Reflection on the Modern Social Reform in China & Japan

Transcription

1 Reflection on the Modern Social Reform in China & Japan Taiyong Chen College of History, Wuhan University, Wuhan, P.R.China School of Foreign Languages, Beijing Institute of Science and Technology Zhuhai, Zhuhai P.R.China Received 29 Apr, 2014; Accepted 6 May, 2014; Published 8 May, Science and Engineering Publishing Company Abstract In 1640, British bourgeois revolution unrevealed the beginning of our modern history. China and Japan still lied dormant while western countries were striding largely forward with highly advanced productive forces. With shrinking space for development under the pressure from western countries, China and Japan were finally exposed to revolutions Hundred Days Reform in China and Meiji Reformation in Japan. However, these two countries ended up differently: Japan rose quickly and stepped on the road to capitalism, while China still lagged behind with failed revolution. Many factors contributed to these two different results, namely, land ownership, political structures, cultural tradition, family possessions, increasing mode of productivity, international relationships and East Asian tributary systems. This is also the root of Japan heading toward to Bushidocapitalism and China heading toward to Communism. Keywords Feudalism; Appointment of Talented System; Political Structure; Family Possessions; Culture Differences Introduction In 1640, British bourgeois revolution unrevealed the beginning of our modern history. However, with the exception of West Europe, the whole world, including East Europe, Islamic World, China and Japan in East Asia still lied dormant at this significant period of transition. Especially China and Japan, the increasing mode of productivity was still the limited arithmetic progression type and the social economy structure shown nothing new related to the new ages. In Ming Dynasty, China is declining. Sailing to the West had no followers, initiated by Zheng He with a substantial scale and strong technology, and let alone to trigger the commercial revolution. Though the coming Qing Dynasty started a Kang-Qian Flourishing Age, it cannot give some growing room for the industrial revolution based on the flourish in agriculture and was still trapped in the circle that each dynasty will go decline from the top, still also cannot find a road to the higher economic formation of society. At last, the productivity of China lagged far behind the West European countries with extreme arrogance in the global modern history. Instead, Japan pushed their feudal society to the top during Tokugawa Era. The closed-door policy of Japan sustained a long period peace in nearly 270 years, but severely obstructed the development, which leaded Japan to be at a loss what to do when westerners start the east-expansion and even to be semi-colonized. China and Japan declined at the period of that the external world had suffered a qualitative change. With shrinking space for development under the pressure from western countries, China and Japan were finally exposed to revolutions Hundred Days Reform in China and Meiji Reformation in Japan, which symbolized the awaken of Yamato People and Chinese people. However, absolutely two different results occurred between Hundred Days Reform and Meiji Reformation; Japan finally accomplished their revolution and made their country become much more independent and stronger than before. Japan learned a lot from westerners, reformed their outdated feudalism, departed from Asia for Europe through Meiji Reformation and went on the road to capitalism at last. Meanwhile, Japan abolished the unequal treaty, got rid of the national crisis and became the only independent country in Asia. In the contrary, Hundred Days Reform in China failed at last and the national crisis was intensified. What caused the total difference between 1

2 International Journal of Literature and Art (IJLA) Volume 2, 2014 these two reforms? This paper intend to put forward some personal opinion on the basis of the previous research at the angle of history comparison, in that to re-analysis and construct the modern reform in China and Japan when putting them into the global history. Differences in Feudalism Feudal in ancient Chinese words means the system of enfeoffment in Yin and Zhou Dynasty. The transformation of the meaning of the word feudal from ancient meaning to the modern new word, originated from the Chinese and Japanese s scholars explanation of English term feudalism, which comes from the Latin word feudum. Feudalism is a kind of social system on the basis of land ownership and personal relation. In this system, vassals could get ligeance from the feudal lord and must be loyalty to the feudal lord. In a word, the four classic characteristics of feudal system can be concluded as following: firstly, the govern-attachment relationship between vassals and feudal lord; secondly, the enclosed manorial economy, also can be said as natural economy occupied the dominant position; thirdly, the forming of the Pyramid hierarchy in King-vassals-ordinary people shape because of the decentralization of the power of the country; and at last is the deprivation of the peasants economy, which means the ultra-economic coercion to the peasants by the superior. The feudal system in China and Japan both included in the four characteristics referred above in macroscopic scale, but at the micro level, the system of these two countries has a large amount of differences. Due to the differences in social political structure resulted by the differences in feudal system, it had made totally different results finally in the modern reform between China and Japan. After the period of Shang and Zhou Dynasty in ancient China, the economic structure of which was always a formation of a unified urban and rural, as well as a feudal society with community nature. About the free city independent of the community, didn t exist. Therefore, the structure of feudal society, was unconsolidated with a shape of big roof, in which the dissimilatory free city and people doesn t exist, also was a patriarchal clan system of absolute monarchy with co-construction of family and state. The economic form of feudal society didn t have potential to be dissimilated after the transformation to the landlord economy within the combination of individual farming and cottage craft from the initiated primitive collaborative agricultural nature economy, and it could not have possibilities to breed capitalism factors in such a big roof circumstance in that to access to the capitalist society. The word feudal has been still in use in Japan since it was put into use in ancient time. At the time when Tokugawa Shogunate was established, Japan set the feudal as the ideal regime originated from West Zhou in ancient China and took use of such concepts as prince, vassal state, appanage, fief, warrior, the common people, industry and commerce that comes from feudal system in ancient China. However, the feudal system in Japan was totally different from China s. Japan s was a Shogunate system within the combination of decentralization and centralization on the basis of Samurai Khan established on the ground of dual relationship combined patriarchal clan with master-slave while China was a patriarchal clan system of absolute monarchy system. On the other hand, Japan s social economic structure was also different from China, especially in the Buke ear. There are two economic center, manor and city, existing simultaneously, which was a little similar with the dual economic structure in Europe. But differ from Europe, with the exception of the dual structure manor-city, there was a dissimilatory free society called underground-city existing, which is a small ternary social structure but dominated by dual. Particularly at the end period of Tokugawa Shogunate, the dissimilatory free hierarchy became much stronger than before, including many worriers who were excellent enough but did not have opportunities to make contributions to their country and talented young people. The advances of such small ternary social structure immediately appeared when met the modern social revolution. The great Yeoman society turned to be the prophet of the age, simultaneously the leader of social reform, thus brought Japan into the threshold of modernization. Differences in Land Ownership The age of Tokugawa is the supreme, as well the last period of feudal society in Japan, the political system and social-economic structures of which are concentrated reflected in the Tokugawa Regime. And the land ownership owned by the generals that derived from the Tokugawa Regime had been the typical characteristic of the Japanese land ownership. In feudal society, land is the basic means of production; of course the amount of land ownership is the mark to judge a person whether rich or poor; therefore the land ownership in Japan in the age of Tokugawa is the 2

3 feudal-lord land ownership because all the lands belonged to the feudal lord (samurai) at that time. In Japan, of all the samurai, peasants, workers and businessmen, only the samurai can own lands. Peasants just have the rights of cultivation, not have the ownership. The feudal-lord land ownership has three characteristics: first, general has the maximum power to distribute and re-distribute the lands, as well has the greatest leadership. Second, a system named Shigao which was created to exploit the rent in kind. Third, a system named Common people, which means that the common people was bounded with lands, exploited by lords and had to paid taxes to the lords. The land ownership of feudal lords in Tokugawa age did not allow to sale lands because lands are their private property. Merchants, usurers and peasants cannot be the legal owners although they had bought lands from the lords, let alone enter into the ruling class by this way. In addition to this, the guarded system of hereditary aristocracy also made the lands does not have any possibilities to be circulated in society. In a word, due to the opposition between land ownership and currency ownership, the weaker regulatory function in social contradiction, which leads to produce various of social contradictions, and make it easier to differentiate new power fighting against the ruling class, thus make full preparations in ideological and political for the social changes in modern Japan. On the other hand, the characteristic of land ownership of bakuhan lord determined that lands are controlled in the hands of lords in that to exploit the common people, leading to the land system become more simplified and the polarization in class structure, finally formed the single exploiting class represented by general, daimyo, and majou domo, as well the exploited class represented by common people. Because the simplification of land system and polarization of class structure has made the land ownership of bakuhan lord become shaky, it is easy to break up in the grand tide of commodity economy, also the bakuhan system would be shaky, which leads to the surami s power will disappear if the bakuhan system breaks up. Therefore it will supply benefits for the success of Meiji Restoration. The land ownership in ancient China belonged to the lords, which is the core of relations of production in the feudal society, and the fundamental characteristic of which is land dealing. In other countries, although land dealing also existed in sometime, it can not be economic relation in dominant. However, land dealing in ancient China occupied a completely position in dominant. In the dynasty of Tang and Song, the commodity economy in China had been developed fast and the amount of land dealing was growing. At the period of Ming and Qing dynasty, the commodity economy had reached a higher level than before, as well as the land dealing, even the capitalism appeared. In that case, such kind of freely land ownership supplied an approach for the underclass to promote to a higher position. Through the freely land dealing, merchants and peasants can grasp the opportunity to climb up to the higher class, simultaneously, imperial examination system also supplied a way for the common people to promote to a higher position, consequently the social resilience and liquidity were much better compared with Japan, which had the strict system of hereditary aristocracy and worse social liquidity. Only in such condition in ancient China, the regulatory mechanism will turn to be better in regulating the social contradiction and make the opposition between land ownership and currency ownership become much less than Japan. Therefore, a special system named quarternity consisted of landlord, merchant, usurer and bureaucrat was formed in ancient China, and it became stronger at the period of end Qing dynasty. It is the reason why they devoted themselves to safeguarding the feudal system. In this condition, unlike Japan, different kinks of exploitation groups and ruling class combined together, along with the combination between common benefits and political appeals, which made it impossible to differentiate another new power to fight against with them. It is precisely because this, the feudal system had a special and strange stability to safeguard its governess, particularly in the end Qing dynasty, although Qing was utterly decadent. It moved slowly against the trace of history, killed the hundred days of reform, and had been the greatest obstruction to prevent the social reform in modern China. Differences in Personnel Employment System One of the reasons why Japan can achieve the success in social reform is that they chose the hereditary system, unlike the imperial examination system in China. Since the rigidly hereditary system, internal class of ruling group had always been permanent, therefore, the road from bottom to top cannot 3

4 International Journal of Literature and Art (IJLA) Volume 2, 2014 access, such as Laozhong in Shogunate should be born from the lord s family, and a person has been doomed to a lower samurai if he borns in a lower samurai family, and so on. So it leaded to the greatest contradiction in most people, including some ruling class, to the hereditary system. Although the lower samurai in late Shogunate showed their opponent opinion to peasant uprising, they were much more hostile to the hereditary system. Hereditary system blocked the way for talents from bottom classes accessing to the center of the country and manually set barriers to prevent the circling of talents, which aggravated the social contradiction and made the classes who were hostile to the hereditary system a strong power to accelerate the modernization in Japan. Otherwise, lower samurais paid more attentions to the western culture due to their failure to access to the official career, which was a best way to the young people to get rid of the lower class, meanwhile, they can learn much more knowledge from west, as the so-called, a person can expand himself if he would like to learn everything from others. In that condition, a non-mainstream academic system had been formed in Japan out of the ruling class, also a large number of talents in western learning emerged, which should have made full preparations for the coming modernization and development. The imperial examination system in China originated from AD 587, until the end Qing Dynasty. The greatest advantage of this system is that talents from all the classes can be chosen to enter into the core of the country, as it was called, a good scholar can become an official. The imperial examination system, highly evaluated by Montesquieu, made the way from bottom to the top can be passed without difficulties, which has a great advantage in alleviating disputes and maintaining feudal system, thereby made the ancient China feudal society flexible enough. However, although there are some advantages in the imperial examination system that stimulated many people to enter into the core of country to change their life, on the other hand, it captivated the ruling class by considering the imperial examination system is such perfect that there is no need to change it any more, in that case, the effective reform will not appear. Besides, the academic circles in ancient China was probably controlled by the imperial examination system, people only focused their attention on stereotyped writing, chased after Confucianism, only knew knowledge should be existed in China, instead, considered that there were not any knowledge in foreign countries and looked down upon the western knowledge, even fight against with foreign languages, at last led to fell far behind the western countries, or Japan. Differences in Political Structure The political differences between China and Japan were becoming much clearer after the two Opium war. In Japan, although there were about 200 vassal states, also a general-centered system named Huangmu and a general dominant system named Tokugawa existed, the diversity of political structure did not lead to the division of Japan, instead, stepped toward to the way to unity. The theory of respecting Mikado, that appeared after the domestic uniform market formed at the middle of Edo era in Japan, was a kind of social thought aims at building a unified country, which was similar with the form of absolute monarchy in west Europe. But national unity and stepping toward modern country the two difficult problems had been solved in such condition. In China, the emperor had the greatest power to control the country, but not stable, and not helpful to step toward the modern country. The feudal system in Qing Dynasty was different with the absolute monarchy in west Europe, as the provincial magnates and local officials in Qing Dynasty were act as landlords, which specialized in the revenue system named Huohao. Therefore it was bad for China step to the modern country, instead there were too many wars broke at the end of Qing and the county was gradually going to the division. The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Uprising led Qing almost went to collapse, thereafter, warlord of Xiang and Huai made China divide into pieces step by step, even worse, a lot wars broke out among warlords after the revolution of Until new democracy revolution occurred, China finally unify the whole country. Diversity of Political System in Japan The political system of Japan in Buke era was a dual political system surrounded with shogun, firstly, it was the bakuhan system that concentrate the power on general and separate powers from vassal states, on the other hand, it was the Mikado system that concentrate the power on general and concentrate the supremacy to Mikado. In the age of Tokugawa, the most classical characteristic of politics in Japan is the combination of the concentration and separation of the power. In another word, it was a political structure consisted of 4

5 Gongyi and Lingfen, it was the reflection of feudal lord land ownership on politics. Bakuhan system originated from Xiuji political power in the era of Taoshan and established in the era of Tokugawa Iemitsu who was the general in the third generation in Tokugawa Shogunate. Mikado system was an identity society depended on hereditary system, the classical political characteristics of which is the combination of concentration and separation, meanwhile the political system of the combination of concentration and separation was established in the foundation of feudal lord land ownership that Tokugawa general has the greatest power. Japan entered into a period of massive wars after the nin War in And after the battle of Sekigahara in 1600, Tokugawa ended the wars and unified the whole Japan, also established the Tokugawa Shogunate, which had the greatest power in the country. Tokugawa Ieyasu, although defeated toyatomi, did not have abilities to eliminate all the daimyo divisions, especially the Tozama daimyo, and had to admit this political truth. At last, Shogunate concentrated all the power and dominated the whole country with daimyo, forming a dual political structure combined concentration and separation. Otherwise, Tokugawa shogunate had no power to deny the ownership of daimyo and majou domo to their lands, as well cannot wipe out all the divisions, therefore it was impossible to finish the unity and concentration. The seigniors formed their forces in their own vassal states, which was independent to an extent and separated powers from the Shogunate in a large extent, but meanwhile controlled by Shogunate. It was a relative dependence and division. Finally the dual political system Shogunate-vassal state was formed. Before mediaeval times, the Mikado was the only person who owned the greatest power and supremacy. But after mediaeval times, power and supremacy were separated. General controlled the force power and the Mikado controlled the imperial power. The influence of force power had much bigger than the imperial power; consequently the Mikado had no real power to control the country. However, the Mikado also was the mental symbolization of Japan, who still had the supreme godhead. In the history of Japan, amaterasu created the country, and all of the Mikados were his grandson. Thereafter, the Mikados set up a palace for sacrificing the amaterasu in order to revere the amaterasu and also the Mikados. In this process, the Mikado surely enjoyed the situation of supremacy. Simultaneously, the Mikado has an advantage in the status, and was the origination that general gain the legal power to dominant the whole country. Instead, generals have to be canonized by the Mikado, who was a little vassal in the eye of general. The correlations between the Mikado and Japan was inseparable, it is unbelievable there was not the Mikado in Japan. Meanwhile, the Mikado was the symbolization of Yamato, the core of Japanese in their religious life, and the object that Japanese believe in. Hence that formed a dummy dual politics as the form of the Mikado and general, capital royalty and Tokugawa Shogunate. In such condition, the double dual political system Shougunate-the Mikado, Shogunate-vassal states was formed at last. (See the following picture) The dummy dual political system Shougunate-the Mikado had two functions: one is the power inheritance which lasted a long period of time, the other is the power could be transformed as soon as possible, and then formed a double characteristic: when the strength of Shogunate was strong, the greatest power and supremacy were in a balance situation no matter in the aspect of politics or psychology, which was helpful to maintain the stabilization of feudal society. When the strength of Shogunate was declining, this balance was broken, even uprisings of war everywhere. At this time, the functions of Shougunate-the Mikado begun to operate. Supremacy was becoming strong while the greatest power was becoming weak, the Mikado should had been the new power to fight against with the Shogunate and supplied sane and legal political support for the lower samurais to overturn the 5

6 International Journal of Literature and Art (IJLA) Volume 2, 2014 governess of Shogunate. The system of the Mikado had provided an example for the new power to choose the way to reform. Consequently, Japan chose the system of Japanese emperor instead of the republicanism, begun to carry out the new reform, which pulled open the gap between China and Japan in the modern development. The two components of the system of Shogunate-vassal states were the Shogunate central authority and the 200 vassal states governed by daimyo. Especially the long-period confrontation between Shogunate and tozama daimyo, made the new forces of innovation have a room to grow up. Once the forces who wanted to overturn the Shogunate appeared, the forces of innovation would take the flag of the Mikado to mobilize and unite all the people who wanted to overturn the Shogunate to start the reform in a reasonable and legal way from the top to the bottom. This kind of oligarchy was quite similar with the absolute monarchy in west Europe in essence, and made full preparations for the success of Meiji restoration in the aspect of theory, morality, public opinion, and politics. The unitary Political System in China The classical unitary political system in ancient China had been last a long time since 2000 years ago. The forming of the feudal monarchy in ancient China was in such a process: initiated from the Spring and Autumn period, developed in the Warring States Time, established in Qin Dynasty and reached the peak at the period of first emperor of Qin, finally consolidated in the West Han Dynasty. The emperors in each dynasty in ancient China were the only person who owned the greatest power and political authority. The legality of the system of imperial power in ancient China was built in the foundation of destiny, which was a kind of metaphysic theory. The emperor was the embodiment of the deity, was the real dragon, and owned the greatest power in their hands, even could release their desire as their wishes without the control of law and humanity. The emperor did not only owned the absolute political rights, but also was the actual source of all the rights. The autocratic imperial power of ancient China was a closed system, which did not allow people enjoy the rights to join in the administration in their country, caused the result that people were indifferent to the politics of their country. Therefore, it made people only care about their family and pay no attention to their country. However, emperors did only could use the force to maintain their imperial power whether in the aspect of power or the mental. In such condition, the politics was dimmer; the governess was more violent than before in that the imperial power in ancient China was becoming much more abnormal from Qin to Tang, until Ming and Qing. People were quite indifferent to their country and nation because the imperial court never allow them to participate in the administration in their country, as thus there were not any power can be existed to challenge the imperial power, and finally delayed the process of modernization in China. Qing Dynasty, who was a local minority regime, stemmed from the northeast of China and entered into central plains with the help of uprisings in the end of Ming Dynasty. It inherited the concentrated feudal system in Ming that all the provincial magnate and magistrate were assigned by central government. However, in essence, this kind of concentrated imperial power was different with the absolute monarchy which was the basis to become a modern country at the end of feudal society in world history. In middle ages, the absolute monarchy countries were established in the foundation of the domestic unified market and the developed transportation, instead, it was difficult for Qing to realize the central concentration similar with west Europe at the end of Qing Dynasty. At the beginning of Qing when entered into center plains, it continued to follow the tax policy named Huohao, in another word, local officials should not only levy normed tax to turn in to national treasury, but also to levy the individual income tax, which was a right that emperors in Ming and Qing endowed. The emperor Kangxi also considered, it was reasonable to levy the additional 1 percent taxes after levied the principal tax; but the local officials levied the extra tax in the amount of 10 percent. Yitian Xijia said: The ruling system in Qing Dynasty was unified in form, about the forming of the unified country would be an issue in the future. At the end of Qing, the imperial power was separated and the empress dowager owned the greatest power, therefore the efficiency of the government to deal with issues was weak. The ideologist, Kang Youwei proposed to reform in the same way of Meiji restoration, who suggested building modern industries and schools. But there were too many classes between the emperor and commom people in that the advice cannot arrive at the emperor smoothly. In addition, the governor at the end of Qing Dynasty was so decadent and foolish that the bourgeoisie reform would not appear radically. And 6

7 the Hundred Days of Reform was just the death struggle of Qing government. China cannot step to the unity with the leadership of the old class, common people still not awake from the dream and cannot unite together, thereafter China became weaker that before. Besides, Qing Dynasty was a minority entered into central plains. Governed by alien races and cultural crash aggravated the national contradictions, which also delayed the process of the modernization in China. Differences in Cultural Structures China is one of the most important birthplaces of world civilization with more than 5000 years history. It also has an indie and huge cultural system since the past, having an effect on the other nations cultural system. For China, the surrounding areas of China were the places that China imported the culture to. China was so proud of its own culture and looked down upon the other culture, even rejected the culture from other places. In history, China never brought in any culture from other countries except the Buddhism came into China in Wei, Jin, Northern and Southern Dynasties. The sinocentrism and the so called center of the world culture had already become the obstacles for China to learn from the foreign countries. Instead, there was not any culture existed in Japan, therefore they had to learn from others to develop their own culture. The most important was that Japanese did not look down upon the foreign culture, they begun to learn from foreigners in 3 rd century, even took in all the Chinese culture without any hesitation. Shoto Kutaishi had dispatched Ono no Imoko to China many times for purchasing books and bringing in Buddhism in order to rank the second class country among all the countries in Asia. For Japanese, the so-called foreign countries were the places where they could take in and learn their cultures, since the new things from foreign countries can bring in new reform and sights to their country and nation. History and culture are the presentation of a nation s mind. No history and culture, no country and nation, a master of sinology name Qian Muru said. Therefore it is easy to find that the cultural and national spirits are intelligence concepts that a country could be established. This intelligence concept created two countries in Asia who has far-reaching influence to the world history, and also had an effect on the reform in modern China and Japan. The differences in cultural structures and the cultural burden were the important reason why produced different reform results between China and Japan. Multiple Cultural Construction in Japan Yamato is a multiple nation consists of the nations from all directions, including Koryosaram, Paekche people, Mongolian, Chinese and so on. All the people from all directions brought great profits for the culture of Japan, in that made the totally differences among Japan and other countries in Southeast Asia. Japanese were easy to accept the western culture in tradition, which was the classical characteristic of Japanese culture. The diversity of the multiple culture construction in Japan played an important role in the modern reform in Japan. There are many definitions about the Japanese culture, for example, multiple cultures, compound cultures, two cultures, alloy cultures and bittern cultures. This paper named Japanese culture as multiple cultures to introduce the no uniqueness of Japanese culture. Yamato meanwhile were good at assimilating cultures from others, choosing and mixing together with their native cultures to form the ultimate multiple culture. The origin of Japanese culture was mixed combined with the plural culture at the period of dawn when man ape begun to learn etiquette. The factors of multiple cultures stemmed from Yayoi period although that period was too far away from now, and factors of bringism were begun to grow at that time. At the pre-bringism period, Japanese culture was the appendage of Chinese culture, and Japanese had learned cultures from China for one thousand years. However, at the after-bringism period, Japan initiated its culture from orchidology, meanwhile learned all from the west Europe, created the archipelago human landscape and made double preparations for the social reform in culture and theory in Japan. Yamato owned some particular features in the process of bringing in the foreign cultures: the practicability of bringism, the stability of traditional culture, the compatibility of multiple cultures. Yamato accepted all the advanced cultures from other countries in the world without any rejection no matter in the period of pre-bringism or after-bringism. In the period of pre-bringism, yamato almost assimilated all the Chinese culture and other civil achievements except the surname transformation revolution stated by Menci, and the system of government official, etc. Finally they created their own cultural tradition 7

8 International Journal of Literature and Art (IJLA) Volume 2, 2014 combined with Chinese tradition and Japanese individuality in the process of exchanging with China. Kang Youwei ever said, western countries spent 500 years to accomplish the reform, but it only took 20 years in Japan. It was the multiple advances assimilated the foreign cultures from other countries by Japan that formed the high compatibility and low resistance of Japanese culture. In addition, the burden on the shoulder of Japanese culture was not heavy as Qing Dynasty, in that made it convenient for Japan to accomplish the social reform. Just like the saying of Guo Moruo, in detail, the burden in Japan was not heavy as China although Japan combined Chinese culture and Japanese culture together, therefore they could move faster. When the global entered into modern age, Japanese took grant to transplant the western cultures and grasped the final chance under the symbolization of west Europe to realize the social reform, even stepped onto the way to capitalism when faced the severe national crisis. The success of Meiji restoration surpassed Chinese with the efficiency of bringism. The Unitary Structure of Chinese Confucian Culture Chinese culture has a long history, which is undoubted and beyond comparison by most other countries. However, the culture itself is a kind of wealth, also a kind of burden. The classical characteristic of Chinese culture is the unitary Confucian culture. The main content of which is filial piety, loyalty, honesty, politeness, brotherhood, sense of honor and shame, the core of which is benevolence. Confucian culture was praised highly by governors of each dynasty, developed and inherited by the following people, therefore had made a great contribution to the Chinese culture. Confucian thought was everywhere in the deep thought of Chinese people. Confucian culture had rooted in the inherent value system of China and can be adjusted itself anytime, it had acclimatized itself to the change of the age and society. In a large extent, Confucian culture was the most valuable culture in east. In the past 3000 years, Chinese Confucian culture did not only produce a far-reaching effect in Japan, Korean peninsula, but the south-east Asia and South Asia. Zhenghe s travelling to the west even deepened this affection. At last the East Asia cultural circle which was surrounded with Chinese culture and admitted by the world was formed. In the past 3000 years, the unitary Confucian culture had made Chinese people think China was the whole world, looked down upon the western countries, and did not want to assimilate their culture. Just like the saying, the burden of Chinese culture was too heavy, also the culture before the period of capitalism was too long, at least 3000 years, therefore they had a belief to the past culture and conflicted with the new culture, even regarded westerners as barbarians, Guo Moruo said. Indeed, the culture before the period of capitalism was glorious, but it was too glorious to be reformed in the revolution. It is thus clear that tradition was the heavy burden of a nation and the barrier of a society moving toward. The Confucian culture under the unitary structure constrained the idea, also the humanities of people. We were so proud of the glory in the past five thousand years that we could not face up to the development of modern ages and cannot grasp the opportunity before our eyes, let alone to form the national spirit in the future. It was the pride of the unitary culture and the conflict to the foreign cultures that formed the difficulties to prevent the society revolution, the 3000 years glory became the burden of the society revolution, instead. Differences Between Family System and Family Property Inheritance System China and Japan were both patriarchy countries, meanwhile family system and family property inheritance system played an important part in the revolution of China and Japan. The concept of family in Japan means an independent social group circled with family property, which was a business community. It contains blood relationship and un-blood relationship, the purpose of which was to sustain the whole family. The sustainable of family reflected the effective development of the economic function of family; it was the ultimate goal that all the family members run after. Especially in the period of Buke era, Japanese took the full impulsion to look for their inheritance of family. Chinese people thought, family should stand before the business, but Japanese inverted. Consequently Japanese attached importance to the inheritance of business, which was in the highest position. When choosing an inheritor, Japanese would choose the most talented sons and daughters in accordance with their standard of management talent and morality. Son and daughters with blood relationship may not have the qualification to be a member of family, the true relationship between father and son could be admitted only within the inherited relationship existed between them. If son and daughters with blood relationship were not excellent 8

9 enough, they would not be considered and instead the talented people in their family would be chose to inherit the family property. Son and daughters who were gave up only can live by themselves or went to the other families to act as other son and daughters. In the Confucian culture of China, however, the core of family system was blood relationship. Families in China were aggregation of the blood relationship, the purpose of which was to carry on the family line. Chinese society was a lengthways structure of attaching importance to the crosswise relationship. The function of family economic community attached importance by Japanese was ignored by Chinese, but the blood relationship concentrated by Chinese was not important in the eyes of Japanese. Otherwise, the leader of family was the only person everyone in the family should devote their heart and soul to in the family system in China. The group of blood relationship was built above personal interest, and also to balance the personal interest. The group cannot tolerate individuals to stronger or develop them, so that it is quite difficult to form a social group that personal interest could be fused, let alone the economic structure of capitalism which was good for the social revolution. Differences in Positions of the Tributary System of East Asia In the 16 th century, there were three country systems existing in the continent of Europe and Asia. First, it was the tributary system of East Asia within the focus on ancient China; secondly, it was the Muslim world within the focus on Turkish Ottoman Empire; and the last, it was the European order with the characteristic of political division. The time when the tributary system of East Asia formed was quite earlier than that Muslim world and European order formed. The tributary system firstly formed at the period of Qin and Han Dynasty, and the dominant idea of which was Hua-Yi. The relations such as canonized and be canonized, paid tribute and be paid tribute, were the fundamental relations among the countries in the tributary system of East Asia, meanwhile these countries were also an alliance. Ancient China established the tributary system of East Asia depended on its own power and culture influence. The emperors of each dynasty in ancient China had the responsibility to maintain the order among these countries, and also issued imperial edict to admit the validity of the kings in other countries. When people in other countries suffered invasion or in disasters, the emperor of China should take measures and dispatched ambassadors to help and comfort them. As the vassal states, the detail form they showed their loyalty to the emperor of China was to pay tribute to China timely, ask for the canonization from the emperor and admit the leadership of China among these countries, as well to record the history in accordance with the title of the emperor s reign. In the aspect of culture, tributary system developed the output of culture from China to the other countries in East Asia, and then formed the circle of East Asia culture. Therefore, China did not realize the equal relationship should be existed between country and country, which also still had a strong consciousness that the emperor was the whole world; China was the whole world; the other countries all should be affiliated to China. The awareness of world was never been existed in the mind of China, let alone to consider it is one of the members of the world, which finally became the barrier to exchange with the other countries after China was becoming weak. In history, Japan had been affiliated to China for a long period of time. Himiko, the king of Yamatai Nation, was once called the king with good relation to Wei Dynasty, and was conferred an official by the emperor of China, and so on. In this period of time, Japan was inside the tributary system of East Asia, but begun to get out of it when the strength of Japan was becoming strong. Taking Toyotomi Hideyoshi as an example; Zhudi, one of the emperors in Ming Dynasty, dispatched an envoy to Japan to confer Toyotomi Hideyoshi the king of Japan, but Toyotomi Hideyoshi took off his hat and coat, even teared up the imperial edict and shouted, I am the king of Japan, why should I accept your confer to me? Therefore, the position of Japan in the tributary system of East Asia was decided 9

10 International Journal of Literature and Art (IJLA) Volume 2, 2014 by the force of Japan. When China was strong, the centripetal force of tributary system of East Asia was powerful; Japan in this period of course would enter into the center of this circle. However, when China became weak, also the centripetal force of tributary system of East Asia became weak at the same time; Japan would swim to the edge of this circle, as the anion. If Japan was put into the history of East Asia, comparing with the other countries such as Korea, Ryukyu, Siam and so on, Japan had wandering around the outside of tributary system of East Asia for a long time, which had a closely logical relationship to the marginalization and the wish to become the powerful nation. Just because Japan was outside the tributary system of East Asia for a long time, the thought of Huayi was weak, even did not exist, therefore Japan could contact with the other countries in the world freely and did not be injured because of the breakdown of the system, instead the international status was enhanced. Yamato emphasized the sense of belonging of the culture and the particularity of nations. The culture of Japan originally stemmed from the culture of China, processed the Confucian culture, and gradually got out of the strain of thought of Huayi, even dare to continually fight against to the tributary system of East Asia. In addition, western culture, orchidology and sinology were developed greatly in Japan since the 18 th century. Until the middle of 19 th century; Japan had confirmed the thought that it was one of the members of the world, understood the equal relationship between country and country, and finally could entered into the world successfully. Conclusion Different results occurred in the social reform of China and Japan was not an incidental in history, instead it is inevitable in the social development, which is the result of different kinds of internal and external causes, and also had profound origin in the aspects of politics, economy, culture and consciousness. Besides that, there were also some other reasons resulted to the social reform, such as differences in the social reform progress, differences in the strength of leadership, differences in the official selection and differences in the mediate system of social contradictions, and so on. The author does not intend to state them because there had been many statements existed. Since from 1853, an American named Perry first visited Japan to open the country, to the end of Boshin War in 1868, the governess of Shogunate was overturned in such a short period of time, 15 years; which created advantageous conditions for the development of capitalism and safeguard the independence of Japan. However, China took 72 years to overwhelm the governess of Qing Dynasty, from 1840 to 1911, which was more than 40 years later than Japan. At this period, China had been colonized by many countries. Under the double stress of imperialism and feudalism, the step of capitalism moved rather slowly, and still couldn t change the situation of being marginalized. REFERENCES Chuanfang He, Qing Dynasty in World History, Issue 1, Page 28, Renan Shen, History of Tokugawa Era, Page 134, Volume 1, August 2003, Hebei Peoples Publishing House. The commentary of Zuo Concise Encyclopedia Britannica, Page 132, Volume 3, 1985, Encyclopedia of China Publishing House. Da Li, Outline of Economy, Page 101, 1985, Wuhan University Publishing Company. Jianer Mu, The Establishment History of Japan Feudalism, Chapter 1, Page 2-3, Syowa 44. Renan Shen, Discussion on the Characteristics of Bakuhan, Page 1, March 1996, Beijing University Publishing House. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Page 369, Volume 1. Rulei Hu, Characteristics of landlord ownership, Page 28. Yuqin Wu, Shirong Qi, World Modern History, Page 179, March 2001, High Education Press. Renan Shen, Disscussion on the History of Tokugawa Era, Page 56-57, 2003, Hebei Peoples Publishing House. Fukuzawa Yukichi, Civilization Theory in General, Page 17, 1982, The Commercial Press. Youcheng Song, New Modern Japanese History, Page 17, 2006, Beijing University Publishing House. Kate Wildman Nakai, "Tokugawa Confucian Historiography," in Confucianism and Tokugawa Culture, ed. Peter Nosco (Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press, 1984), P.86. Rose Benedict, The Chrysanthemum and the Sword, Page 22, November 2007, Shanghai Joint Publishing Press. The Book of Songs Sheng Hu, From the Second Opium War to the May 4 th Movement, Page 13, June 1981, People s Publishing House. Yodayoshiie, Comparision in Modernization between China and Japan, Page 23, January 2004, Shanghai Far East 10

11 Publishers. Zhijun Tang, Sets of Kang Youwei s Political Words, Page 59, 1981, Zhonghua Book Company. Mu Qian, Spirit of Chinese History, Page 7, January 1976, Taipei University Book Company. Hayashiyatachusaburo, Discussion on History, Page 21, 1972, Shogakukan. Tadao Umesao, Tadamichitaro, Structure of Japanese Culture, Page 193, May Syowa 47. Katosyuichi, Multiple Culture, Page 31, September Syowa 49. Zhuo Li, Thinking on the Family System and National Character in China and Japan, Page 80, Issue 2, Deyu Zhao, Japanese Culture History in Modern Times, Page 388, December 2010, World Affairs Press. Moruo Guo, Guo Moruo Essays, Page 72, Volume 11. Pu Pang, Traditional Culture and Culture Tradition, Page 18, Issue 4, Zhuo Li, Seeing the Development of Japan from the view of Inheritance, Page 14, Issue 6, Zhuoyun Xu, Chinese Culture and World Culture, Page 5, March 2006, Guangxi Normal University Press. Ningning Yu, Relation Transfromation between Japan and Tributary System of East Asia, Page 116, Issue 2, Yodayoshiie, Historical Issues in Modern Japan, Page 78, January 2004, Shanghai Far East Publishers. 11