Chinese legalise the opium trade?

[stevep]

Reading through a book on Chinese history, 'China, a history' by John Keay. Got up to the problems the Chinese were having with the trade in the 1830's and surprised to read that during this period the bueracracy were discussing legalising the trade. Many officials were arguing "that prohibition had failed and both consumption and corruption could be contained by punitive tariffs, which would also bring in substantial revenue and state control would make foreign traders more amenable to regulation".

It appears that the problem was that Britain had just removed the monopoly of the EIC on trade with China and as a result, sent a formal represensative to replace the company man who had supervised the foreign trading community. As a professional diplomat, Lord Napier, expected and had been ordered to insist on negotiating with comparative levels of government officials. Unfortunately no one had informed the Chinese of this and they refused to accept such a change. A stand off occurred and Napier actually called for ships to help defend his position. Before they arrived however, under pressure from traders who were being hurt by the blockage the Chinese had imposed on business, he withdrew from Canton to Macao, where he then died of dysentery. The local Chinese governor Lin Zexu argued strongly that it demonstarted that a hard line with foreign traders would work and the support for legalisation faltered in preference for the more traditional abrasive approach.

What might have happened if the clash had been avoided somehow, say an earlier decision or Britain removing the EIC monopoly later? Legalisation wouldn't have solved the opium crisis by no means but might have mitigated it. Also it might have avoided the confrontations that resulted and the humiliation that the Chinese regime suffered. If so at least some of the disastrous rebellions might have been avoided or reduced, especially the Taiping rebellion.

What do people think might have happened? Suspect the pushy confidence of the western powers would have clashed sooner or later with the obsession of the Chinese empire with its own inherent superiority over all other peoples and nations but might have been under different and less destructive circumstances.

Steve

 

[Faeelin]

What do people think might have happened? Suspect the pushy confidence of the western powers would have clashed sooner or later with the obsession of the Chinese empire with its own inherent superiority over all other peoples and nations but might have been under different and less destructive circumstances.

I need to think about this, but I want as an American I am leery of saying an attempt to stop foreigners from flooding your nation with narcotics is a sign of an obsession with inherent superiority over all other peoples and nations.

 

[stevep]

I need to think about this, but I want as an American I am leery of saying an attempt to stop foreigners from flooding your nation with narcotics is a sign of an obsession with inherent superiority over all other peoples and nations.

Faeelin

Then don't say it. Its not like I did. I did however refer to the long Chinese habit of refusing to accept any idea of other nations being equal to them and treating any trade relations as tribune, other than at sword-point.

Steve

 

[GreatScottMarty]

I think we are due for a clash anyway. The way the civilizations conducted relations to each other was just abrasive. The Westerners had no respect for their culture and the Easterners either couldn't or wouldn't see the strength of Western Technology. While legalisation would have perhaps helped to mitigate some of the problems arising from the Opium trade I doubt it would have done much to curb addicition. I really think the British would have found something else to try and bully China on.

 

[Cook]

Faeelin

Then don't say it. Its not like I did. I did however refer to the long Chinese habit of refusing to accept any idea of other nations being equal to them and treating any trade relations as tribune, other than at sword-point.

Steve

Mate,
It’s coming across like you think the Chinese should have acquiesced to Britain instead of fighting the Opium Wars.

This has got to be the first time I’ve heard of anyone saying Britain was in the right there!

 

[MNP]

Mate,
It’s coming across like you think the Chinese should have acquiesced to Britain instead of fighting the Opium Wars.

This has got to be the first time I’ve heard of anyone saying Britain was in the right there!

Don't be silly, no one is saying Britain was right. What someone is saying it might have benefited China in the long term more to acquiesce more than resistance did. The Chinese certainly matched the west in arrogance if nothing else.

 

[subversivepancakes]

I rather doubt that the Qing bureaucracy would have gone beyond the level of discussion and actually legalized the opium trade. Not only would it be reversing more than a century of imperial policy, but it would also be seen as a capitulation to the foreigners. Even if the bureaucracy had united around the idea, it's far from certain that they could have convinced the Daoguang Emperor of the wisdom of the idea. In the end, a crackdown on the opium trade seemed to make sense for the Qing; after all, not only was opium a social ill, but the influx of opium into China resulted in an outflow of silver, which was the only thing that China really wanted from Western traders anyway.

 

[Typo]

Don't be silly, no one is saying Britain was right. What someone is saying it might have benefited China in the long term more to acquiesce more than resistance did. The Chinese certainly matched the west in arrogance if nothing else.

The Chinese were arrogant to stop Opium trade into their country?

You are basically propose that China would be better off to passively acquiesce to western bullying than resisting it.

 

[Cook]

Don't be silly, no one is saying Britain was right. What someone is saying it might have benefited China in the long term more to acquiesce more than resistance did. The Chinese certainly matched the west in arrogance if nothing else.

It may have benefitted them in the short term to acquiesce if they’d taken the opportunity to build up their defences more, but I doubt they’d have matched the Europeans, and in the mean time their country still gets flooded with Opium.

 

[Typo]

And the country gets politically destabilized anyway, the Qing will be seen as completely spineless

 

[Cook]

And the country gets politically destabilized anyway, the Qing will be seen as completely spineless

Yes, I agree with Typo on this one. I don’t see any advantage unless you are talking short term tactical and I don’t see a way for them to gain an advantage over the Europeans. It’s not like they could harness international opinion to help them.

 

[MNP]

The Chinese were arrogant to stop Opium trade into their country?

You are basically propose that China would be better off to passively acquiesce to western bullying than resisting it.

Okay let's take this one step at a time.

The Chinese were arrogant when it came to dealing with westerners generally. I am basically proposing that the OP might be right: It might have benefited China over the long haul if they hadn't gotten into the Opium Wars with Britain to buy time to strengthen themselves later.

 

[subversivepancakes]

Okay let's take this one step at a time.

The Chinese were arrogant when it came to dealing with westerners generally. I am basically proposing that the OP might be right: It might have benefited China over the long haul if they hadn't gotten into the Opium Wars with Britain to buy time to strengthen themselves later.

This. In fact, saying that they were generally arrogant doesn't really do the Chinese justice. It would be more accurate to say that in their dealings with foreigners, they were always incredibly arrogant. That's what tends to come of believing that your country is the center of the world, to the point of naming it "middle country."

That said, I have my doubts as to whether they could realistically have avoided entering the First Opium War. Such an action would have been very much out of character for the Qing bureaucracy, and at the time there were a number of reasons that made war seem like an eminently sensible proposition.

 

[Typo]

Okay let's take this one step at a time.

The Chinese were arrogant when it came to dealing with westerners generally. I am basically proposing that the OP might be right: It might have benefited China over the long haul if they hadn't gotten into the Opium Wars with Britain to buy time to strengthen themselves later.

Except the Opium Wars was what demonstrated the need to strengthen themselves in the first place.

 

[Leistungsfähiger Amerikan]

Except the Opium Wars was what demonstrated the need to strengthen themselves in the first place.

Preferably, there would be a way to show that China needs to be strengthened without losing a war and having harsh terms forced upon it in a treaty. The First Opium War really started the decline of the Qing empire. I mean,if people think that legalizing Opium was giving into the West, too bad, because the treaty that the Qing will get when they lose to Britain-and they will lose-will far more undermine the Qing right to rule under the mandate of heaven. Now, can Opium be legalized? I think it's possible, there already was some support for it. All you really need is a high ranking bureaucrat who knows how powerful the West is to get the ear of the Emperor.

 

[Typo]

The treaties themselves weren't fundamentally crippling, the domestic fallout from those treaties were. Showing themselves as spineless will yield the same results in a different form (probably a general Han rebellion as oppose to be Hakku Taiping), abeit later, since the British will force more concessions once they figure they can get away with some.

Preferably, there would be a way to show that China needs to be strengthened without losing a war and having harsh terms forced upon it in a treaty.

Remember even the Opium wars wasn't enough to inspire enough of the strengthening OTL

he First Opium War really started the decline of the Qing empire.

I wouldn't be too sure of that, a truly strong and determined Chinese government could stave off an English assault indefinitely

Now, can Opium be legalized? I think it's possible, there already was some support for it.

Of course, it's also starting China on the path of been colonized.

All you really need is a high ranking bureaucrat who knows how powerful the West is to get the ear of the Emperor.

That's is just wrong, there were more than one high ranking bureaucrat OTl who wanted reforms and it didn't save the Qing

 

[stevep]

Guys

Just to clarify a few points:

a) As I said I got the point from a book I'm reading, quoted in the OP, the author of such seems to have a pretty good knowledge of what he's talking about. For instance a couple of pages later he mentions the scandal about the Qing correspondance referring to the Europeans as barbarians. Mentions that this appears to be a mis-translation and the correct translation, referring a person who seems to have been one of the best Chinese language experts in the west, who said it was actually a mis-translation of foreigner. As such when the author said it was being discussed by a number of bureaucrats I think its likely to have occurred. How likely it might be that such a decision was made I don't know.

b) I was referring to the Chinese view of themselves and their nation at being the centre of the universe and all others being subject to it. This seems to have been partly a trap they wandered into and via the Confusis philosophy unable to get out of. Coupled with the unbounded self-confidence of the main European nations I think there would have been a clash sooner on later. However given that the Europeans were predominantly interested in trade and, as I said initially backed down when a boycott resulted means that a military clash may have been delayed considerably. However it would have meant better leadership in the Qing empire, either at the centre or possibly just in the south.

If a clash was delayed it might come under different circumstances. Or just coming after an earlier and less Taiping rebellion that is suppressed before it causes the ruinous civil war that China suffered OTL.

c) I definitely didn't imply, or mean to, that they were wrong to try and enforce their rules on forbidding opium.

Steve

 

[Cook]

The Chinese were arrogant when it came to dealing with westerners generally.

I think it’s a little unfair to say that a government is being arrogant because they think that their internal laws should be respected by foreigner businessmen in their country. I just don’t think they expected the British to jump on the opportunity to go to war against them.

I am basically proposing that the OP might be right: It might have benefited China over the long haul if they hadn't gotten into the Opium Wars with Britain to buy time to strengthen themselves later.

This would have required them to deliberately plan a confrontation with Britain. I think their motivation was purely to prevent Opium distribution in China. For China it was an accidental war, for Britain an opportunity war.

b) I was referring to the Chinese view of themselves and their nation at being the centre of the universe and all others being subject to it.

Those silly impertinent yellow upstarts, didn’t they know that Britain was the centre of the Universe?
Have the drink wallah bring me another Gin and Tonic old boy.

 

[67th Tigers]

What might have happened if the clash had been avoided somehow, say an earlier decision or Britain removing the EIC monopoly later? Legalisation wouldn't have solved the opium crisis by no means but might have mitigated it. Also it might have avoided the confrontations that resulted and the humiliation that the Chinese regime suffered. If so at least some of the disastrous rebellions might have been avoided or reduced, especially the Taiping rebellion.

There was no Opium crisis or "Opium Wars". When the Chinese government asked the UK to stop undercutting their opium market the UK aquiesed, after all, opium was a perfectly legal pharmacutical sold globally and there was always a market for it. It was only six months later when the Chinese government decided to "ethnically cleanse" the port of Canton that HMG sends a frigate to protect it's citizens and over a year before the decision to send an expeditionary force is made.

In the words of John Quincey Adams, "[Opium] is a mere incident to the dispute, but no more the cause of the war than the throwing overboard of tea in Boston harbor was the cause of the North American revolution … the cause of the war is the kowtow – the arrogant and insupportable pretensions of China that she will hold commercial intercourse with the rest of mankind not upon terms of equal reciprocity, but upon the insulting and degrading forms of the relations between lord and vassal."

 

[subversivepancakes]

There was no Opium crisis or "Opium Wars". When the Chinese government asked the UK to stop undercutting their opium market the UK aquiesed, after all, opium was a perfectly legal pharmacutical sold globally and there was always a market for it. It was only six months later when the Chinese government decided to "ethnically cleanse" the port of Canton that HMG sends a frigate to protect it's citizens and over a year before the decision to send an expeditionary force is made.

In fact, opium had been proscribed more than a hundred years before the Opium Wars. The Yongzheng Emperor issued a decree in the 1720s that made the sale and possession of opium illegal. But the loopholes in Yongzheng's decree were big enough to drive a truck through; there were exemptions for the medicinal use of opium, and so enforcement was lax at best. That's why in the 1790s, the Jiaqing Emperor issued a further set of decrees that clearly and unambiguously illegalized the use, sale, and possession of opium. So while opium may indeed have been a "perfectly legal pharmaceutical" in most of the world, it quite clearly was not legal in China. Additionally, it is inaccurate to say that the Chinese government "asked the UK to stop undercutting their opium market." In reality, the vast majority of opium in China during the early 19th century was imported from India. This was a deliberate strategy to reduce the trade imbalance that had developed over the previous years, as Great Britain imported a wide variety of goods from China, while the Chinese cared little for European goods - all they wanted was silver. When traders realized that they could sell large quantities of opium to China, silver began to flow out of China, which added an economic dimension to what had previously been viewed by the bureaucracy as a purely moral issue. Arguments both for and against legalization were presented to the court in the late 1830s, and ultimately the Daoguang Emperor sided with officials who favored the total eradication of opium. Lin Zexu, who was entrusted by the emperor with ending the opium trade, did not intend to "ethnically cleanse" Guangzhou. Instead, he intended to put to death all traffickers who dealt in opium - both foreigners and Chinese. In sum, not only was opium clearly illegal, and not only did China not participate in the opium trade, but there was no plan of ethnic cleansing contemplated at all. Your argument is erroneous in every particular.