Which nations could've plausibly undergone rapid modernization, as Japan did?

"Hey, doesnt Korea fit in all those categories? It has had central government for centuries longer than Japan, its got the people and resources, and-"
The thing about Korea's central government by the late Joseon era is that it's not exactly the most rational government in the world. To have any chance at a Korean Meiji you need a more successful (and more legitimate) Daewongun analogue decades earlier that can shake up the status quo to concentrate and centralize power and weaken the prerogative of the yangban aristocracy.
 
The thing about Korea's central government by the late Joseon era is that it's not exactly the most rational government in the world. To have any chance at a Korean Meiji you need a more successful (and more legitimate) Daewongun analogue decades earlier that can shake up the status quo to concentrate and centralize power and weaken the prerogative of the yangban aristocracy.

Best POD is Japanese invasion is stopped early - OTL a third of all arable lands were destroyed and a quarter of all men were dead. Note that Yi Sun-shin was always an army general, its entirely possible that if he was stationed along one of the mountain passes he could've completely defeated the Japanese expeditionary army. :D
 
Best POD is Japanese invasion is stopped early - OTL a third of all arable lands were destroyed and a quarter of all men were dead. Note that Yi Sun-shin was always an army general, its entirely possible that if he was stationed along one of the mountain passes he could've completely defeated the Japanese expeditionary army. :D

I am looking at your sig with suspicion.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Yeah, Korea's kind of the Poland of Asia...

"Hey, doesnt Korea fit in all those categories? It has had central government for centuries longer than Japan, its got the people and resources, and-"
*quick look at map of East Asia*
"Goddammit."

Yeah, Korea's kind of the Poland of east Asia ... If it's not the Germans, it's the Russians, or the Swedes, or the Austrians (for the Poles); for the Koreans, if it's not the Japanese, it's the Chinese, or the Mongols, or the Russians.

Best,
 
Yeah, Korea's kind of the Poland of east Asia ... If it's not the Germans, it's the Russians, or the Swedes, or the Austrians (for the Poles); for the Koreans, if it's not the Japanese, it's the Chinese, or the Mongols, or the Russians.
Well, unlike Poland, Korea has never been partitioned, plus only directly annexed for 35 years.

If we're talking only about the propensity to get invaded China is more like Poland :p
 
Yeah, Korea's kind of the Poland of east Asia ... If it's not the Germans, it's the Russians, or the Swedes, or the Austrians (for the Poles); for the Koreans, if it's not the Japanese, it's the Chinese, or the Mongols, or the Russians.

Best,

If only they could just war with each other long enough to give Korea a breather and regret not interfering for the rest of their careers...
 
If only they could just war with each other long enough to give Korea a breather and regret not interfering for the rest of their careers...
Korea had bigger internal problems. It's not that external forces kept attacking Korea at critical moments, it's that Korea never really saw the need to Westernize (because, let's face it, modernizing is generally used a euphemism for Westernizing) until it was too late.
 
If the Taiping had won, which they definitely would have had Britain and France not intervened in the civil war, then you'd have a more ethnically homogenous China, where the ruling and subject peoples don't really have divergent interests like the Manchus and Han did. Hong Rengan, the Taipings' head of government, was very pro-west, and advocated modernizing the country. They were going to allow free movement of westerners, free trade, import western technology, hire western experts, build railroads, buy steamships, set up modern banks and insurance companies, etc.

Whether they could actually accomplish change like that is hard to say, but that's one possibility.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Fair enough ... Although it's also the strategic reality of

Well, unlike Poland, Korea has never been partitioned, plus only directly annexed for 35 years.

If we're talking only about the propensity to get invaded China is more like Poland :p

Fair enough ... Although it's also the strategic reality of being surrounded by larger powers.

Not a spot where ne expects stability and time to concentrate on internal development.

Best,
 

TFSmith121

Banned
That's an interesting one...

If the Taiping had won, which they definitely would have had Britain and France not intervened in the civil war, then you'd have a more ethnically homogenous China, where the ruling and subject peoples don't really have divergent interests like the Manchus and Han did. Hong Rengan, the Taipings' head of government, was very pro-west, and advocated modernizing the country. They were going to allow free movement of westerners, free trade, import western technology, hire western experts, build railroads, buy steamships, set up modern banks and insurance companies, etc.

Whether they could actually accomplish change like that is hard to say, but that's one possibility.

That's an interesting one ... Absent European involvement, what other changes are needed for a Taiping state that will be stable, do you think?

Best,
 
The only thing stopping the Ottomans from the late 18th century onwards is time and Russia, to be frank. If the Ottomans had made better use of the Napoleonic Wars to reform themselves and avoided the worst of the Janissary revolts and their excesses, their Balkan provinces would have been far, far more stable and arguably in a good position to industrialize, were a Sultan actually that far-thinking.

The Balkans have no shortage of natural resources; for example, the Ottoman's Balkan provinces have more coal combined than Great Britain, if Wikipedia's modern-day coal reserve listings are accurate. Bosnia is a wealthy source of timber and the like. Iron and copper are also far from scarce in the Balkans and Anatolia. The Balkans are also fairly good agricultural terrain, and have easy access to grains via Egypt. Additionally, the Ottoman's extra-European empire is more than capable of providing various goods useful for early industry such as wool, cotton, and dyes.

The hardest aspects about Ottoman industrialization is the Ottoman government itself, and how difficult it can potentially costly it could be to move resources around.

In addressing the latter, Bosnia may have the resources to be an industrial powerhouse but it's not Britain, where everything is close to a coast or a river and thus an easy means to transport goods both rapidly and cheaply. The areas best suited for early forms of industrialization are actually the Ottoman's Mediterranean provinces in terms of transportation. Conversely, the areas most suited to heavy industry due to the close availability of industrial metals and coal are the Ottomans' more landlocked provinces.

The Ottomans' potential to break out as a major industrial power, ignoring all other factors other than land and resources, is more or less limited to a proto-industrial state at best until the advent of reliable railroad networks, something that came far too late IOTL for the Porte.

As for the Ottoman administration, it's simply not a modern one capable of dealing with the realities of capitalism, and is feudal with its nature of taxation. I really couldn't recall details since it's been a while since I've read about the Ottoman tax system but tax collectors when not corrupt where playing with a system that taxed in yearly farm produce and animals rather than yearly income up until the later 19th century, as well as limited social mobility outside of the Janissaries; and the Janissaries as a good vehicle for social mobility hadn't been a thing for a while now. The availability of capital in the Ottoman Empire is also a major problem as it's simply not something the Ottomans are in a position to offer from a place of central authority, what with their IOTL history of constant deficit and near bankruptcy due to their poor administrative system by the standards of their era. A lot of time and effort during the Tanzimat was ultimately expended trying to modernize and empower the central government with mixed success; to be really broad, Egypt was a failure that even when a golden opportunity was presented to salvage it, the Ottomans were unable to act on because of money problems, the Kurds were ignored because it would simply have been unfeasible, the Levant was a secondary priority when compared to the Balkans, Anatolia was much the same, Bulgaria was a PR nightmare with questionable results, the Greeks were more or less a doomed cause because of the existence of a Hellenic nation-state, and a lot of Beys revolted causing more expenditure and bloodshed, such as in Bosnia. The Romanian principalities were essentially lost because of outside interference and the Sultans being unable to see the way the wind was blowing.

Really, the Ottomans are simply in a hard place because of their fall into decadence and while certainly possible, it's never going to be a smooth ride with Russia as a neighbor and the other European Great Powers constantly plotting the best way to carve your state to pieces.
 
"Hey, doesnt Korea fit in all those categories? It has had central government for centuries longer than Japan, its got the people and resources, and-"
*quick look at map of East Asia*
"Goddammit."

19c Korea was 3% urban. It had limited literacy, because the monarchy had monopolized printing. There's a very good reason why Japan colonized Korea rather than the reverse.

By the way, I lol at everyone's suggestion that Japan's ethnic homogeneity helped. Guys, the second country in the world to industrialize was Belgium.
 
19c Korea was 3% urban. It had limited literacy, because the monarchy had monopolized printing. There's a very good reason why Japan colonized Korea rather than the reverse.

By the way, I lol at everyone's suggestion that Japan's ethnic homogeneity helped. Guys, the second country in the world to industrialize was Belgium.

I was believing it, I was believing the sad nontruth of homogenization until this- Thank you! Thank you very much!

This just proves that everything that can happen will happen. To paraphrase, "History is the autobiography of an ASB"
 
Like, say, Tamil Nadu?:D

Goodness, can we focus on this? Is this possible? Can India break free and become a superpower?

(If I can now have both my parent nations become 19th century major powers, it would make me so happy!)

I'd really love to see some timelines in which the southern tip of India and perhaps Sri Lanka avoid colonization. They did, after all, manage to keep out most major land-based empires in the Indian subcontinent, from the Mauryans to the Mughals. The Pandya Kingdom was one of the longest-lasting sovereign countries in history, and the Cholas even managed to spread their influence as far as South East Asia.

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about Indian history to know what factors led to the decline of power in that region, and what might avoid them. The arrival of European naval powers seems to be big factor. The Nayak dynasty doesn't seem to have been as competant as its ancient predecessors, but I wonder if Travancore might have more potential.
 
What do we mean by modernization here? Is this another synonym for adopting western customs, firearms and industry?
 
What do we mean by modernization here? Is this another synonym for adopting western customs, firearms and industry?

Well, maybe there's a chance that an independent response can be made to it, but because there's little example of that OTL, we can't think of any.
 
I believe Rapid should disqualify a lot of nations. All of European civiilzations and their offshoots doesnt need to have rapid modernization, just gradual and end result will be the same.

Japan needed to be rapid since the point of reference or start is 19th century wherein it is still medieval Japan.

Even though Russia, Spain, Spanish Americas, Philippines are not as advance as Britain, their starting point is close to the British compared to where you are starting in Japan that rapid modernization becomes unnecessary.

That means you need medieval societies that hasnt move to the 19th century sophistication much like OTL Japan to be able to qualify the necessity for rapid modernization.
 
I believe Rapid should disqualify a lot of nations. All of European civiilzations and their offshoots doesnt need to have rapid modernization, just gradual and end result will be the same.

Japan needed to be rapid since the point of reference or start is 19th century wherein it is still medieval Japan.

Even though Russia, Spain, Spanish Americas, Philippines are not as advance as Britain, their starting point is close to the British compared to where you are starting in Japan that rapid modernization becomes unnecessary.

That means you need medieval societies that hasnt move to the 19th century sophistication much like OTL Japan to be able to qualify the necessity for rapid modernization.

That actually helps us qualify even more nations, funny enough.
 
Top