New Shun 1730

[January 27. Shanghai. Light snow.]

I am glad that the Minister has convinced most of the fools in the company's Chinese trading house. At least we don't have to worry about offending the emperor and being expelled.

People who don't know this Eastern Empire don't understand what it means for a group of "barbarians" to bypass officials and monitoring troops and directly stop the emperor's carriage. This is not the China in the story that seems to be the size of a knight's manor - sadly, most of Europe's imagination of China is as big as a knight's manor, and the emperor often travels around his territory to understand the people's sentiments.

The Minister agreed with my views on the tea tax issue, but I did not discuss the Indian issue with the Minister.

He asked me about my views on the reconciliation between the Netherlands and China, and my answer was very straightforward: immediately putting aside hatred and resentment and choosing to cooperate with China is the most correct decision made by the Netherlands since the death of our common Highness William.

The Minister was worried that China would follow suit to dissolve the VOC, and worried that the same means would be used against our East India Company in the future.

I had to tell him two Chinese stories, one is called "carving a boat to find a sword" and the other is "waiting for a rabbit by a tree".

Perhaps someone in China will make such a mistake, but at least the duke will not make such a mistake.

I told him that the choice of the Netherlands is absolutely correct for the Netherlands, precisely because there is no dilemma faced by our East India Company - there will be no cotton cloth prohibition bill in the Netherlands.

The scattered guild power is not enough to shake the existence of those financiers, speculators, and traders in Amsterdam.

We are different.

I did not explain our differences directly, because the ambassador is also a noble with a title and has his own land.

I can't say it too clearly. The wool and woolen trade supports the land rent in England. And whoever dares to touch the land rent in England will be opposed by the nobles. The dilemma faced by our East India Company is actually that the workshop owners of industrial capital and the land nobles come together to suppress us, and it is difficult for us to win.

This may touch the sensitive dignity of the Minister - he always believed that he worked and was in politics for his country, for honor, for the glory of the nobility, for loyalty, and for feelings, and he was determined not to admit that they were fighting for land rent.

In fact, the tabloids and editorials quietly circulating on the streets of London have made it clear: the reason why the indirect tax reform led by the Walpole government encountered unprecedented opposition is that the management model of most of the land in the UK relies on agricultural workers.

The Prime Minister tried to please the land nobles, reduce agricultural taxes and increase indirect taxes. But in fact, he made a fatal mistake, that is, he did not have a deep understanding of the land management model in the UK.

He made the same mistake as we did in China's diplomacy and trade, self-righteous.

The increase in indirect taxes, alcohol and other consumption taxes means an increase in the cost of agricultural labor.

When a large amount of land adopts the agricultural labor system, raising indirect taxes and consumption taxes is equivalent to raising the cost of labor. This is the Chinese story of changing one's mind from morning to night.

Many people opposed Walpole only because Walpole's reform increased their labor costs and reduced land income. But they refused to admit it, and used all kinds of reasons - but they would not mention their interests being damaged - to oppose this policy.

This is no different from the Chinese literati, who never admitted that their opposition to reform was because the reform touched their interests, but used all kinds of excuses from saints and kings. Perhaps the only honest person was a literati minister in the Song Dynasty, but no one has admitted it since then.

The Minister is undoubtedly such a person, so it is better for me not to reveal all this.

But I still tried to make it clear the difference between Britain and the Netherlands, and why the Dashun Empire could not deal with us in the same way as it dealt with the VOC.

The Bloody Duke brought down the VOC, and the Dutch had no choice but to accept the olive branch offered by China.

And if the Bloody Duke brought down our BEIC, the choice of our parliament would be to completely cut off trade with China and India, and London would stage a fireworks display to celebrate this.

Our lovely nobles, whose rents are determined by the price of woolen cloth; those lazy, unprogressive textile factory owners who only know how to rely on tariff protection to protect their interests, are full of both houses.

After our people lose the support of the company, they will immediately introduce stricter import control laws and cut off all trade with the East.

For those rent nobles and textile practitioners, the only thing that the Eastern trade brings to them is a decline in rents and difficulties in selling woolen cloth.

Each of them knows that we can't sell anything except silver to China now. Not only China, in fact, we can't even sell anything to Japan.

The Bloody Duke can sell his ridiculous free trade theory all over Europe, but no one will pay attention to him except the Netherlands. Even his closest European ally France... Perhaps, it shouldn't be even, but especially! Especially his closest European ally France.

The Bloody Duke didn't go into us about the opium issue, but threatened us, partly because he was unwilling to give up the British and North American markets. I don't know why, but he had a special hatred for opium, as can be seen from the fact that he arbitrarily sentenced more than 300 people to death.

The Minister could not understand all this easily because he had not read too many pamphlets on trade and business issues that were popular in China in recent years. I read a lot of them in Songjiang Prefecture, and I have to admit that they taught me to look at the world from another perspective.

These pamphlets are easy to convince others, at least the Minister was easily convinced by me and agreed with my ideas. That is, the company will not repeat the mistakes of the VOC, and the Chinese will not use the methods they used to deal with the VOC to deal with us.

In addition, our annual military expenditure of 7 million pounds and 21 million taels of silver during the previous war also prevented the Chinese from having any idea of ​​trying to solve the problem by force.

At this point, I can proudly say that although our country has only 5% of China's population, it has a higher military expenditure than China.

And we only have an army of 60,000 people. Their huge army and the need for inland border defense make them unable to maintain a large navy that is large enough to cross the ocean to defeat us.

We can collect 17% of land tax, while they are still worried about whether they can collect 3% to 5% of land tax.

I firmly believe in my judgment that the Dashun Empire has to integrate their internal affairs and make changes, and is unable to continue to expand. For such a huge empire, if it can receive a 17% land tax like our Britain, it will be more profitable than any trade.

Whether it is the Huaihe River governance project and immigration plan they are discussing now, or the high-profile deterrence against Japan and the restoration of the Ryukyu throne, they are trying to digest everything they have already obtained and try to reorganize their Celestial Empire system.

Relatively speaking, Annan, Korea, Myanmar, Siam... these countries should be more worried. I can foresee that after this canonization of Japan, their fleet will also go to these countries to let them observe closely how thick the "crown" of His Majesty the Great Emperor is.

In fact, this trend is already very obvious.

Perhaps it was the desire for military merit, or perhaps it was the envy of seeing the Bloody Duke being awarded a title for military merit, that many people have used the Ryukyu issue to cruelly reveal some facts that they had been pretending not to know before - whether it was Vietnam, Siam, or Myanmar, their letters were either polished by people who knew the truth, or like Japan before, they tried to establish a tribute system and recorded every Nagasaki trade ship as a tribute from the Tang people.

Once these things are revealed, it is impossible to pretend not to know. And the reason they were revealed is that the emerging military nobles are eager for military merit and to be awarded a title and become prime ministers.

The Bloody Duke opened the Pandora's box of East Asia and Southeast Asia.

Since the Duke of Xingguo could be awarded a duke for military merit, why can't we?

Countries are always destroyed by weakness, but the Han Dynasty alone was destroyed by strength. When they look back on all this many years later, they will be like the Bloody Duke himself said: the only lesson of history is that people will not learn any lessons from history.

[January 28. Shanghai. Overcast.]

I have basically finished writing the advice and analysis for the company's board of directors. But I am considering whether some words are suitable for public disclosure?

When the shareholders' meeting elects the board of directors, those who write tabloids, anonymous editorials, and satirical pamphlets will fly like flies.

Some words can be made public. Some words cannot be made public.

But these words must be known to the chairman.

But how can I be sure who will be elected as the chairman?

The policies of the chairman and the board of directors directly determine the success or failure of the company's transformation. And how much effort the company is willing to make for it.

And how much funds can be raised.

The South Sea Company was able to raise huge amounts of funds because our King George served as chairman.

Dashun's Western Trade Company was able to raise huge amounts of funds because the emperor's favorite served as director of the regulatory committee.

The failure of the Tory South Sea Company dragged us down.

If I don't speak out a lot of plans and ambitions, we won't have enough funds.

Because of the impact of the South Sea Bubble, the country is cautious about this kind of investment-this is also the reason why the company is now in a state of decline. Although the company's shareholders are profit-seeking, they tend to prefer more stable plans.

A more prudent solution means that we dare not easily break away from our dependence on trade profits with China.

This comfortable normality has made us lose our enterprising spirit.

On the contrary, the French will be more powerful in India... because they have nothing to lose.

And making a lot of plans and ambitions public will arouse the vigilance of our enemies.

In addition to ambitions and plans, we have to face another problem.

Tories, Whigs, His Royal Highness the King, His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, Little Patriots, Rural Ideal Constructionists, which side should we stand on?

The lobbying of the company and the parliamentary seats cultivated by the company should strive for a better future for the company. Instead of being like a headless fly, only caring about issues related to the company.

We need political allies, not just lobbying with money.

Because if the company successfully transforms, it means that the company's policy in India will face huge differences: focusing on corporate profits? Or focusing on what they call the overall interests of the country?

This is a variation of the cotton ban or allowance issue, except that it is no longer cotton. When companies no longer make money from the cotton trade, but from land taxes, new problems will inevitably arise. They will, like the cotton issue, force us to not maximize profits as a policy under the banner of the overall national interest.

For companies, any form of regulation must be avoided. Every infringement on human freedom is excused by "necessity", which is a slave program. We are only responsible for the profits of shareholders and have no obligation to consider the so-called necessity of the national interest.

Except that the state has granted us a monopoly and guarantees our monopoly. The state should not interfere in the policies of the company in any form.