Page 588 - Le Operazioni Interforze e Multinazionali nella Storia Militare - ACTA Tomo II

1228 XXXIX Congresso della CommIssIone InternazIonale dI storIa mIlItare • CIHm

technological changes usually leave behind, desire strengthened by power shifting
to more conservative groups. Radical technological changes, that threatened the
balance of power, were carefully avoided. The difference between China and Europe
stood in the fact that ,in the latter, the power held by each group, wanting to sabotage
an innovation considered disadvantageous for its own interests, was limited.
Furthermore, this was object of private initiative and in the case of disinclination to
technological change, it was possible to migrate within Europe to more favorable
groups, hence a loss of power for the country against it.
9) In China on the other hand, the state was the propeller of technology and at one point
support from central authorities ceased. Why? One of the causes is the so called
“hydraulic despotism”, requiring bureaucracy capable of managing great projects
concerning the control of water and aimed at guaranteeing social and political control.
Maybe the state adopted such a central role in China due to the lack of interest in
technology shown by land owners creating a gap to be filled. The role held by the
elite in inhibiting technological progress in China explains many things. If educated
and dominant classes are not interested in production and lack technical knowledge,
they cannot put any effort to introduce technological improvements, leading to a
consequent state of stagnation. Fei’s theory (Chinese intellectual) is that traditional
Chinese society intelligence represented a class void of any technical knowledge,
interested only in wisdom of the past, literature and art. The characteristic of
assessing the world through human relations made it a conservative power, because
in human relations the goal is always a reciprocal agreement while technological
change implies social break down. Technological progress requires a link between
educated classes and working classes, in China such a link were the Authorities.
The social and political importance of the mandarinate was an impediment to a correct
selection of talent, taken from the working class and sent to bureaucratic machinery
instead of technological or productive.

Why did the state loose interest toward technological change?
Hard to say, the Ming and Ch’ing Dynasties were, compared to their predecessors,
more absolutist and despotic. Before them, gulps and regicides were frequent, thus
introducing an element of “competition” in the Chinese political market. On the other
hand, a strict etiquette, absolute obedience and baseline conformism became the main
trait under the Ming emperors. At the same time public administration became one of the
main powers which preserved status-quo. In fact, it learned how to resist to unwanted
changes, and even the most powerful emperors were unable to enforce progressive
policies. In their search for stability, their interests converged with those of bureaucracy.
Totalitarian decisions of an absolute monarch whose preference moved mainly toward
stability, discouraged the dynamism that was winding throughout Europe in those years.
With the advent of the 15th Century, the role of imperial authority both with inventions
and innovations resulted in being irrelevant compared to what it had been during the
Middle Ages and no other subject in China was in such a position to take the State’s