessarily but what is unique is that Meritocracy took hold in Warring States China before any where else on the planet. And the State of Qin is the ultimate exemplar of this form of society and government.

Lord Shang must have been a great economist, ... economics is the study of incentives ... all he did was create a system of rewards and punishments to make to people of Qin want to fight and die for the State. Lord Shang himself said that people, given a choice don't want to kill and murder, but under the right conditions, even the most peace loving can justify the mass slaughter of the enemy. Other societies and cultures justify conquest and slaughter with propaganda, whether religious (ancient Israel, Islam, Christianity) or ideological (Communists, Nazis) or pseudo-scientific (Darwinists, Nazis) or patriotism or country worship (America). Why bother with all that nonsense? Adopt the policies of Shang Yang and make a weak state into a strong one.

Edited by Hooly, 08 June 2012 - 03:04 PM.

[mohistManiac]

Come on mohistManiac, the Qin 'Burning of the Books' myth has been debunked. Pure Confucian and Han Dynasty propaganda.

And Meritocracy is a means, not an end unto itself. The best way for a state to facilitate conquest and unification, something not unique to China necessarily but what is unique is that Meritocracy took hold in Warring States China before any where else on the planet. And the State of Qin is the ultimate exemplar of this form of society and government.

Lord Shang must have been a great economist, ... economics is the study of incentives ... all he did was create a system of rewards and punishments to make to people of Qin want to fight and die for the State. Lord Shang himself said that people, given a choice don't want to kill and murder, but under the right conditions, even the most peace loving can justify the mass slaughter of the enemy. Other societies and cultures justify conquest and slaughter with propaganda, whether religious (ancient Israel, Islam, Christianity) or ideological (Communists, Nazis) or pseudo-scientific (Darwinists, Nazis) or patriotism or country worship (America). Why bother with all that nonsense? Adopt the policies of Shang Yang and make a weak state into a strong one.

Why bother with all the bells and whistles of meritocracy at all? It is to create an environment where equality is perceived and the worth of people are valued based on their skill sets so that they can fit into the economy, not to be discarded because the higher ups have issues with certain segments of the population so they have to perform elsewhere. Sure perhaps during a warring states period meritocracy would perhaps shift focus towards the survival of the state or conquest etc but later on not so much. I'm pretty sure meritocracy of the second order have been adopted earlier on the planet elsewhere as such meritocracy was only exemplified by China during the Han dynasty during civil examination.

[Gan]

If you all think about it, for a lot of communities (big or small), if they were serious about their military/political goals, then in way or another their organization would have to be overwhelmingly based on merit. It's realistic and very pragmatic to reward those who did more and have those people who have accomplished more to use their experiences to lead others. Warring nomadic tribes operated like that for a long time and many successful military campaigns had to used that to some extent.

[Westwind]

The Qin was a "short-lived" dynasty.