How to Get Through Historical Wasted Time

In 1368, Zhu Yuanzhang established the Ming Dynasty and instituted the Eight-Legged Essay; Dante’s “Divine Comedy” had been born 60 years earlier, and Boccaccio completed “The Decameron,” signaling the awakening of Western Europeans.

In 1380, the Hongwu Emperor of Ming Dynasty executed Hu Weiyong and abolished the chancellor’s power; over 170 years had passed since the Magna Carta was issued in England, establishing the principles of private property and inviolable personal freedom, leading to the rise of the nobility.

In 1587, during the 15th year of the Wanli Emperor’s reign, eunuchs gained favor and wielded significant power; Shakespeare began his career in acting and writing, producing “Romeo and Juliet” eight years later.

In 1643, the Shunzhi Emperor ascended the throne of the Qing Dynasty, with Dorgon serving as regent; Isaac Newton was born. “Had Newton not been born, we might still be in the dark,” Newton secluded himself in his hometown in 1666 to avoid the plague, during which he developed calculus, classical mechanics, optical theories, and astronomy, marking it as Newton’s Annus Mirabilis. Meanwhile, the first major literary inquisition of the Qing Dynasty, the “Ming History” case, had just concluded.

In 1689, during the 8th year of the Kangxi Emperor’s reign, Kangxi captured and executed the prominent minister, Aobai, personally handling state affairs; John Locke published “Two Treatises of Government,” criticizing the divine right of kings and hereditary monarchy, proposing a civil government. Meanwhile, the English Parliament passed the Bill of Rights, limiting royal power.

In 1776, Emperor Qianlong ordered a massive book purge in the imperial libraries; the same year, Adam Smith published “The Wealth of Nations,” and North America issued the “Declaration of Independence,” while the Watt steam engine went into production, marking a miraculous year for humanity.

In the 14th and 15th centuries, at a critical juncture in human history, the Ming Dynasty established by Zhu Yuanzhang pushed China into “history’s wasted time.” From then on, the East entered an era of significant divergence.

What does “history’s wasted time” mean? Is it a long cultural vacation or a cultural hell? How should we navigate through “history’s wasted time”?

This article uses “history’s wasted time” as a starting point to reflect on the challenges of national modernization.

01 History’s Wasted Time

Many historians believe that the collapse of the Soviet Union began with the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. Veteran media figure Hu Wenhui defined the period from 1979 to 1991 as the “history’s wasted time,” suggesting that Gorbachev only hastened the end of this wasted period.

Hu Wenhui also argues that “history’s wasted time” is not limited to Russian history but extends beyond contemporary history. For example,

The end of the Western Zhou Dynasty in 770 BC, following King Ping’s eastward move to Luoyang during the Zhou Dynasty’s wasted time;

After the Gao Pingling Incident in 249 AD, the period of Cao Wei’s wasted time;

After the Huang Chao Rebellion in 878 AD, the Tang Dynasty’s wasted time;

After the execution of Yuan Chonghuan in 1630, the Ming Dynasty’s wasted time;

After the Battle of Sekigahara in 1600, the Toyotomi regime’s wasted time.

The concept of “history’s wasted time” may seem like empiricism, but it lacks precision and is susceptible to hindsight bias.

“Tang fell to Huang Chao and was ruined in Guilin.” Chen Yinke borrowed from Song Qi’s “New Book of Tang · Southern Zhao Biography” and argued that the Huang Chao Rebellion destroyed the wealth division of the southeastern circuits and cut off the transportation of goods between the north and south. Li Tang thus lost the economic power of the south. If we trace back further, it was due to the rebellion provoked by Nanzhao—Pang Xun led 800 soldiers stationed in Xuzhou to launch a mutiny in Guilin in 868.

When did Zhu Ming’s wasted time begin?

Huang Runyu believed it was “the fifteenth year of Wanli”: “In 1587, it was the fifteenth year of Wanli, and Dinghai was next year. On the surface, it seemed that the four seas were peaceful and nothing was worth mentioning, but in fact, our Ming Empire had reached the end of its development.”

However, Hu Wenhui opposed Huang Runyu’s “grand view of history.” He believed that if the Ming Dynasty perished in the fifteenth year of Wanli, then Chinese history would have ended. The three hundred years of the Qing Dynasty were also a waste of time in history. Hu Wenhui defined the period from Chongzhen’s self-destruction of the Great Wall in 1630 to his suicide at the coal mountain as the Ming Dynasty’s wasted time for 14 years.

According to the historical experience methodology, there are many differences and disputes in the wasted time of history. It implies historical inevitability, which is a controversial viewpoint in itself. If we determine the inevitability of history from the results, we easily fall into a circular argument.

Usually, when we say “the game enters garbage time,” it at least contains two meanings: one is a definite countdown, and the other is the high probability of a failed outcome. If we were in that era, how would we know when this period of history would end and where the next phase of history would begin? More importantly, “garbage time” is relative to the high probability of failure for losers; for potential winners, it is a “return to square one.”

However, the garbage time of history is still an interesting and valuable rhetoric. Moreover, logically speaking—beyond historical empiricism—it remains a reliable concept. We can deduce garbage time in history separately from the logic of economics and political science.

As early as 1920, Mises published an article titled “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth,” in which he logically refuted Pareto’s proposed socialist planned economy and centralized resource allocation from an economic calculation perspective, even before the Soviet Union was established. In other words, Mises predicted through logical reasoning that such an economic system would inevitably fail before the Soviet Union was even founded. According to Mises’s logic, the Soviet Union entered garbage time from its establishment in 1922.

Therefore, from an economic logic perspective, when a period of history is violating economic laws, individuals are powerless to change it, and it is inevitably heading towards failure, we define it as “garbage time of history.”

The collapse of the Soviet Union was Mises’s deduction of the failure of the planned economy system and also the failure of the highly centralized national system of the Soviet Union. There are many failures of national states, and their common reason for failure is that they did not become democratic countries, that is, the internal power of national states did not become legalized and did not fall into the hands of the people.

“King in the law,” the national power from the rulers to the people, and bound by the constitution, this is the change of ancient and modern times, and it is also a key problem in the modernization of the country. This is the logic of political science.

Kong Feili constructed a logic of “political participation, political competition, and political control” based on the experience of the Glorious Revolution in Britain. He believed that the extent to which the expanding elite class participates in politics with economic progress relates to the process and risks of national modernization. After the Zhu family fell after the Ming Dynasty, the British aristocrats participated in politics highly and balanced the imperial power, leading to a peaceful reform route leading to modern civilization. During the same period, Louis XIV of France greatly strengthened imperial power, weakened aristocratic power, overly concentrated power, and finally the political structure lost balance. Louis XVI was sent to the guillotine.

Qian Mu counted the changes in the political power structure of each dynasty in his “The Gains and Losses of Political Power in Chinese History.” He believes that it is not accurate to define ancient Chinese dynasties as centralized power, and in fact, there are many changes between dynasties.

“If we say that traditional Chinese politics is autocratic, and that the government is ruled by an emperor, this is applicable to the Ming and Qing dynasties. If we discuss the Han, Tang, and Song dynasties, the organization of the central government, the balance of imperial power, and the division of authority are different in weight, but we cannot say that everything is ruled by the emperor alone.”

Qian Mu analyzed the relationship between imperial power and ministerial power from the perspectives of personnel and institutions, believing that Emperor Taizu of the Ming Dynasty abolished the power of the prime minister and centralized imperial power. Emperor Taizu executed Hu Weiyong and abolished the central book and the Ministry of the Central Book, leaving only the Ministry of the Central Book; the Ministry of the Central Book did not have a chief official and was responsible for the six departments, called the six ministries, with an official rank of two. The six departments, the nine ministers, and the military general, are all listed in one line, managed entirely by the emperor. The emperor established a private secretary’s office, appointed a cabinet bachelor, and helped manage everything. Some say that the bachelor actually acted as the prime minister, but there has been a fundamental change in the power structure, and the administrative power controlled by the bachelor is responsible for the imperial power.

Later, the Qing Dynasty of the Aixinjueluo clan basically followed this political system. In Kong Feili’s view, Wei Yuan raised the fundamental question: how should the country enrich its spirit and participate more widely in politics, thus making the authoritarian rule stronger? Feng Guifen went further, advocating political participation through official elections in “Public Expulsion”. He quoted Confucius’s words “lifting straight, correcting wrongs”, “having asked to rise to fill the vacancy, used by many of them.”

In the changing times, the power structure of political power determines the future of this country, the path of modernization of the country is peaceful reform, or violent twists and turns. During the Ming Dynasty, it was the era when modern civilization was opened to the world, and the power of ministers to eliminate barriers to modernization. Therefore, it is time for history to enter the garbage.

02 Cultural Market of Asuras in History

History may have its trash times, but individuals do not.

How should individuals spend historical trash times?

Hu Wenhui believes that the grandeur of history is one thing, while the insignificance of individuals is another. During historical trash times, individuals may indeed be powerless politically, but in life, in culture, they can still soar freely.

The saying goes, “When the world has virtue, it is visible; when it lacks virtue, it hides.” To hide can be understood as “lying flat,” a rejection and evasion of historical trash times. Hu Wenhui suggests, once encountering historical trash times, why not treat it as a long cultural vacation?

During the trash times of the Tang Dynasty, there were the disillusioned Pi Rixiu, the failed Lu Guimeng, Luo Yin, who retired to the distant western Shu, Han Wo who fled from Later Liang; each of them enjoyed their long vacations, radiating unique cultural brilliance.

In Hu Wenhui’s view, entering historical trash times also spawns another parallel universe of history: the darkest political world and the most splendid cultural world.

During the trash times of Ming and Qing, literati and beauties reveled in the Qinhuai River, Kong Shangren wrote of the joys and sorrows of Hou Fangyu and Li Xiangjun, creating “The Peach Blossom Fan,” Mao Xiang wrote of his poignant love with Dong Xiaowan, penning “Memories of the Shadow Plum Hermitage.” Wu Weiye composed “The Pipa Song,” “The Yuanhu Ballad,” and “The Qinhe Reminiscences.”

“Let the storm rage, for I have a magic boat to wait in.” Perhaps what Hu Wenhui wants to express is not generosity and romanticism, but helplessness and intoxicated emotions.

Historical trash times may not necessarily be long cultural vacations; they could very well be cultural markets of asuras.

In historical trash times, there are never bright stars, only monsters and demons. In the cultural market of asuras, Goebbels-like mouthpieces, beautiful people of the prosperous age, sycophants, echo chambers, a riot of demons, frenzied ignorants, freeloaders, the silent majority, and a group of accomplices pretending to be harmless like Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil,” paint a picture of “those horses don’t know they are donkeys, those birds don’t know they are chickens” mirage. Pu Songling called it “Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio.”

Underneath the great tree, no grass grows; with centralized royal power, ten thousand horses are silenced. From Mises to Kong Feili, Qian Mu, we discover that economic and political power concentration creates historical trash times, and centralization is the enemy of culture.

Whenever history enters a trash time, it is always the intellectuals and thinkers who fall first. Each cultural catastrophe is like a replay in history: from sharp criticisms disappearing, to silence being seen as suspicious, then even inadequate praise considered a crime, until finally only one voice remains: lies.

Moreover, the more centralized royal power becomes, the more frantic the control over ideology, the more extreme the crackdown on dissenters.

After the Qing Dynasty entered the Pass, they were suspicious of Han Chinese intellectuals, which led to the great chaos of 160-170 cases of censorship, more than the total number of censorship cases in other dynasties. Hu Qiguang pointed out in his “History of China’s Literary Disasters”: “(Qing Dynasty’s literary disasters) were longer in duration, denser in the literary net, more numerous in cases, broader in impact, more sinister in framing charges, and more ruthless in means, surpassing previous dynasties.”

The Ming History Case in the Shunzhi eighteen years was the first major case of Qing Dynasty’s literary disaster. At that time, Zhuang Tingzhou, a wealthy man from Huzhou, Zhejiang, bought the unfinished “Ming History” by Zhu Guozhen, the first assistant of the Ming Dynasty, and then hired literati to embellish and write down the events of the Chongzhen Dynasty and the Southern Ming Dynasty, compiled into “Ming History Collection Outline.” As a result, it was reported by Wu Zhirong, the county magistrate of Gui’an, resulting in a great disaster. Although Zhuang Tingzhou had died by then, his grave was dug up and his body was hanged on the north gate wall of Hangzhou City for three months as a public display. 221 people involved in the editing, printing, and sales, 70 people were convicted, and 18 people were executed.

Why is royal power so persistent in controlling ideology?

We can use Zhao Dingxin’s theory of political legitimacy to explain. Zhao Dingxin believes that political legitimacy comes from three aspects: ideological legitimacy, procedural legitimacy, and performance legitimacy, corresponding to value rationality, formal rationality, and instrumental rationality. According to modern state standards, the procedural legitimacy of past royal powers was insufficient, and kings had to resort to ideological legitimacy, reaching an unprecedented level of control over ideology.

Ancient Oriental secular thought matured excessively during the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, overwhelming natural religious thoughts. The ruling class advocated the divine right of kingship to maintain the legitimacy of their royal power, but attempted to use secular thoughts to maintain their royal power forever.

The so-called era of a hundred flowers blooming is nothing more than a time when ruling thoughts contend and elites vie to be imperial tutors. During the Qin Dynasty, Legalism dominated and burned books and buried Confucianists. During the Han Dynasty, Confucianism rose to power and dismissed the hundred schools. Confucius spoke of self-discipline and ritual, Mencius said the people are valuable and the king is light, Dong Zhongshu listed the three outlines and five constants, Zhu Xi compiled the great perfection, “poor righteousness, clear human ethics, speak of holy words, pass incidents,” and the Confucian master and the great Confucian have achieved.

However, secular thought cannot solve the problem of the final destination of the soul like religion, and let the people absolutely obey the royal power. Why did God give the king the power to the Zhao family? Why is my family serving as a slave for generations? “The king, the lord, and the relative” reveal the new clothes of the emperor wrapped in ideology, so the revolution has not stopped for two thousand years, and the dynasty has changed.

The ideological legitimacy of the ancient European kingship came from divine power, not secular thought. The Bible, Romans wrote, “If you have authority above, everyone should obey him, because there is no authority that is not from God. All those in authority are commanded by God. So resist the authority of the authority and resist the command of God.” The three major religions have a set of ideological legitimacy to persuade believers to obey the rule of kingship, that is, believers have eternal life. God said that man is born sinful, Jesus came down, was crucified, to wash away the sins of the world. Believers do not seek for eternal life in this life, “If you do not be reborn, you cannot enter the kingdom of God”, “I tell you truly, the believer has eternal life.”

The ideological legitimacy of the European monarchies came from divine power, and their royal power continued for thousands of years without a revolution, and the ideology held tightly.

Why did modern thought thrive in Europe?

The power of God and kingship conspired, but also mutual restraint, Europe has never appeared an absolute power. Moreover, the power of God and the power of the king, often you fight me, kill each other. This instead leaves some space for the people.

The black death that swept through most of Europe in the mid-14th century shattered the rule of the Middle Ages. People began to wake up, began to question God, followed by Martin Luther’s religious reform, mastering the interpretation of the “Bible.” Weber believes that Protestantism provides a psychological driving force and moral energy for capitalism. “Capitalism is more relaxed, but the situation is also becoming more obvious.”

When the power of God declined, the king tried to dominate. Starting at the end of the 15th century, the Austrian Habsburg dynasty and the French Valois dynasty fought a war to seize the numerous city-states of Italy, and many European dynasties such as England, Spain, and the Holy Roman Empire were involved, known as the Italian War. This war fought for more than 60 years, and the result was not only that the royal power did not increase, but it also activated the civilian forces.

Noah talks about this war in “The Rise of the Western World.” At that time, kings and city-states had to go to war, without sufficient financial and tax-hunting capabilities, they had to borrow money from local businessmen, which directly gave birth to modern finance-government bonds. Noah emphasized that those who owe money do not return to Spain, the tax can be returned to France, and it becomes a failed country, and the rise of commercial power becomes a historical indicator of the country.

The local noble Medici family participated in the Italian War. The Medici family helped the Holy Roman Empire to resist France and obtained its ruling position in Florence. In the next 200 years, this banking family became the ruler of Florence without a crown.

The Medici family vigorously supported the Renaissance of da Vinci, Raphael, Michelangelo and other creators, and without the Medici family, the Renaissance would certainly not be like this. The Renaissance advocates humanism, and the Enlightenment promotes human rights, so Europe has emerged from the dark ages.

In the 15th century, during the Ming Dynasty, East and West began to enter what Peng Mu-lan referred to as the era of major divergence.

During the Kangxi and Qianlong periods, the Aisin Gioro royal family compiled extensively “Comprehensive Examination of Imperial Documents”, “Grand Qing Code”, and “Complete Library in Four Sections”. Concurrently, Montesquieu published “The Spirit of Laws”, proposing the separation of powers; Rousseau published “The Social Contract”, advocating popular sovereignty; Kant published “Critique of Pure Reason”; and Diderot compiled the Encyclopedia. They addressed critical issues in the modernization of their countries.

Despite progressive thinkers such as Wang Yangming, Li Zhi, Wang Fuzhi, Huang Zongxi, and Gu Yanwu emerging during the historical garbage times, they cannot be compared to the vast enlightenment era.

That was another time.

03 Personal End-of-Life Care

Reviewing the millennia of human history gives the impression that after the 15th century, humanity’s mental shackles suddenly opened. In Kant’s words, it was “releasing mankind from the self-imposed immaturity.”

Maddison’s “Contours of the World Economy” reveals through calculations that Western Europe’s per capita GDP saw little growth in the first millennium AD, remaining below 450 international dollars; improvement only began from 1000 to 1500, and took off after the 18th century. China’s per capita GDP in the first millennium was slightly higher than Western Europe’s but stagnated for a millennium. Even in the second millennium before 900 years ago, this was the case, with a recent rise in the last century.

According to the grand view of history, humanity has spent millennia in “garbage times,” with no increase in productivity or asset appreciation, enduring a long winter akin to Earth’s ancient glacial period. Every individual’s efforts, every generation’s efforts, seem to have been “in vain,” with conditions unchanged for millennia, sometimes even worse, falling into what is called the Malthusian trap.

In the Malthusian trap, the harder people work, the deeper they sink. Due to unresolved critical issues, technological levels remained low, with minimal increments. The harder people worked, the more children were born, exacerbating food shortages, ultimately leading to famine and plague. To escape famine and plague, migration, pioneering, looting, and warfare ensued. The four pale horses of the Apocalypse in the Book of Revelation—plague, war, famine, and death—entered the world, plundering life.

In times of historical garbage, efforts only accelerate the end due to the wrong direction.

Qian Mu, in his “Successes and Failures in Political History of China,” discussed why the descendants of the Zhu family of the Ming Dynasty did not attend court. He said that after the founder abolished the chancellor, all administrative power, affairs, and pressures fell on the emperor. The descendants of the Zhu family grew up secluded in the palace, lacking the extraordinary energy of the founder to manage such a vast court, so they had to let secretaries and grand secretaries handle it. Not attending court for one day, not asking about government affairs for three days, naturally unable to keep up, nor willing to keep up, eventually leading to successive generations not attending court.

By the time Chongzhen took over, the country was in ruins, people’s livelihoods were devastated, and the borders were in crisis. However, Chongzhen was unlike his ancestors from the Zhu family, he was diligent in political affairs, working day and night in hopes of revitalizing the empire. Even two days before his suicide, he was still attending court. However, Chongzhen’s diligence ironically accelerated the demise of the Ming Dynasty. He cruelly executed the General Yuan Chonghuan who defended the Liaodong frontier, which resulted in self-sabotage and internal and external turmoil.

Speaking of diligence in governance, no dynasty compares to the Qing Dynasty’s Aisin Gioro rulers. Each emperor was diligent in court affairs and adept in both civil and military matters. However, the greatest fear was an ambitious emperor. An emperor launching expeditions would inevitably levy heavy taxes and loot; decisive military actions would inevitably lead to rivers of blood; unbridled power would naturally silence all dissent.

With the emperor’s lavish spending, ministers, bureaucrats, landlords, farmers, merchants, and slaves were all drawn into the vortex. All efforts only intensified mutual slaughter, leading to refugees fleeing, adults killing infants, and the elderly seeking refuge in forests. The only valuable words were funeral dirges for the departed spirits.

When Chongzhen committed suicide on Coal Hill, only the eunuch Wang Cheng’en accompanied him. Before his death, he wrote on his clothes: “I, in my cold virtue and humble demeanor, bear heavenly blame, but all these ministers have misguided me. Unable to face my ancestors in death, I remove my crown and let my hair cover my face. Let the rebels divide, without harming a single person among the people.” Wang Cheng’en, in Chongzhen’s final moments, provided emotional comfort. The excuses on his clothes seemed more like last words to himself.

The evolution of human history is dramatic and discontinuous. After the 15th century, the dark clouds over humanity suddenly dissipated, as if the terrifying millennium-long night had never occurred. Even the lowest classes, with effort, could greatly improve their situation.

Thomas Mann described these exciting changes in Europe in his memoir “The World of Yesterday”: “Cities like Vienna, Milan, Paris, London, Amsterdam – every visit left me surprised and delighted. Streets were widening, becoming more beautiful; public buildings were grander; shops were more luxurious and attractive. One could feel wealth growing and expanding in every type of food… Whoever dared and ventured forth could achieve success.”

In the journey toward national modernization, Europe led the way, followed by America and Asia. The United States followed the path of prosperity advocated by Felix Adler, while South Korea and many transitional countries followed Milton Friedman’s path, promoting political freedom through economic liberalization. However, few transitional countries succeeded because of political difficulties in crossing the Greenwich time. Once political hurdles are not overcome, economic regression is likely, and history enters a period of garbage time.

“Actually, opportunities often lie in the hands of one or two generations.”

In “The Rise of the Western World,” Jack Goldstone discussed how England and the Netherlands succeeded because the monarchs, whose taxing powers were restricted, had to encourage trade and markets, promoting the growth of property owners. With the increase in private wealth, property owners began to participate in political power, establishing a constitutional system to protect private wealth, ultimately completing national modernization.

In other words, one or two generations lucky enough to benefit from the rise of trade and markets were key figures in national modernization. They had property, knowledge, influence, and some even became officials, legislators, or lawyers. Most importantly, they were the economic force on which the monarchy depended for survival, the only force capable of competing with royal power and peacefully promoting the country’s modernization. In fact, these one or two generations of social elites were the backbone of political participation that Confucius Fei Li was eager for.

In 1979, South Korean ruler Park Chung-hee was assassinated by his subordinates. The 40s and 50s rose in the “Han River Miracle” and began to challenge the military government. The military government brutally suppressed them. These two generations fought bravely and finally crossed the Greenwich time with the help of the 1988 Seoul Olympics. If these one or two generations had missed their opportunities and failed, the political structure of South Korea would have collapsed into a power law shape, with sharp contradictions and endless revolutions.

Therefore, the Han River Miracle, that is, the Han River window period.

“For this country, once missed, it’s a hundred years.”

The dilemma of collective action is that when the degree of national market is very low, opportunistic motives are very strong, and the two generations of the “Han River Miracle” may not want to act as drivers. Olson pointed out in “The Logic of Collective Action” that the more people participate in collective action, the more free riders there are. They are like those described in Mao Buyi’s “Dispelling Worries”: “Acting self-righteously, pretending, dancing, and tiring.”

Wang Jisi said, “In uncertain times, be an ‘ordinary good person’.” Well, this is a bottom line and also a good saying. “Life is short, why remember it so much? A toast to freedom, a toast to death.” Getting drunk creates the greatest emotional value, leaving hurriedly after dawn, “the sober-minded person is the most absurd.”

Hu Wenhui expressed his feelings about the garbage time of history in his article, using the inscription given by his friend and Southern Song Dynasty Zhang Yuangan’s “Rui Zhe Gu · Peng Deqi shows new sentence second rhyme”:

“The white-clad dog turns into floating clouds,

A thousand years of fame gathers dust.

It’s good to write sad songs and drink wine,

Let’s not forget to appreciate the remaining spring.

The scenery is all like the Central Plains’ days,

The stench must be we, the people of our generation.

After the rain, flying flowers know the bottom line,

Drunk, winning the freedom body.

Isn’t this Zhang Yuangan’s last care for the old man of the Northern Song Dynasty?”