The Taiping Rebellion... successful?

Hendryk

Banned
That was largely under the warlords and republic in the 20s, 30s, and 40s.
Indeed, by the time the Communists took over in 1949, footbinding had practically disappeared.

True, but Chinese civilisation is hardly carved in stone. It changed in many different ways from dynasty to dynasty, and when things "go back to normal" they might still have drastic changes in *some* areas compared to the previous era.
Oh, I agree. But change, as in any society, takes place organically, not by political fiat; and there's a difference between the normal evolution of a society, and the brutal implementation of an abstract ideological model on said society. The latter is by definition bound to fail, because as soon as the political pressure to conform to the artificial model is removed, the status quo ante is restored.
 
I see your point. If the Taiping did revert to a status quo situation, what remnants of their ideology could remain? I'm assuming the trappings of the Qing could readily stay gone. I do believe that some Christian imagery and influence could remain, especially if a pragmatic post-Hong Xiuquan Taiping emperor is more amenable to foreign missionaries.

I'm imagining American missionaries in a Taiping China causing growing discontent in the United States regarding the continued attempts by the British to force opium into China.
 
Well, there are two interesting scenarios:
-Hong Xiuquan stays in power as do the Taiping, Taiping China stays for a while. Christianity makes huge headway in China, perhaps China modernises earlier?
-China goes to hell in a basket with Hong Xiuquan managing a semi-stable hold on power until his death. Then, China fractures and collapses into warlordism, with a Taiping section in the south and everything else... crazy.
 
Well, there are two interesting scenarios:
-Hong Xiuquan stays in power as do the Taiping, Taiping China stays for a while. Christianity makes huge headway in China, perhaps China modernises earlier?
-China goes to hell in a basket with Hong Xiuquan managing a semi-stable hold on power until his death. Then, China fractures and collapses into warlordism, with a Taiping section in the south and everything else... crazy.

I think you don't get it. It's the Taiping held part the one that will be fucked beyond comprehension.
 
I’m really not quite sure how the Taipings would have won in the first place. Hong Xuiquan was generally incompetent (he failed the civil service examinations on no fewer than four occasions before he began seeing visions), his chief military commander was an illiterate coal-burner, and neither of them had any concept of military strategy, economic administration or foreign relations. Hong never seemed to grasp the idea that controlling cities was only worthwhile if he controlled the countryside around them; as a result the local landed elite in the countryside remained in place and for the most part stayed loyal to the Qing. They failed utterly to understand the concept of concentration of force, with the result that they frequently gave inferior armies impossible goals. The one great advantage which the Taipings had were their twenty-thousand or so fanatic-soldiers, mostly from the Hakka communities, and these were squandered in endless attritional sieges…

So what sort of POD would be needed to get the Taipings to win?
 

Typo

Banned
I’m really not quite sure how the Taipings would have won in the first place. Hong Xuiquan was generally incompetent (he failed the civil service examinations on no fewer than four occasions before he began seeing visions), his chief military commander was an illiterate coal-burner, and neither of them had any concept of military strategy, economic administration or foreign relations.
That's not true at all.

If that were the Taiping wouldn't have being able to destory most of the standing Qing army
 
That's not true at all.

If that were the Taiping wouldn't have being able to destory most of the standing Qing army
I was rather under the impression that that was because the Qings were, at least initially, even more incompetent that the Taipings, and that the Taipings initially had a large number of Hakka fanatics to call upon.

Also, Hong et al. might have been more competent than I gave them credit for before ‘victory disease’ set in after they captured Nanjing, but after that occurred the quality of leadership in the Taiping camp was, AFAIK, poor at best.

But keep in mind that I am 1) an arrogant teenager who probably desperately needs to get the hubris beaten out of him and 2) hardly an expert on the subject.
 
The Qing *WERE* incompetent to an immense degree, hence Taiping's successes. Any functioning, intelligent Chinese dynasty would have kicked the crap out of the them far earlier.
 

Typo

Banned
True, but arguably functional and competent dynasty would be able to prevent such a rebellion in the first place.
 
Oh, I agree. But change, as in any society, takes place organically, not by political fiat; and there's a difference between the normal evolution of a society, and the brutal implementation of an abstract ideological model on said society. The latter is by definition bound to fail, because as soon as the political pressure to conform to the artificial model is removed, the status quo ante is restored.

Hrmm. This statement, while sounding true, seems vague enough to be meaningless.

No offense.
 
A Taiping China, if successful and not a basket case, would have an interesting flavour. Civil service exams based on the Bible would change the kind of elite discourse and mindset in China. I can also see the banning of foot binding and queues and the draconian measures against drugs, alcohol, gambling and such vice as continuing, and may help give the Taiping a higher reputation among some foreign circles (mainly Americans).

Keep in mind that the Taiping also had people interested in foreign inventions like railroads. This sounds minor, but the Qing didn't start building them til the 1890s OTL.
 
Hong claimed himself a younger brother of Jesus (i.e. second Messiah). I wonder how Hong's successor could reconcile this with mainstream Christianity.
 

HueyLong

Banned
I don't think any society can just snap back to an original position- not even if change is implemented from above. For example, while you may argue that the Cultural Revolution "failed" as the Chinese leadership went against it in later years, it continued to have lasting effects on Chinese politics and culture.

As for the Taiping specifically, I imagine they would shed some of their crazier ideas- no private ownership, separation of the sexes, etc..... and still come out with their puritanical ideas.

(BTW, why the regards of the Americans as worse prudes than others in the era?)
 
If China fell apart in the 19th century. The Europeans will move in and carve China into colonies not spheres of influence.
 
Hong claimed himself a younger brother of Jesus (i.e. second Messiah). I wonder how Hong's successor could reconcile this with mainstream Christianity.
IMO this was just replacement for "heavenly son"
</div>
 
Could someone explain please why exactly a Taiping China would be so irreparably ruined? Obviously a surviving Taiping could not continue with all of its extreme policies, and there would have to be some reforms. I also think some people overestimate the ability of Chinese culture to revert to exactly how it was before any large trauma. Compare the pre-Communist ROC to the later 20th century PRC, or either of them to the Warlord period, or to Qing China. China in 2000 is much different than China in 1900, so it's not all "business as usual." The same would hold true were the Taiping to succeed.
 
What would've brought the Qing low was if the Taiping PLUS the other rebellions at the same time had coalesced to finally crush their last vestiges of power. This would probablt have needed a European world war, and some way in which the Taiping could have been used as a proxy in that, eg with France fighting Britain, using the Taiping against the Imperials

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
No he claimed he's the second son of God.

And in Taiping's theology the early Wangs (kings/princes) were also (younger) sons of god, as far as I know.
Well, in many cultures (and in Chinese particulary) the words of blood relation weren't used only in the narrow sense. I don't think that Chinese when called emperors sons of Heaven, undestood this literally. And again IMO this word "younger" is also refference to the one of the five relatioships

</div>
 
Top