Talk:Self-Strengthening Movement

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BigRandy73.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Removed this statement

The bureaucracy was still deeply influenced by Neo-Confucian orthodoxy.

I don't think that most historians think that this was the case with China in the mid-19th century. The imperial examinations were still largely based on Neo-Confucian concepts, but at the same time they were being very seriously challenged by the Han Learning and the evidential schools.

(see Benjamin Elman)

Roadrunner 16:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but it is quite clearly possible to be influenced by more than one form of intellectual enquiry. Neo-Confucianism was the sharpest expression of contemporary philosophy at this time; without sufficient knowledge of it, it would have been impossible (or very nearly) to progress bureaucratically in Qing China. I think you had no right to remove this obvious statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.31.99 (talk) 23:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

GOCE

Mlpearc Pull My Chain Trib's 16:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Intense Bias - Lack of Sources

This article jumps to conclusions about the reasons for the inefficiencies of the self-strengthening movement being "government bureaucracy" without supplying examples of bureaucracy. The reasons that governments are inefficient are particular, not general to the concept of government-run programs. Request support for claims or making the tone neutral. Thegreatmuka (talk) 15:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)