China's pyramids

Why china never really industrialized during its imperial period would be a good watch

The Satsuma rebelion of Japan in 1877, or perhaps details of the sengoku period

First a conflict (like in this Gem video here), then a special episode about weaponry, strategy, and tactics in that conflict. That would be beyond great. About East Asia? Yes. Or from any other region.

North Korea,good friend!!!🏋️‍♂️

Who forced them

​​@@WissHH- Joos ✡️

​@@WissHH- Satan did it

@@WissHH- brits

@@Prat-zi1ou did Brits forced chinese population to consume opium?

What a stupid comment...

Haha

Maybe the British don't know it's a drug? Or people didn't realize the seriousness of the drug at the time.

​@@mrlendon8039 People in the past weren't idiots, they knew very well how drugs worked. drug addiction isn't some new modern concept nobody knew about

@@mrlendon8039 当时英国法律严禁吸食鸦片😂

"...to reject a prime minister." what do you mean? Who wants to reject the PM and who is holding them back? I mean, how and why the struggle?

British fell off hard

Now Britain is all alone. The sun has finally set on this empire. Now it’s so poor, I’ve heard that there’s hardly any fruits or veggies in their supermarkets...most shelves are empty....

They pulled a Portugal; from all over the world to that lil end of a country off Europa

@@istvansipos9940 I meant “elect” thanks for the correction 🙏😅

Yes that is correct viva la madre patria España e hispanoamerica 🇪🇸🇯🇪♥️

150,000 tons of European silver were shipped to China until the end of the 18th century. And imported Ginseng by exchanging silver from Joseon.

Lies again? American Education Black Ops

😮Ooo😮 oil d😮😮😮😮😮😮😮c😮😮

Ok😮

Wow

they use this tactic still today!!

@@Ezekiel903 Its not even 'their tactic' its the oldest one in the book. Humans all do the same tactics and predictable things

​@@scarletcrusade77 Roman what do you mean bro

@@Ezekiel903 Everyone uses this tactic. Let other people fight your wars for you. Ukraine is a prime example

British Empire the biggest drug dealer in human history

但是中国会输掉鸦片战争的根源依然没有改变-闭关锁国

@@farmers740 闭关锁国？你确定？都闭关锁国了，那清朝对西方的贸易顺差是哪里来的？让英国人美国人靠鸦片才把顺差改变，这叫中国锁国？

​@@farmers740😂 现在到底是谁在闭关锁国？

@@TLB1450 中国

Considering how many of the comments are “tipping their hats to the Brits”, they mostly feel proud, instead of shamed, about what the west did. They wanna to portray themselves as a constant wining power that collapsed an foreign empire in order to justify their internal need for a sense of western superiority of some sort.

Probably rebellions generated by British Secret Service. They had many operations throughout China.

Because the domination system of the Qing dynasty was ultimately non-Legitimacy against 430 million Han Chinese became forcibly oppressed. They invaded mainland china 400 years ago after opening the gate of Shanhai Pass with collaborating Han traitor(Wu Sangui). Their regional- Eight Banners soldiers(駐防八旗) were stationed in each main cites and watched Chinese behavior. Manchu imperial family members married wealthy Mongols princess who traditionally and has served as religious teachers who Dalai Lama of Tebet. 430 million Han Chinese began to serve barbarian emperors non-related to their culture & history with cut their unique hair forcibly by savage nomads' order(薙髮令) in 1644, and have lost their unique-identity for 290 years under a ruthless-rule.

I think the main cause of decline is the Chinese civil war. Especially the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom movement, which occurred in the most economically developed regions of China, resulted in the death of tens of millions of people. These led to the rapid collapse of the Qing Dynasty. Especially when Japan took advantage of the turmoil of the Qing Dynasty to launch the Sino Japanese War, it completely destroyed the Qing Dynasty in name only.

That is because the West completed the industrial revolution, and China, due to its conservative closed policy, China has been in the era of cold weapons agricultural society, if the Chinese government at that time was a very aggressive government, then the collection of China's huge human and material resources, in terms of weapons far superior achievements far beyond Europe

"Forced"? Joyce Madancy also cites the extensive scale of chinese opium production and the strong even violent resistance with which chinese opium farmer opposed government attempts to suppress their opium trade. I wonder how would u view this.

All of them except Japan had to live under a Chinese empire long before this so an advanced strong and extremely ambitious China like it once was is not exactly something they would want. We can throw in Vietnam Thailand Java Malaysia practically everything in Asia in the West. China love to bully everybody in Asia back in its heyday. Now they want to cry that for 100 years people were able to bully them.

Mmm I’m not so sure that was the catalyst They were going ahead with the ww regardless of this

@@buzby303 It did. It gave the Japanese courage that if they have weapons like the Europeans they can beat China too. That's why they modernize their army.

​@@nsebast It's not so obvious here but I think what truly changed and motivated the Japanese was their victory against the Russians. They truly thought they were hot stuff because honestly, they would've lost that war if not for the growing unrest back home.

Taiwan and Ryukyu are the same place, and Ryukyu was the name of Taiwan thousands of years ago

"Forced"? Joyce Madancy also cites the extensive scale of chinese opium production and the strong even violent resistance with which chinese opium farmer opposed government attempts to suppress their opium trade. I wonder how would u view this.

"Forced"? Joyce Madancy also cites the extensive scale of chinese opium production and the strong even violent resistance with which chinese opium farmer opposed government attempts to suppress their opium trade. I wonder how would u view this.

yet it happens again nowdays...the western world its again banning and being unfair...

@@Rowlph8888 Hahaha, I don't know where you are from and why you came to this conclusion. I am Chinese, and the situation you mentioned is completely different from what I saw. The younger generation may be confused, but it is definitely not as common as you said. China has 1.4 billion people and is a very large country. Use your brain to think about it. If it were really like what you said, China would have been in chaos long ago

​@@Rowlph8888 The Qing Dynasty was ruled by the Manchus, but after the Manchus controlled the Central Plains, they declared themselves to be the orthodox faction of China. The Qing government continued to use the traditional Confucian culture of the Han Chinese in terms of writing, administrative management, and culture, which can be said to have completely sinicized the Manchus. The Qing Dynasty also regarded itself as China to the outside world. Chinese culture has always been a culture that embraces all rivers and is inclusive. The ethnic groups around the Han ethnic group have basically been sinicized. You can see that there are 56 ethnic groups in China today, with the Han ethnic group being the main ethnic group, and most of the 55 ethnic minorities have already been sinicized. This is the true charm of Chinese culture, which encompasses everything. Foreigners find it difficult to understand this point, unless they learn Chinese and conduct in-depth research, otherwise it is difficult to understand the spirit of Chinese culture.

萌妹飞云

@@hljshwyf 是滴😚

What can be said the same is how China never did either, as to this day they continue to infiltrate western, South East Asian and African nations.

Why, my brother, are they the best people? France, Britain and America helped the good Khomeini against the evil, corrupt king of Iran

They did it to each other for centuries. Now It was the turn for other nations to suffer apparently.

Bs.

@@seferino so Did the other nations. The weak should fear the strong.

"Forced"? Joyce Madancy also cites the extensive scale of chinese opium production and the strong even violent resistance with which chinese opium farmer opposed government attempts to suppress their opium trade. I wonder how would u view this.

@@vapaus831 I think this is the wrong comment

"Forced"? Joyce Madancy also cites the extensive scale of chinese opium production and the strong even violent resistance with which chinese opium farmer opposed government attempts to suppress their opium trade. I wonder how would u view this.

curious, what time period do you start off with? When I taught, I'd bring up the first Han Dynasty and the Trung Sisters of Vietnam

I feel most information of China is base off only base of western view, specifically justifying their “superiority”. Just in case anyone don’t know, the last dynasty of China is an foreigner power that take over China sometime ago….so, it is just exchange one group over another.

@Oggie389 I teach western civilization, so I actually start from Mesopotamia and work my way up. I lecture on the opium war as I get to the colonization period. I actually have all my lectures on my channel you are welcomed to take a look

Qin dinasty brought its own demise.

@@seferino Qings were from North of the Wall, like in Game of Thrones. Europeans are like the White Walkers, ahahha.

How? I’m not that familiar with both of their histories.

@@Birthday92sex British conquer entire india.. while brits only conquer hong kong

Thanks to traitor Mirjafar for British invasion & Jaychand for islamic invasion

Unlike China ,India was not a nation at that time , so your arguments are vain. They conquered or bought small provinces, that's how strategically the British conquered the Indian subcontinent with a pinch of divide and conquer strategy. If only that old India was like today's united as a single nation, no power would have even thought of a glimpse of bad eye towards India.

@mr.curious6872 So there would be no India without Britain. India is completely different from China.

They proved decisively that a pre-industrial military is no match for a modern, industrial military, no matter how large and rich and powerful the former is.

You’re saying that like china was some great military power

@@Chadius_Thundercock premodern china was arguably the most advanced civilization prior to the great divergence in europe.

@@edwardmauer7442 what does that have to do with the massive outdated and corrupt qing dynasty?

@@Chadius_Thundercock china was always a strong country I am from turkey we left our homelands thousand year ago mainly because of them they have a huge population size and resources they were basicly the strongest country on the world for thousands years.

Ignore it? They basically fund the Mexican cartels with guns and 💰

Qing was not a feudal state, they didn't have lords or kings ruling over different provices, that stopped when the first emperor wiped out the feudul system

Those American politicians prefer profit through legalisation. Truly traitors of a once great nation.

What? Have you not heard of "the war on drugs"? It's been going on for over 40 years.

America is falling apart while China is pushing ahead. America is consumed by drugs, pleasure, and degeneracy. The funny part is that America has no clue why it's falling apart. They can't put the pieces together. It's ironic that China had this happen to them before. They learned from it, and used the same tactic on the West.

Its funny how china is « Sad » that the treaties were unequal. Bitch you lost the war, its too late for an equal treaty. Should have been less idiot about it

London Museum? Which one? 😂😂😂

Good.

​@@kordellswoffer1520Disgusting

​@@edwardtandy9613 I think that he meant "The British Museum" in London. You know that very well what he meant. It shows you British are still with a defeatist mentality. Your status of country & culture is nothing more or less nowadays, ome down in the world😂

Save the Queen and the King Charles III now. British 💋s to you. BRITISH always rules the 🌎.

Yes. Very rich and very british.

Envy kills.

That's right: the British kings and queens have been the bosses of the piratic British narco-monarchy since ever. Today they are still in business, laundering the dirty money of drug dealers, dictators, murderers and criminals in the dozens of tax havens that they have scattered around the globe, from Gibraltar to the Cayman Islands. British pirates never change: willing to ruin anyone for their own benefit.

​@@joaoalbertodosanjosgomes1536 no, drug dealers kill.

Ah yes, a country acting in its own interest militarily has never happened before the British or after. Iraq should just have respected the rules set and agreed upon internationally, rather than just invading Kuwait.....

​@@rocketmonty9916well they wouldn't have gotten slapped around had they done that...

不是有趣，而是屈辱

this war started the Century of Humiliation for China, that is what they are taught.. It is not the war they have a problem with, but the unfair trade treaties and occupation of lands that they feel caused the humiliation.

They view their shipping of fentanyl over our borders as revenge for this conflict.

I'm sure they do, as should the Brits.

The Chinese called it the Century of Humiliation

@@chengchin5073---See what I mean a black stain. And the title seems to fit.

Heres something else that might titilate your suspicion & curiosity!¡! Why does America Only Target Certain Cartel leaders ?¿?. Pablo Escobar - a freelancer who apparently rose Organically just like the rest of the Medelin Cartel and their associates !¡! They rose independently, and were put down as soon as America matched / exceeded the level of corruption & bribery that they uses !¡! ( America had alot more to offer in terms outside of money alone!¡!) El Chapo, His Sons, His Cartel.... Why is it only him & his Cartel that Amerixa Seemed intent on destroying?¿? Why that Cartel/ group alone when there were & are others that are worse.... Maybe those Cartels aren't as "organic & lone wolf" as we may think... maybe they have connections & friends that keep them from being targeted & worse yet... help then dismantled their enemies .... A complete sham I say !¡! Things work : JUST AS THE "DR ORDERED" !¡!

Really 😂? Are you that naive? Your government basically funds the cartels

the US funds them.

​@@Jack-he8jv israel funds them* never forget the 5 israeli spies caught celebrating on 9/11

洋人不知道它们欠了咱们多少血债，世界已经变了，愚蠢和傲慢只会让他们重走清朝的路

为中华崛起而读书

可惜有共产党，不可能的

As an European-Portuguese-born citizen of Earth, I suport Love only. Borders are man-made invisible barriers. And barriers are not a part of Love. United we stand, for an United Earth ❤️🙏☀️

Ridiculous assumptions.I'm Western and I'm ashamed of this and I hope the entire human race will improve in the future.But when we have comments like yours here seeking petty revenge oon generations of people that have nothing to do with this, taking offence for previous generation when you didn't have 2 suffer anything that they suffered, I don't have any hope for the human species. The vast majority of Western Europeans are ashamed of this kind of activity, how could you not be when you see the results of addiction and the misery of death.But the Chinese here, don't seem to see how the Chinese government themselves were quite happy for trade to begin and continue, until the value of trade turned in the Brits favour, then they cut the trading relationship off entirely, showing not only that they didn't give a crap about the Chinese people in the 1st place, but that they cared even less about the Chinese people, when not taking any responsibility for their part in the Chinese People's misery in the 1st place, but also doing a stupid manoeuvre in a trading relationship with the country with 10 times the technological capability in everything, including warfare. Ultimately, the Chinese government has responsibility for the welfare of the Chinese people, the Brits and the French do not.In cutting off trading relationship in the way they did, it was obvious there would be repercussions, and there would be today, from every nation in such a position.The Chinese government, new repercussions would be exercised on the Chinese people and not themselves or their friends, who are protected in high places

The practice of raising a white flag as a sign of surrender is recorded in ancient Chinese and Roman history. It is believed to have originated during the Eastern Han Dynasty (25-220 AD).

It's got more to do with the mismanagement of relations with the growing nation of Germany in the lead up to the world wars, then the effect of those wars, than others catching up industrially. By the start of World War I USA was already producing more industrial output than Britain, but Britain was always going to be able to stay far ahead in money gained from trade, military power and because USA was heavily in debt to them. Independent studies show that it's likely that without the 2 world wars, Britain would still be militarily the most powerful country in the world, right now, but not by much and the USA would have been gradually making inroads over the century and the ascendance of the USA would eventually be inevitable. In our timeline, the US benefited from Staying out of the wars and being the only country that was actually growing stronger economically, whilst everyone else was dramatically getting weaker. Before the First World War United States was massively indebted to the Brits, for borrowing in order to develop its economy througghout the previous century. The wars massively Swapped the imbalance in the opposite direction. *Added to this was the US having the safety and time to develop the atomic bomb, which then became a massive threat and a deterrent, so the takeover was immediate. *The British Empire had tied up most trade routes in Britain's favour and gave Britain' Strategic advantage all over the globe in terms of reconnaissance, storing of military gear and presence in tactically beneficial areas, if attacked. These facets lways dramatically improve their circumstances compared to any nation, even with a vastly more numerous army or navy, which the US was obviously going to develop over the course of the mos20th century, if the world wars did not happen and the changes in our timeline didn't happen

That’s not true actually Britain maintains a major edge in technology over basically everyone and in economics. Even during the early 20th century Britain was economically and politically more important the literally everyone. Even today that still remains.

​@@kordellswoffer1520 You wish 😂😂😂

@@ender8759 I wish for nothing I only state what is true.

​@@kordellswoffer1520 Does Britain dare to go to war with China now? China can easily wipe Britain off the face of the earth, but the British empire is the first in the universe, and the British universe is the first.

It's more complicated than that.

@@Grenadier311 tell me your sophisticated thought, please.

Watch the video ?

​@@Grenadier311What about Nazis is that also complicated? Or is that Evil?

Stop worshiping Buddha, they are evil Scythian Aryans

@@Rowlph8888 Opium is a horrible destructive drug that ruins people

And it was on the other side of the world rather than sharing a land border lol

China didn't have two whole continents + australia sending weapons, money and Intel to them

Kinda hard when the target have prepared for 8 years & backed by Amerimutt

British Empire the biggest drug dealer in human history

@@Xrginld17X you can say that.

@@Xrginld17X indian kingdoms were to busy in fighting

@@Xrginld17X india wasn’t a whole country for most of its time

​@@Xrginld17X 190 yrs exact..and India fell because of internal conflict

​@@Xrginld17X mughal did not colonize India. They were one of rulers of India sub continent. Colonization is European concept. Rest of world really never used .

China was weak due to technological and tactical capabilities of the british. It was largely agrarian in nature.

Yea they were backwards.

Europe had technological supremacy and China closed themselves off to foreign ideas. They had the attitude "we have everything we need, we don't need your barbarian ideas and products, China is the best and everyone else should kowtow to our emperor" (see: "Emperor Qian Long's Letter to King George III, 1793"). Not so different to where the new emperor is taking them today, really. (for the opposite: see the Meiji restoration of Japan)

by this time, the technological gap and the gap in military doctrine was HUGE. Just compare the ships on both sides. That's the best, most spectecular way to see this. China was many many decades (I say more than a century) behind the West. Plus, the West were colonial powers with a lot of combat experience on every level of their military forces.

@@Ghost-vi8qm now it’s the opposite 😂

no, u

Well the PRC promotes it

China wants revenge...what a benevolent country.

@@tommygogetter5992 ccp turns blind eye. Its income.

China returning the favor

KARMA

Read more, best wishes 🙏

@@DaveSCameron Read what?

@@DaveSCameron drug dealers gang also shot police you called to stop him.

@@ianian9078 Thats kettle calling pot black.

@@ianian9078 That China dared not to buy stuff from Britain?

Their getting their own back

USA did it to themselves. China dont sell them any drugs. Mexican cartels buy the base chemicals from China and made fentanyl and sell it to USA. These base chemicals can be used for a lot of legit use.

Tungusic vs Germanic 👁️👄👁️

​@@papazataklaattiranimam Or Tungustic vs Slavic (Russian) or Latin (French).

Please don't mix up all the Europeans with the Brits. We are completely different.

​@@rodheqThe 2nd Qing War involved Britain and France. The boxer rebellion involved a bunch of European countries. The only difference between the British and other Western Europeans is that the other Europeans were worse in their actions and less powerful

Is tiktok more dangerous than opium? I doubt your intelligence.

British Foreign Secretary Palmerston blurred the scope of opium smugglers by accusing Lin Zexu's Guangzhou government of wrongful and violent law enforcement and presented British opium traders as innocent victims. He attempted to argue that the British government initiated the war because Britain had suffered the following damages from China's wrongdoings: first, the British government claimed that the British merchants in China who were "imprisoned" were forced to give up their "ransom" and suffered personal injury and property damage; second, China's imprisonment of Second, the detention of British officials by China constituted an insult to the British Crown. The basis for Palmerston's claim of these two damages as grounds for war was the international law of the time, because from the point of view of international law, these two grounds for the declaration of war put forward by Barmaizen were in themselves potentially valid. According to the basic principles of international law at the time, the damage suffered by one state as a result of the wrongful act of another state constituted a cause for the declaration of war. It was legitimate for that state to resort to war in order to obtain compensation and achieve justice and peace. The question is, if the persons and property harmed were smugglers and contraband in violation of Chinese law and not legitimate rights and interests protected by international law, did the Chinese government's law enforcement actions still violate international law and constitute a legitimate reason for Britain to go to war? The arguments given by Britain in this regard are not sufficient, but rather contradictory.

In a secret message from the British Government's Foreign Secretary, Palmerston, to Yiru in 1839, it is stated that The views taken by Her Majesty's Government on those questions which must be discussed between Great Britain and China, and its present intentions, are as follows: the British Government recognizes the right of every independent State, not bound by treaty, to regulate the trade of its subjects with foreigners, to permit or prohibit trade in any of its own agricultural and industrial products or in any commodities imported from abroad, to levy appropriate duties on imports and exports, and to to lay down such regulations as it may think fit for the conduct of trade within its territory. The British government therefore in no way doubts the right of the Chinese government to prohibit the importation of opium into China, and to seize and confiscate any opium which has been imported into its territory by those foreigners or Chinese subjects in defiance of the prohibition. This indicates that the British government considered China as an independent country with legislative and judicial territorial sovereignty under international law, free from interference from other countries. This means that China had the judicial enforcement power to ban and sell cigarettes in Guangzhou, and had the right to inspect and arrest suspected violators of Chinese law, including taking coercive measures, trying and imposing penalties. However, the British government made a different argument, arguing that they had the right to bring charges against the Chinese government's enforcement actions based on the principles of international law and justice. The British government argues that The action of the Chinese Government cannot be considered justifiable either on the principles of international law or on general principles of justice, because that Government, which for a long period had allowed its own officials to derive a constant and well-known benefit from the flagrant violation of the prohibition against opium, and had even allowed its own officials to act as instruments for the importation of that commodity, has now suddenly changed the system. But, not feeling strong enough to punish the real criminals and seize the opium loaded on the imported ships, he resorted to violence against all the British merchants residing in Canton, many of whom had nothing to do with the opium trade, and Her Majesty's Commissioner, a British official who had nothing to do with any trade. The Chinese government not only threatened to brutally starve the men to death, but actually imprisoned them. Their release was conditional on the surrender of substantial property by some others to ransom the traders and this British government official, but those men were outside its power. Therefore, the British government had to demand, first, compensation for the outrage committed against the British official himself, thereby humiliating the British Crown, and second, it had to demand the return of the ransom extorted at the expense of the lives of the detained British subjects. Since the particular goods obtained by the Chinese government as ransom could not be returned, it was insisted that compensation of equal value to the goods must be made by the Chinese government. At this point, Palmerston denied that the people confined to the British merchant houses by the Chinese government were opium smugglers, and did not say that the opium handed over by the British merchants and destroyed by the Chinese government could not be returned was opium, but used "ransom" and "goods" to show that the British merchants were imprisoned and extorted, ignoring the damage of opium smuggling. The British warlords did not say that the opium surrendered by the British merchants and destroyed by the Chinese government could not be returned was opium. In fact, it was by concealing the British government's protection of the illegal opium trade in the parliamentary debates and by playing up the British national dignity and the injustice done to its compatriots that the British war mongers finally won a narrow advantage and passed the war against China bill.

The British government tried to use international law to prove that it started the First Opium War to protect the personal and property interests of British merchants, but Lin Zexu's measures to seize and sell tobacco to British merchants were Chinese law enforcement actions within its own territory and did not violate any international rules. British Prime Minister Palmerston announced two reasons for war, which were challenged by some members of the British Parliament at the time and did not hold up in international law. The first reason he declared was that British persons and property had been damaged. The British property here was clearly the loss of property passed on to the British government from the opium confiscated and destroyed by Lin Zexu. Since the opium trade was clearly illegal under Chinese law, the damage caused to the smugglers by the confiscation of smuggled opium certainly did not constitute a valid reason for using force to obtain compensation. The physical damage refers to "the brutal treatment of British merchants, including many innocent Englishmen, who were imprisoned by the Chinese authorities." Palmerston interpreted the detention of British merchants in the merchant houses as violent imprisonment, claiming that the Chinese government had violated the principles of justice in international law by demanding a "ransom". The fact is that Lin Zexu, the anti-smoking minister, confined British opium traders to his merchant house in order to confiscate the smuggled goods - opium - in a non-violent and coercive manner. Prior to this, the Qing government had repeatedly reaffirmed the anti-smoking laws and strictly enforced them, and Lin Zexu had been notifying British merchants to turn in their opium through their merchants prior to the siege of their merchant houses. Stanhope described the enforcement measures in China is a calm method, as they would have been more severe in England. When Lin Zexu removed the Chinese employees from the foreign merchant houses, life for the British was indeed not as comfortable as before, as the British needed to do things like frying eggs that they did not have to do themselves before. In "Lin Zexu and the Opium War," author Zhang Xinbao quotes a letter from Mr. Paterson, a merchant with first-hand experience, describing that a British merchant ship that was blockaded at the time was supplied by a Chinese ship every day. Paterson also said that merchants in Canton were also treated very kindly and were free to play ball in the square opposite the merchant house. Therefore, the reason for compensation for the personal injury to the British is also not sufficient. The second point mentioned by Palmerston was that China's imprisonment of the British representative of the commercial director, Yiru, was an insult to British sovereignty. The British Foreign Office archives and correspondence between British merchants at the time show that the British commercial director was sent to China by the British government without the consent of the Qing government after the East India Company's monopoly of trade with China was abolished in 1834. Before that, it was the Chief Supercargo of the East India Company who was responsible for the coordination of trade in China. Therefore, Yiru's status as a legitimate representative in China was not officially recognized by the Qing government. Furthermore, Yilu came from Macau after the blockade of Guangzhou and volunteered to enter the besieged British merchant house and tried to escape from Guangzhou with the opium traders, not that the Chinese government forcibly seized him. Taking into account the attitudes of Palmerston and Yiru toward the opium trade and Chinese law before the Opium War and the legal opinions of British legal authorities, the British government had no justification in international law to wage war against China. In summary, it is easy to conclude that Britain's first opium war against China did not have the "just cause" required by international law for a just war. Today, more than one hundred and seventy years later, the British government has never really faced history and publicly stated its official opinion. Most British scholars have also adopted a tacit attitude, even describing China's repeated references to the Opium Wars as a strategy to politicize the Chinese government's patriotic education. Moreover, with the gradual dominance of positivist theories of international law and the legitimization of the Western colonial system at the end of the 19th century, Chinese and Western scholars developed a prejudice that 19th century international law did not apply to uncivilized countries such as China. The facts show that the British authorities and scholars of the time launched a heated debate on whether waging war against China was in accordance with international law in an attempt to justify it through its purported justifications for war. If it is true, as modern scholars believe, that international law in the 19th century applied only to civilized nations excluding China, there was no need for the Parliament and rulers of the time to discuss China's violation of international law and the legality of its waging war. What is more, the British sovereign of the time had repeatedly emphasized that according to international law, China's territorial sovereignty and supreme jurisdiction should be respected. It was Britain's own archival materials and parliamentary legal opinions that became the historical witness of the blatant violation of law and justice in the Sino-British war.

❤ from Mars. The planet Mars.

You better have some silver in exchange.

@@saldownik Euros are good for it in south of Spain 😁

Culture changes alot in 170 years

"my fellow Homo Sapiens" a very new and very western perspective it is not strange that people didn't hold such modern views two hundred years ago

@@vulkanofnocturne you missed my point. suffering was real, humans were real, empathy was real. magic was not real. Even back then. That's what makes it weird. For me.

@@istvansipos9940 empathy is conditional Back then foreignness represented a potential threat/competitor

This is why I find the idea that Britain knew the harsh reality behind Opium laughable 😐😐 people thought addictions were just laziness , they weren’t sympathetic to the same extent now

😂❤

The fentanyl epidemic is all due to the US government itself. So civil war please.

Probably the same!! When communism falls it will go back to tribalism

China has no interests in expanding best case scenario for Chinese nationalists is Russia collapsing and China annexing Siberia

Britain and France were still both global powers a century earlier with advanced training and weaponry, the war may have been more bloodier but the outcome would've been the same. The Europeans have a short history compared to Asia but it became very proficient at war because they waged *LOTS* of it and developed a taste for it.

@@lionelhutz5137 unlikely, while the brits army could punch above its weight a hundred times or more, china has a thousand times more men, in particular the cavalry which are still dangerous to musket men in large formations. brits can win against 30k army with 2k men, but what about 10 waves of 30k armies? exhausting them to death is a viable option, cutting supply lines and hundreds other tactics could be employed with an actual functioning government.

@@lionelhutz5137 Mid 1700 would be the early Qianlong era. That was when Qing Dynasty China was arguably at it's peak so the chances of it beating the contemporary Britain or France in a land war was quite high. A naval war would have been another story.

China is an agrarian society, and China's economy is circulating internally and does not have contact with the outside world. Since the arrival of the aggressors, China has experienced nearly 100 years of war, plundered its wealth, lost a large area of territory, and plummeted by one-third of its population

​@@lionelhutz5137 😂实际上100年前中国和欧洲人是接触过的，明代中国击败荷兰人，把他们从台湾岛赶走了。

俄罗斯和英国对轰，英国肯定灭国，太小了😅

@@leelee-om9rc The Opium wars is Ancient history, the British public has no responsibility for this. The Chinese authorities were equally culpable in agreeing to the trade in the 1st place. Funny how the Chinese don't take any responsibility for this, then why should the Brits take responsibility for a 200 year old government, that was railroaded by a small group elite, galvanised by the psychopathic Palmerston, and this was soon curtailed once Gladstone became Prime Minister repeal started happening *The Chinese are more concerned and upseabout the Japanese denial of war crimes, than this much older episode in history

Say goodbye to your country then you clown, you do know Britain has nukes also?

How lovely of you to wish for the annihilation of millions of innocent Brits, including children. Really shows that your heart's in the right place

Yes they have or they wound t have asked for help in WW2 do open your eyes, and it’s Britain not just England 🤡

No, the main thing is that the Qing Dynasty is still in an agricultural society, and for Europe that has completed industrialization, the Qing Dynasty is very weak, and still occupies such a large territory. When a child has hundreds of millions of wealth, then the child is guilty

Seems this is the English translation of the name North Korea call themselves in their own language.

Original Chinese Name: 朝鲜, meaning 'The bright sun of the morning'.

🤨 💭 Hmmm Oooh lord🤦‍♂️!… Any story about about Western nations invading Asia, Africa, America, Middle East, Pacific, etc… always excruciating… Afterwards, they’d send Priests into that territory to continue spread their evil spirits… Western civilization acting like world police officers but they’re the robbers, thieves, criminals, etc…

The west could have fully colonized china like India if they wanted to. What excatly would have stopped them?

yes

Lol if this were some grand conspiracy theory, you’d better shut it before more ridiculous shit pop out. As far as I can see, the bullshits on TikTok and the regular okay stuff, literally are just the generic reflection of its users and the internet as a whole. You are just pretending weird shits doesn’t exist until TikTok while there plenty stuffs on Twitter FB or Instagram that never suited your view of the world all along.

Tik Tok literally recommend u content that creates social conflict and discord to create divisions in the population and weak the democratic states.

Sort’ve justified, even if it is the society i’m in that is being affected now….

@@eggnugget575 how is It justified? Learn something about chinese history and how they treated/treat the other nations. How u justify what they are doing to the uygurs? Such childish attitude and naivety... I wonder if u got the same attitude in life with personal relationshipS

China back then was a racist backwards nation! Now China is controlled by a German Jew ideology

​@@19ate4 racism was necessary part of a civilization in 19th century.

​@@user-jf5qw6vg3h You are not of the same race, why do you fight each other?

@@user-cg2tw8pw7j who exactly? Who do you mean?

I'm a Chinese and we really don't trust the West. In particular, the British put the treasures looted from us on display in museums and not returning them to us, which motivates us to work hard to make progress

⚠ NATSI CREW ALERT ⚠

@@DaveSCameron how does that make me a nazi lol

@@kitgoostrey6162 of the Grammar variety of course 🤣🤣🤣🤣⚠️

强弩之末，冢中枯骨罢了，伦敦都快没白人了，他们崩塌不了几天了。

Yeah that's why we dealt with them uyghurs and the Tibetans.

The video also tells some facts, which is already very rare, but compatriots, have you seen the comments of Europeans? After more than a hundred years, they are still full of disdain and arrogance towards China, Sons and daughters of China, we must continue to work hard. . . . . . We must believe in our own culture and our nation. I firmly believe that I can see the rise of China in my lifetime. rise up who do not wish to be slaves. . . . . . .

英国佬总爱狡辩，为什么他们不会把鸦片战争当成一件荣誉的事情宣传呢，其实他们自己也知道自己不光彩

the big

Big Business We still are, its just that we don't need to build a strong military like in the past since we have a very close alliance with The Us.

@@lawbringer9857 that’s pure copium

@@Marc-. Of course compared to our peak we're no where as powerful right now. But if we are ever forced to mobilised besides the US very few nation's could take us on.

​@@lawbringer9857 British became powerful only because of resources from Indian subcontinent including men and industry.

@@lawbringer9857 apple a single us company is richer than most countries too

Can we join Britain's drug trade?

No, the Chinese communist government is a tyrant and should be punished for their crimes.

It won’t, China believe they are above international law

I think a good way to start would be the British start giving back all those items they took and are now proudly exhibiting them in museums.

@@chengchin5073 It's a museum, they're there for educational purposes