Civilizations and time 9 (Reaction force)

6 Reaction force: About R

Reaction force R is a force deeply related to culture, but if a certain value V exists, E: efficiency efficiency force and S: social structure force change depending on that V, and in this world there is some kind of creation, the amount of output .Suppose there is a significant expansion. Let us divide them into mental and physical things and name them Cs mental creations and Cp physical creations. However, while such things appear in the world, there is a force that tries to return them to their previous state, the state before the change, and this is defined as a counteracting force. No attempt is made to formulate the reaction force.

 

Examples of counteracting forces abound in cases of conservatism. Especially in Chinese history, this element seems to come out strongly. Confucianism has long overshadowed Chinese history. In the case of China, there has been a conflict between legalists and Confucianists since the Warring States period, but especially since the Sung period, large landowners, merchants, and bureaucrats have come together, and the emperor has acted as an intermediary. The examination questions for the imperial examinations to be selected were also based on Confucianism, that is, the rule of man. Until the society before the Republic of China based on Western thought, conservatism in China meant returning to the stable society of the former three parties, and in that sense it did not change.

 

Conservatism in Europe, on the other hand, changed rapidly. This may be due to the experience of a significant change in value. European civilization was based on Greece, the Roman Empire, and Christianity, but first, the coexistence of the sovereignty after Charlemagne, which was established after the invasion of the Germanic peoples, and the priesthood of the Roman pope, including pioneering by monasteries, was a major cornerstone. It seems that Thus began the Middle Ages in Europe, among which the value of the papal system exerted a great influence on technological efficiency and social structural power, giving birth to spiritual and material creations. It seems that the phenomena up to this point did not occur in Indian civilization or Islamic civilization, which were both religious civilizations. Neither Indian civilization nor Islamic civilization has ever had a large-scale bureaucracy of religious power, exactly like the secular one. The expansion of religious power in European civilization ended with the limit of agriculture, and after that it began to expand to the sea like the Crusades, but it led to the rise of commerce in Venice, Genoa, and Florence, the downfall of small and medium lords, and the rise of nations. , the Middle Ages lost their grounds and the Reformation, a force that denied them, eventually came into being. The activities of the Society of Jesus and the anti-religious revolution against it are conservatism, and may be given as an example of counteracting force.

 

As another example of conservatism, the value of the industrial revolution in Western Europe has influenced technological efficiency and social structure, and has produced spiritual and material creations . and it may be possible to point out that the power to deny it arose.The value of trying to make an industrial revolution may have been seen more strongly in France than in England. This is because Britain seems to have naturally accomplished the industrial revolution, while France seems to have consciously tried to start the industrial revolution. The French Revolution itself was started by enlightened aristocrats and bourgeoisie who felt a sense of crisis after watching the industrial revolution in England. It seems to be a typical symptom of the manifestation of counteracting forces." The example of France shows that, given the emergence of various forms of political regimes, counteracting forces can manifest themselves in many different forms. Europe was divided between Catholicism and Protestantism, but in 1830 and 1848, the ripples of civil revolution spread, centering on France. While France itself, the center of the ripples, was a haven for many forms of reactionary forces, and conservatism in other parts of Europe was also varied, the diffuse reflections of reactionary forces became very colorful. It seems that it was Germany that tried to lead to the industrial revolution in the most forcible way.

 

The Bismarck regime is said to be Bonaparteism*, but because it lagged behind France, it was unable to obtain overseas colonies in the way that Britain and France compromised on their overseas colonies. Although it was forced to move toward militarism, it was the same as France in that it tried to preserve conservatism and reactionary power. France spent a long time working out its problems with the Catholic Church (especially education). Such militarism rooted in conservatism is similar in Russia and Austria, and after World War I, the Russian and Austrian empires collapsed, Russia became a communist country, and Austria became a number of republics. 

 

* Bonaparteism

The foundation of the state is to promote capitalism and the interests of the bourgeoisie, but the forces of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are in opposition, and in the transitional period when they cannot rule alone, they must seize and maintain political power with the support of the peasants in the middle and the middle classes .

 

In this way, conservatism and reactionary force remained relatively strong in England and France, but there was one country that developed differently, the United States. Unlike other European countries, the United States did not have an aristocratic or landlord class, which was originally conservative, and because of the size of its own country, it followed a different history from that of Europe. The United States sought to expand economically, rather than through blatant imperialism (although its neighbors were different), to acquire markets and resources (this is an important point in thinking about the era that will follow imperialism). 

 

During the Great Depression, fascism, in which the ruling class took control of the military, emerged as a countermeasure against the masses. In a sense, nationalism was also about preserving the long-formed conservative culture cultivated in the age of religion and aristocracy. For this reason, it should be considered that the culture of militarism already existed due to factors different from those of fascism. For example, in Japan, it could be called "Bushido".

 

If militarism is the result of conservatism and counter-acting forces, it is because there are conflicts between classes within the country, and the old powers of the church and the aristocracy are being oppressed by the industrialists and workers. It is thought that this is due to the fact that they tried to protect by force. In this era, the reason why they were oriented toward external development was that they used their political power in accordance with the times to acquire social status overseas and convert their land assets into financial assets in order to maintain their own vested interests.  and militarization was probably closely tied to it. In addition, the officers who commanded the armies were former powers of Britain, Germany, and Russia, and were of the aristocratic landlord class*.

 

*Gentleman Capitalism

The export of capital did not begin on top of the accumulation of capital by the Industrial Revolution, but the development of industrial capital as an investment destination (initially, it grew through the cooperation of industrial capitalists) at the same time as the capitalization of the nobility and gentry progressed. Together, Britain is said to have developed gentleman capitalism. Britain's trade balance declined early on, earning from its non-trade and capital accounts. And the culture built on this economic prosperity was the gentleman's culture, the Victorian morality.

 

In contrast, the United States did not have the old powers of nobility and churches, and although it was able to avoid blatant imperialism because of its vastness and its proximity to South America, it seems that it didnt formed its armies like Europe. The fact that there was little power of strong landlords and nobility would also be mentioned. It seems that this has become a form of economic expansion through business expansion overseas. This state of affairs in the United States seems to have had a great influence on the phenomenon of the latter half of the 20th century . Although there may have been something like an admiration for the British style.

Therefore, it seems that there was a feudal aristocratic value as a reaction to the spiritual and material creations of the Industrial Revolution (together with materialism), and this was linked to militarism (nationalism). In order to protect their feudal and aristocratic values, which were ending their historical role in relation to bourgeois and popular values, militarism was not denied, and colonial competition was affirmed. This reactionary force was stronger than expected, and lasted until World War I was inconclusive and Britain was exhausted in World War II, after which the colonies were liberated after the war. The result was the United States, a purely business  and a social organization for the industrial revolution. After the First World War, the reaction force declined greatly, the world changed greatly, and the modern world started, but the Second World War put an end to the reaction force originating in Europe.

 

Conservatism and reactionary forces in Europe are, in a sense, historical, and are closely related to the religious civilization that was established together with the agricultural civilization, such as the counter-reformation and militarism based on the aristocracy. was also a doctrine. The common root of all these is feudalism, but it might be a good idea to go back to Chinese civilization here. If the religious outcome of agricultural civilization in China was Confucianism, if Chinese civilization never became a feudal state in the sense of European civilization, and if conservatism, reactionary forces were to return to the Confucian classics, In the first place, Chinese civilization probably did not have anything equivalent to the religious reformation in European civilization*, and it may be said that there was no era of militarism.

 

In other words, the conservative and reactionary values that Europe has suffered for so long are not the ideas of the Industrial Revolution or the French Revolution, but rather the old religious and feudal values (Nietzsche's dying Christianity), the industrial revolution, Democracy is an advocacy of production and organization based on human reason, and it may itself be an unchanging ideal that is still in the process of evolution.

I have written conservatism and reactionary force side by side with similar meanings, but strictly speaking, they are different things. Reaction force is the "reaction" to technical efficiency and social organization power, whereas conservative force is the force in which technological efficiency and social structure force harmonize with the previous creative ruler or minority ruler. You should think In that sense, "conservative" may be said to be fusional and "synthetic".

 

All rights reserved to M Ariake

Civilizations and time 8 (social structural force)

5 Social Structural force: About S

 

Social structural force S is a force that is deeply related to politics, military, and integration , and is defined as a force that tries to realize an integration value V, given that there is an integration value V. The relationship between S and value V can be expressed by the following formula.

S=h(V)・・・③ From V=f(t), social structural force is a function of value, and value is a function of time. ＝h(f(t))・・・④,

which expresses that social structural force is a function of value. Values are chosen within the constraints of the times, and organizations are formed based on those values.

What has been realized in history is that the people who lived in that era chose the best values and organized the best in the challenging environment.

As an example of such social structural force, if we take examples from successive social organizations in China,ｗe can see that the history of Chinese dynasties was a history of repeated restructuring of social organization. From the Western Zhou to the Warring States period, it was domestic economic development that prompted the formation, but in the case of China, a radical regime (in this case, Qin) was established for a short period of time, and then a long-term regime, the Han, was established. , undergoing a process of stabilization. In the Han dynasty, conflicts between the public and private sectors arose, and the system was established in the midst of it.  During this time, challenges from the Xiongnu from outside also continued.

 

This mechanism continued to occur, and after the period of the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties, the Sui dynasty was established for a short period of time, followed by the Tang dynasty for a long period of time. The various systems created by the Sui dynasty were born during the Wei, Jin, and Southern and Northern Dynasties, and after a short period of radical Sui dynasty, they were stabilized under the long-term Tang dynasty. There has been economic development for some time, and among them, there have been conflicts between the public and private sectors, and new systems and both tax laws have emerged. In China's history, the reorganization of social systems and tax laws to grasp the people has been repeated repeatedly. It is also the reason why it is possible.

 

Later, after the turmoil of the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period, the Song dynasty arose. At this time, radical governments like Qin and Sui were not established, but instead, from the era of Sejong in the later Zhou to the establishment of the Song Dynasty , it occurred in the process of conflict. Based on the Shidaibu, they built up an excellent economist system consisting of bureaucrats, landlords, and big merchants. The Song dynasty tried to control the challenges from outside the country (Liao, Jin) with economicism (tribute diplomacy), replacing the domestic rule from soldiers to literati. However, here too there was a conflict between the public and private sectors (Wang Anshi's reforms). In the case of China, the conflict between the public and private sectors is the conflict between the government that protects the small and medium-sized landowners who bear the tax burden and the government that protects the interests of the large landowners. In the meantime, there was an emperor, with eunuchs as his servants.

 

After the Song dynasty, the Han Chinese continued to be challenged by outsiders in northern China, and the period of conquest dynasties continued. Liao, Jin, and Yuan followed, but the invention of social organization in the Liao and the ``system centered on nomads'' and the ``system centered on farmers'' such as North and South officials (so to speak, the beginning of one country, two systems) ) was the premise of the conquest dynasty. At the same time, the establishment of a system of bureaucrats, large landowners, and large merchants in China must have been important. After the Liao and Jin, the Yuan Dynasty was established from the 12th century to the 14th century, but although it was one country, two systems (in terms of taxation), it did not respect the Han people, but respected the people of the eyes. It was originally a trading nation, and it may be said that Han Chinese landowners and merchants were taken in by it. Originally, a coin called kosho was established with salt as the source of capital, but due to the wasteful spending of finances and the inadequacy of the method of succeeding to the government, the Ming dynasty was established after a peasant rebellion and compromise with the large landowners. Although the Ming revived the policies of the Han people (Riko system, Yurin Huangshu), they had no choice but to follow the movements of the world, creating a silver-based monetary economy, and the tax system was established as a one-paragraph expedient law. . After a period of restorationism, the Ming, unlike the Yuan dynasty, established relations with foreign countries under state control . In the first place, Ming did not have the radical leading nations, Qin, Sui, and Later Zhou like Han, Tang, and Song before it, but it was a trading nation, a nation in which the Yuan dynasty collapsed and the Han people revived. During the emperor's era, there was an aspect that he tried to inherit the Yuan line (Zheng He, who made a great cruise abroad, was a eunuch and a former secular man), but this was no longer possible in Hokuroku Nanwa, and the Han people's old landlords. , bureaucrats, and merchants may have been frozen in the trinity system. In the Ming dynasty, the economy developed, but Tsukudado's anti-ancestor movement also became active. There was growth to free farmers, but it did not lead to the industrial revolution due to usury and the production process being meticulously controlled by commercial capital. In the Ming political system, the power of the emperor and eunuchs (after the Yongle emperor) was strong, and the rule of the emperor was strengthened from the bottom at first, but the structure was such that local gentlemen, who were granted special privileges by the government, suppressed small and medium-sized landowners. Instead, it became a typical example of how the "social structural force" created by large landlords, bureaucrats, and large merchants (triangle) suppressed the "efficient technological power" of the economy. Financially, the emperor should stand between the general public and the wealthy, eunuch politics (one of the most prominent Chinese social structures, probably established to respond to the powerful bureaucracy or to back up the imperial dictatorship. The reason why it fell into the “things” is probably due to the inclination toward the Trinity. As a result, a peasant rebellion broke out, and it was put under control by the Qing, who were not the Han Chinese. Achieved equilibrium (Emperor Kangxi, Emperor Yongzheng). However, this equilibrium was broken during the Qianlong emperor's long prosperity.

 

I have looked at the history of China as an example of social structural force, and I have taken up it as a typical example of the suppression of efficient technological force. For a long time in other civilizations as well, the mainstream of change seems to have been a change in social structural force. The rapid expansion of the Islamic empire after Muhammad and the rapid expansion of the Mongol empire after the advent of Genghis Khan can be cited as such examples. they reformed military administrative organizations to control trade routes, and a society that encompassed religion and culture. I believe that the invention of the system was the secret to success. The history of China's dynasties can be said to be a treasure trove of such history.

All rights reserved to M Ariake

Civilizations and time 7 ( Efficient technical capability : E)

4 First, let's briefly consider value. Value will be considered in another article, "Civilization and Value," but if I explain only the conclusion, value will arise with the transition of the creative ruler . Synthesis of ``quantitative'' changes that occur with ``qualitative'' changes and the transitions of the imitative masses  is formed by “quality and quantity synthesis”.

So it would be a combinatorial problem. For example, what happens to society when the leaders of society lose their creativity and the masses are self-actualized?

This seems to be a problem relevant to modern Japan, but when a society's leadership groups respond creatively to the challenges of the outside world, and when the public's mentality is strongly communal-oriented, the society is strong. Conversely, when the leadership group can only take compulsory control and the masses are self-fulfilling and disjointed, society seems to be weakened.

 

With that in mind, let's consider value: V (V alue ) and time: t (T ime ).

Here the value V is given. The formula V=f(t) . . . 1 is a conceptual formula expressing that value is a function of time. This means that the value changes with time. Values change because, with changes in the external world and environment, the contents of challenges change, the ability of creative leaders to respond to change, and the intentions of the masses change. ) simply states that "value changes with time" including all such things.

As for the question of how "value" changes due to what influences time, it can be said that the external world, changes in the environment, the position of the creative ruler, and the position of the masses correspond to the function "f".  Whether V or f or anything can be quantified is not considered here, and I think there is a certain significance in the sense of how these relationships are positioned in the system of the driving force of historical change.

On the other hand, t is time, and time exists trivially as a quantity, just as the chronology of history does. However, the historical chronology was not treated as if Tyco Brahe observed celestial bodies and organized the data.

What should be considered here may be the work of selecting examples from many histories. For example, if we think about the transfer of hegemony, what kind of challenges did the Netherlands receive from the outside world, what kind of creative leaders emerged, and what was the state of the public at that time? This will be arranged along with a chronology (as objective time), and this will probably be how the "celestial bodies" in the world system of Holland, England, and America moved.

 

Accepting V=f(t) as a rough hypothesis, let us not consider the content and state of V for the time being, but consider the system of driving force.

 

4 Efficient technology: About E

Efficient technical capability E is mainly related to efficiency and technology. When a certain value V exists, it is defined as the ability to achieve technical improvement among the powers that try to realize that value. As a case to think about this, a comparison of "South Korea and North Korea" or "China and Taiwan" may be appropriate. If the value is different, the meaning of "efficiency" and "technology" to realize it will be greatly different. South Korea's national policy was economic growth, and North Korea's national policy was military . In this way, the value regulates and controls the content of efficient technical capabilities. In that case, the most important thing is to “find out values that match the trends of the times and the world,” and it will be the market, capitalism, or the government that will make this possible. Again, it may be interesting to see what happened in the case of Wallerstein's hegemonic states, Holland, England, and America. For the time being, let's express the relationship between efficient technical ability E and value V in a formula.

 

Since V=f(t)…(1), E=g(V) is E=g(f(t))…(2)

 

Formula (2) expresses that efficient technological capabilities are a function of value from formula (1) V = f(t), and that value is a function of time. In practice, values are chosen within the constraints of time, and technologies are chosen based on those values, within the constraints of limited resources. In other words, what has been achieved in the past history was achieved by the people who lived in that era choosing the best value in the environment as a challenge and investing limited resources in the best efficient technology. That is what it means. Regardless of whether it is truly optimal.

 

As an example of such efficient technology, if we take the case of the industrial revolution in England,

Invention of coke production method with coalfields (1709) "change from wood to coal"

Newcomen, Steam Internal Combustion Engine (1712)

Watt, Steam Internal Combustion Engine (1769) with further efficiency

Development of spinning machines and other machinery Use as a power source (Jenny, Arkwright, Cartwright, Mule)

Development of transportation (railway, steamship)

 

The use of coal as a power source and from wood to iron as a material was a technological innovation accompanying the reduction of wood resources and a response to environmental challenges. That kind of value existed in England at the time, and I can feel a strong obsession with "power" in particular. The raw material of iron and the power of the steam engine gave birth to full-fledged "machinery", supporting productivity and transportation, and at the same time becoming the source of the power of the British nation*. However, in the case of the British Industrial Revolution, before the leap in efficient technology, there was also a major element of the leap in social organization power (deregulation, centralization, fiscal reform, financial system), which will be discussed later . It was largely the non-mainstream Puritan middle class or Scots* who were responsible for the innovation,  and the fact that there were people with values that compelled them to go in that direction. 

 

In addition, there was a market in which capital (Atlantic trade: triangular trade with America and Africa) was accumulated from the beginning, but according to Ashton's "Industrial Revolution" , industrial entrepreneurs initially It was thought that the businessmen who expanded the factories were able to accommodate each other's capital. After production got on track, Gentry and financiers may have invested heavily in the factories, but looking at the background to the abolition of the grain law, it seems that it was not so simple*. Also, unlike London, Lancashire, where the Industrial Revolution took place, did not have a large population, which may have been a factor in promoting mechanization*. When it comes to technology, there were talents (Dissidents, Scottish Enlightenment) and resources (coal, iron ), depletion of timber, population scarcity as challenges, fostering value for innovation and has hatched. And there were favorable conditions such as the agricultural revolution in East Anglia such as Norfolk, strong centralization centering on London and deregulation after the Glorious Revolution, investment from the Netherlands, and overseas markets due to the Seven Years War. The appearance of a completely different world from the era before it, such as the Industrial Revolution, would not have appeared without the discovery or creation of "value" and rational (not only empirical) efforts* toward it. In a sense, then, by losing the creative middle class, Britain lost rationalism, and creative leaders degraded under empiricism.

 

The Industrial Revolution was cited as the best example of efficient technological power. would be mentioned as an example. These are interesting themes about what kind of challenges they faced, what kind of creative leaders emerged, how the masses followed them, and how civilization developed. At that time, social organizational power might be at work as well, but when looking at what kind of power was most dominant, it is fair to think that it was an era when efficient technological power was at work most. I wonder. The present age is truly an era of efficient technological power, and the value of technology is the most dominant situation .

 

All rights reserved to M Ariake

Civilizations and time 6（about five forces)

3 If we organize the above dynamical system into several "force" concepts, what would it be like?

Pressure from the environment or from outside civilizations or forces (which we call external forces).

Creative Minority Capabilities. A shift in the energy of creative faculties.

capacity as the susceptibility and comprehension of many imitators.

Self-development capacity of the inner proletariat.

Self-development capacity of the external proletariat.

 

How to judge a challenge is a matter of "value", and in the sense of responding to "value" efficiently and systematically, there are two main types: "efficient technical ability" and "social organization ability". I think.

And these forces, being forces, will also have counteracts.

Internal proletariat, external proletariat, world empire against environmental control

World Churches, Fighting Groups as counteracting forces against It

These can be thought of as different forms of social organizing power.

 

Therefore, I would like to cite 1 value, 2 efficient technical power, 3 social organizational power, 4 reaction, and 5 external power as the minimum form of the concept of force in social science. And add "time" to it. These forces change over time. Wallerstein's conception could be included as an example of an external force that influences these forces. In reality, there are various forces at work in this human society, but I have tentatively extracted these forces from among these various forces.

  

Braudel aside, Wallerstein's theory seems to be more spatial than temporal. Wallerstein's time axis is, for example, the A phase and the B phase*1, and the world system is assumed to be a movement between the central country, semi-peripheral countries, and peripheral countries. Therefore, the dependency theory is accepted, and the stage of development theory is not accepted. it may be correct. However, from the perspective of the emergence and growth of capitalism, Tadao Umesao's Ecological Historical View of Civilization seems to make good use of Marx's materialist historical view. There was a region where capitalism naturally arose and developed (transitioned), and along with that came the central country, semi-peripheral countries, and peripheral countries. In other words, movements have arisen in semi-peripheral and peripheral countries.

 

※１The Kondratiev cycle is the basic cycle of expansion and stagnation in the capitalist world/economy. One cycle, which consists of the so-called A phase "expansion period" and B phase "stagnation period", generally has a length of about 50 to 60 years.

 

Western Europe and Japan had undergone an ecological transition from feudalism to capitalism, while other regions were formed as empires rooted not in feudalism but in domestic farming and pastoralism. Based on this way of thinking, Marx's materialistic view of history is not necessarily connected to the theory of the stages of development, and capitalism is a phenomenon that occurred specifically in Europe and Japan. The central country, the semi-peripheral country, the peripheral country, the A phase, and the B phase are the concepts taken up by Wallerstein, but Umesao believes that the former empire, which is not a capitalist country, can achieve economic development with an approach different from that of democracy. 

 Wallerstein's theory seems to address the quantitative (such as the volume of trade) rather well from the standpoint of quality and quantity*. However, from the perspective of history and futurology, it seems that there are still many blank areas in how to predict "quality" and "essence." Why, then, is Toynbee's theory of civilization capable of predicting something qualitative? That's because Toynbee's theory is vague, but it's also qualitative and dynamic.

 

All rights reserved to M Ariake