(Part 2) Top products from r/Sino

u/Erebus_of_darkness, u/Osroes-the-300th

There is a helpful and basic introductory series called "History of Imperial China". I have not read their books on the Yuan & Ming or the Qing, but I liked what I saw in their book on the Tang. They're basic, topical, and makes for an easy overview.

In America, the "New Qing" school mostly dominates discussion of Qing Dynasty history. China tends to view the Manchu Qing (and the Mongol Yuan) as part of a multicultural "China" state that has existed since time immemorial. "New Qing" disputes that by essentially arguing that the Manchu only considered "China" as one part of their empire, and thus ruled over Buddhist theocratic Tibet, Buddhist nomadic Mongolia, and Muslim Xinjiang (among others) differently from how it administered core China. This obviously ruffles feathers in China, since this ethnic-focused historiography seems to be trying to start something, but both sides of the ocean can probably agree that it at least provides a way of looking at things, including at ethnic relationships in Qing China. For New Qing, China Marches West is perhaps the most salient right now. You can also look at The Manchus (and look at The Tibetans in the same series while you're at it, since Tibetan Buddhism and Tibetans played important roles in the Ming, Qing, and modern China). Mark Eliot also is a prominent "New Qing" professor, and this seems to be his hallmark book, The Manchu Way.

During the Ming Dynasty, the Neo-Confucianism ideology solidified and became the guiding philosophy of East Asia. For a primary source peek at this philosophy, this translation of Wang Yangming seems a decent start.

The Forbidden City is the crowning achievement of Chinese palatial architecture, a culmination of imperial wisdom transmitted across thousands of years. No less, this book is a great, short introductory resource that is visually pleasing. I don't think it's a direct translation of the author's authoritative Chinese works, but he is the foremost expert on the architecture of the Forbidden City, and Nancy Steinhardt is an excellent authority on traditional Chinese architecture.

See if you can't find this book, The Class of 1761, in a library, going through the minutiae of the Chinese imperial examination system. I plan to look at this as well.

Chinese literature and opera came into maturity during the Ming and Qing Dynasty. So if you're feeling for long reads, read any of the Four Classic Novels of China. In particular, the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, while not covering Ming or Qing (written in late Yuan/early Ming) will let you interface with literally any East Asian since they will know all the anecdotes and the Dream of the Red Chamber is noted for its extreme depth (entire departments devoted to studying it) and particular insight into mid-Qing society.

For opera, probably the Peony Pavilion is good enough, as a classic of Kunqu opera, the OG Chinese opera.

And honestly, just go to chinaknowledge.de ... It's a very comprehensive website surprisingly enough.

Not sure about scifi movies, but there's a book, The Three Body Problem that has won the Hugo award. The title refers to the famous three-body problem in physics, which is known for having no closed-form general solution. People around this sub generally agree that the original Chinese version is better than the translation, no surprise there; but many English readers I've asked say they still liked the translation. It also has 2 sequels, so it's a trilogy really. And they're coming out with a film adaptation next year.

More so on Newton's arrogance, that though Leibniz was extremely willing to share credit, Newton actually invested in efforts to slander Leibniz.

Otherwise, the "Bayesian style" is merely an axiomatic style to probability theory that aims to extend those notions of propositional logic as is expounded upon by E.T. Jaynes' "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science". However, an axiomatic style, or an approach to probability theory is just that, an approach. Thomas Bayes lacked much in developments of the theory that was not developed prior to him, whereas the great Laplace was able to demonstrate the true effectiveness of such an approach as described by E.T. Jaynes to a much larger audience and those after (e.g. Gauss etc.) due to the wide applications of such a style - essentially, Bayes was vanity, but the likes of Laplace demonstrated that such an approach to probability theory is not merely vanity. An analogous statement can be made regarding Booles (on "Boolean algebra") and Cantor, where Cantor's much more general considerations as applied to, for instance, the analysis of the foundation of real numbers (e.g. see Dedekind-Cantor axioms of the system of real numbers, equivalent formulations of the completeness property, and properties of the real numbers - i.e. Dedekind cut, Cantor set etc.) contrasts Boole's vanity.

>Regardless, it would be false to claim that the UK wasn't at the cutting edge of computer development at the time

No lol, to suggest that the UK was researching cutting edge computer development of the time is a false claim considering that those notions of computers weren't even rigorously conceived yet - concepts relating to programming for instance were extremely foundational and primitive. It is more realistic to attempt to stake in information theory - which is unrealistic due to the more comprehensive works on Shannon.

Developments in computing comes later as triggered by the likes of John von Neumann.

The fact that I grew up in the UK during my formative years helps - it means I can see through the UK's shallow bullshits very easily and quickly.

History

The classic Fairbanks book, China: a New History for overview.

The always classic, Cambridge Illustrated History of China for reference. Though the real reference is the completely 12 volumes of The Cambridge History of China, which is not for the faint of heart. At that point, you might as learn Chinese and read The Comprehensive Mirror yourself.

For an aspiring historian
China: A Macro Hisotry



Culture

For old pre-revolutionary China, My Country and My People by Lin Yutang

For modern China, you're better off watching TV dramas. I recommend Ode to Joy as a start.

Japanese-American relations provide a warning against focusing on racial differences between great powers. As I detail in my 2017 book, during the decades before the Second World War, Japan was — like China today — a rising power that wanted to be recognized as a fully equal member of the great power club. Several crises eventually convinced Japanese elites that they faced an impenetrable racial barrier to acceptance. Many of these involved the treatment of Japanese immigrants. For instance, in 1906, the San Francisco Board of Education decreed that Japanese students would be segregated from white students; in 1913, California prohibited Japanese from owning land in the state; in 1924, the U.S. Congress prohibited Japanese immigration altogether.

Such actions — combined with narratives about the “Yellow Peril” flowing from Western capitals since the late 19th century — made Tokyo anxious enough about racial discrimination in world politics that Japan insisted on including a “racial equality clause” in the League of Nations charter. That effort failed, which underlined Japanese worries that racial prejudice would keep them out of the great power club.

In September 1931, the League of Nations condemned Tokyo’s invasion of the Chinese province of Manchuria. Japan — primed to see Western powers as racially discriminatory — interpreted this as further evidence that the interwar order was rigged against it. This ultimately drove Tokyo to withdraw from the League in 1933 and strengthened hard-liners in ways that made Japanese foreign policy more confrontational — and more dangerous to U.S. interests and allies. The story ended with a war fought especially viciously (on both sides) in part because of the racial animosity that had developed earlier.

Will the United States take the same attitude toward China?

Is American grand strategy going to be explicitly oriented around the idea that China is racially different? If so, another ambitious, rising great power may realistically come to believe that it will face racial discrimination in international politics. This could again contribute to the perception that the international order is fundamentally unjust and won’t make a place for Chinese ambitions. That could empower Chinese hard-liners who favor a more confrontational foreign policy than Beijing has so far pursued.

[Beijing is becoming more assertive. That may change U.S.-China relations.]

But there’s a difference between then and now. In the early 20th century, U.S. presidentsdiscouraged California and Congress from taking actions that treated the Japanese as racially inferior — specifically because they worried about what these would do to Japanese-American relations. Theodore Roosevelt opposed San Francisco’s segregation policy and called its backers “infernal fools.” William Howard Taft successfully persuaded California not to pass the Alien Land Law during his term, and Woodrow Wilson opposed its passage in 1913. Calvin Coolidge objected to the 1924 Immigration Act (though he ultimately signed it).

By contrast, the Trump administration is intentionally signaling that China is racially “other” so it can treat Beijing as an exceptional threat — warranting an exceptionally robust response.

This is not the first time that China has been identified as an outside “civilization” in a way that encouraged other powers to treat it as legitimate prey. European powers (and, at times, the United States and later Japan) treated China as not fully “civilized” from the second half of the 19th century through the first half of the 20th, effectively carving it into a collection of spheres of influence during what the Chinese call the “century of humiliation.”

[Why it's so hard for the U.S. to have a coherent China policy]

That experience remains important in China. The combination of a rising power sensitive about having been treated as beyond the pale of “civilization” and an established power that actively promotes that view could be dangerous.

Steven Ward (@Steven_m_ward) is an assistant professor in the government department at Cornell University and the author of Status and the Challenge of Rising Powers (Cambridge University Press, 2017).

I originally read about it in this book, and it gave several examples.

The one I remember with reasonable certainty is 万. (Unfortunately, this site appears to be under construction now and this one does not provide any clues.)

Edited for punctuation and grammar.

On Chinese politics: «Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China» by Ezra Vogel

https://www.amazon.com/Deng-Xiaoping-Transformation-China-Vogel/dp/0674725867

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Coping-Post-Democracy-Fabian-Pamphlets/dp/0716305984

Don't thank me. Thank Colin Crouch's research.

https://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Ally-Chinas-World-1937-1945/dp/061889425X

Forgotten Ally: China’s World War II, 1937-1945

Read this one first the read the one u/killingzoo posted

I hope these Chinese officials know what they're doing. Given its predatory history with drugs, the West is more likely using this opportunity to worsen the problem if they aren't outright orchestrating it.

https://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Opium-Wars-Jack-Beeching/dp/0156170949/

 

The Politics of Heroin - CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade http://www.amazon.com/Politics-Heroin-Complicity-Global-Trade/dp/1556524838/

I think it was a bad idea to use American narration. It gives the false impression that these "white saviors" really cared. We don't see them narrating shit like this

Native Indians

http://www.amazon.com/Bury-My-Heart-Wounded-Knee/dp/0805086846/

Blacks

http://www.amazon.com/Slavery-Another-Name-Re-Enslavement-Americans/dp/0385722702/

Cambodia

http://www.amazon.com/Sideshow-Kissinger-Nixon-Destruction-Cambodia/dp/0671835254/

Laos

Hiding America’s War Crimes in Laos | http://thiscantbehappening.net/node/2715

Vietnam

● http://www.amazon.com/Kill-Anything-That-Moves-American/dp/1250045061/
● http://www.amazon.com/Phoenix-Program-Americas-Forbidden-Bookshelf-ebook/dp/B00KGMIW6Q/

Korea

http://www.amazon.com/Hidden-History-Korean-1950-1951-Nonconformist/dp/0316817708/

Philippines

http://www.amazon.com/Benevolent-Assimilation-American-Philippines-1899-1903/dp/0300030819/

China

● China’s Rise, Fall, and Re-Emergence as a Global Power | http://dissidentvoice.org/2012/03/chinas-rise-fall-and-re-emergence-as-a-global-power/

● USA’s warfare against China ½ | http://www.voltairenet.org/article177063.html

India

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/23/british-empire-crimes-ignore-atrocities