Throughout world history, many peasant uprisings and peasant wars in Western countries, although they carried banners of anti-feudalism and land redistribution, also demanded punishment for corrupt officials, but they often did not directly oppose the emperor or king, or held unrealistic illusions about them. One important reason for the failure of Watt Tyler’s uprising in England was the deception tactics of the king; the Stenka Razin uprising and Pugachev’s rebellion in Russia still harbored illusions about the tsar; during the uprising of the Bábí people in Iran, they were also deceived by the Iranian king; during the Gabo farmers’ war in Korea, slogans like ‘loyalty and filial piety’ were also used. However, in Chinese peasant wars, such situations rarely occurred. The Yellow Turban Rebellion, the late Sui peasant wars, the Huang Chao uprising, the Fang La uprising, the late Yuan peasant wars, Li Zicheng’s uprising, and the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom revolution all directly demanded opposition to the emperor, without illusions about him. I am very curious about the reasons behind this difference. Personally, I think it might be because in China, feudal centralization developed more thoroughly, and the emperor, as a large landowner, had stronger control over various regions. Therefore, challenging the feudal system would inevitably threaten the core of feudal rule—the emperor himself. In Europe and the Middle East, where royal power was weaker and local rulers such as nobles and great landowners held actual control, peasants mainly focused their struggles on them and did not place as much emphasis on opposing the emperor or king. I’m not sure if my thinking is correct.
I think it’s not correct that the Chinese peasant wars initially opposed the emperor; they also developed over time. First, most Chinese peasant wars occurred during periods when large landlords held power and divided territories, which is not really related to centralization of power, because at that time, central authority had already been eliminated. In fact, Chinese peasant wars did not start with opposition to the emperor. For example, the uprising of Chen Sheng and Wu Guang still carried the banner of Fu Su and Xiang Yan, and the Red Eyebrow and Green Forest armies also had what could be called legitimate royalist ideas. However, these uprisings were suppressed and taught a bloody lesson to the broad masses of farmers, which led to the political goals of Chinese peasant wars becoming increasingly advanced. They evolved from opposing the restoration of slavery, to overthrowing the emperor and establishing peace, then to the later ideas of “equal land distribution,” and finally developed into the utopian socialism of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom.
I also thought of the Chen Sheng Wu Guang uprising and the Green Forest Red Eyebrow uprising, so I didn’t list them earlier. However, after the Green Forest Red Eyebrow uprising, farmers indeed generally abandoned their illusions about the orthodox royal family. But this phenomenon is not common in foreign countries. I am wondering what the reason for this is. (If Chinese farmers learn from previous uprisings, then why do farmer uprisings in other regions rarely show this pattern? They would surely also learn from experience, so just mentioning this doesn’t seem to fully explain the issue.)
Doesn’t the Chi Mei Army support the so-called Han imperial clan Liu Xuan ascending the throne as emperor? It can’t be said that the Chinese peasant revolution was not influenced by such reformist ideas.
I think it has to do with Confucianism; there is no culture abroad that controls people and time as long as Confucianism does. And the Chinese common people generally don’t trust Confucianism much.
The biggest characteristic of Confucianism is supporting the emperor, so opposing Confucianism means opposing the emperor. But Song Jiang and others are exactly the opposite.
It is unrealistic to disbelieve Confucianism. Private families are deeply influenced by Confucian ideas, especially feudal patriarchs who advocate sayings like “family shame should not be exposed” and “harmony in the family leads to prosperity in all things.” Oppressed women in these families are also deeply poisoned by these ideas, forced to endure silently within the family, maintaining the so-called family harmony, and unable to resolutely break free from the shackles of Confucian family norms. Many women remain oppressed throughout their lives, subjected to insults, domestic violence… Therefore, it cannot be said that disbelief in Confucianism is solely due to propaganda by the ruling class; the lack of revolutionary consciousness among the masses is also a factor. External factors also need to act through internal factors. In a spontaneous state, people are forced to accept Confucian ideas, but in a conscious state, revolutionary people strongly oppose Confucian ideas.