China's Westernization Movement and Japan's Meiji Restoration

Comparison between China's Westernization Movement and Japan's Meiji Restoration Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Comparison between China's Westernization Movement and Japan's Meiji Restoration Introduction Meiji restoration was the source of modernization in Japan while westernization brought about modernization in China. The modernization resulted in both and positive and negative impacts to both Japan and China (Jansen & Rozman, 2014). During the modernization period, both Japan and China were impacted similarly in aspects such as; development of military forces, adoption of western education, exploitation of the native people by foreign investors and new systems of marriage was adopted in both nations. However, Japan advanced more than China did, more Japanese engaged in entrepreneurial activities than Chinese and western exerted more pressure on China than they did to Japan. Difference China was a heterogeneous country ruled with real monarchy power with feigners being the minority in the leadership which was known as Manchus. In contrast, Japan was a homogeneous country rule by two systems of leadership known imperial court and Shogunate and this made Japan face difficult times in the event of adjusting to its political control after having slipped out of control. Toward the end of 19th-century dynastic cycle experience a downfall but shogunal cycle persisted making Japan rea free from external turbulent through 1850. However, there was some degree of social tension in Japan since the ethics of samurai Confucian still penetrated the country, and the entire political form remained unshaken (Walker, 2019). Tokugawa system was unable to remain without major change since encroachment into Japan from foreigners were very rampant. Furthermore, the administrators in the Ch'ing government were very corrupt and graft while leaders in the government of Japan demonstrated higher levels of integrity, more active and efficient in their work than the China government officials were. Japan had patrimony which facilitated its ability to replicate and refine approaches from the rest of the world. For example, the great reform which ranged between 645 and 702 resulted in the legal Codes and hence the formation of the central government of Japan in relation to the centralized model of government in China. When comparison of aspects such as efficiency, homogenous country, timing of dynastic cycle, integrity, activeness, and dual-political system and the ability to replicates the alien model, Japan did better on such factors than China for commencing its modernization (Mesoudi, Chang, Murray & Lu, 2015). Both China and Japan used feudal armed military forces which were too weak to maintain both internal securities to prevent the nations from external attacks during the mid-19th century. In addition, the military forces in both nations were highly decentralized making each region of the country had its independent military forces (Paine, 2017). The main difference that existed between the two countries in relation to military force is that in China, the elite of the Confucianism –rooted and thus were very loyal to their tradition making them very conservative. They showed loyalty to the court of China, finally took control of the military autonomy. On the flip side, in the Japanese military forces the enlightening samurai were aggressive and due to this, they ended up becoming more loyal to domains and shogunate. They were very happy to learn new skills and they expected revival and renovation in the Bakumats (Minami, 2016). . Hence comparing the aspect of conservative elites in China and the Japanese samurai who were enlightened, Japan stood a better chance than China to achieve modernization since the elites regulated the country's destination in the near future. In China, effects like corruption in institutions such as China system of administration, graft, lack of efficiency in financial management, concentrating the military in campaigns rather controlling internal riots the shortage was fueled by the importation of opium and the gap that existed between the exchange of gold and silver. In this deal, the national treasury of China was destroyed by western which resulted in the shrinking of the China economy from day to another until it finally crippled. On the flip side, although Japan lacked political and social logics and perfections it generally upheld high economic standards in the Tokugawa period (Mesoudi, Chang, Murray, & Lu, 2015). In addition, the rich merchants, samurai, and wealthy peasants depicted entrepreneurial interests from mercantilism to physio racy. Committed shown by different classes of people to invest in the country facilitated the monetarization and commercialization which boosted the modernization of Japan faster than China did. Communication systems was another aspect of the difference between westernization in China and Japan's Meiji restoration. Even if the communication system of and transport of China composed of both canal and roods and managed to interconnect al cities and provinces accounting for the connection of largest percentage of the country, some region were left underdeveloped such as Chinghai, Mongolia, Tibet, and Manchuria. On the contrary, during the era of Tokugawa Shogunate, the communication system of Japan development was equally distributed in both by sea and on dry land.in comparison, communication and transport network development in the two countries Japan had done more compared to Japan. Both Japan and China society was influenced by the ideology of Confucian and citizens portrayed domestics ethics, political and social as very vital virtues. In both countries, families were treated as fundamental units other than personal. Men were superior to children and women. In addition Confucians, Buddhism and Shintoism were common in both Japan and China (Ma, 2017). Besides, both societies were characterized by hierarchy comprising of four fundamental classes. Warrior-bureaucrat which was the highest ranked class in Japan was eventually replaced by Chinese class known as scholar-bureaucrats. A conclusion relating to the social classes could be made that Japan was samurai-oriented while China was a gentry-oriented nation. The comparison of the two countries shows that gentry was so much attached to the ideology of Confucian which hindered persons from advancing the mechanization (Mesoudi, Chang, Murray, & Lu, 2015). In contrast, the samurai class had a lot of interest in entrepreneurship and learning the skills of western people. Additionally, in Japan, there was no opium and women abuse as it was witnessed in China. In the mid-19th century, natural disaster and internal wrangles were witnessed in both country but their impacts were more severe calamities occurred in China than in Japan. Both countries achieved high academic rate before the modern age. However, Dutch learning had greatly reduced in China by the beginning of the nineteenth century, while scholars in Japan were able to get enough knowledge courtesy of Dutch and thus enabling them to extend their know-how in science and western knowledge. The western knowledge Japanese acquired from Dutch learning gave them the advantage of being ahead t...