The Logic Of Early Modernization Reform

When confronted with the impact of the modernization in the early19th century, only a few post-modern countries including Prussia, Russia and Japan can conduct an self-advancing reforms to deal with it, and the strong national tradition is a common prerequisite for these reforms to be carried out. Although many significant differences exist in various aspects of their tradition and internal and external conditions, since the very same nature of modernity of external challenges, the basic goal of these reforms are similar. The traditional identity systems reform is one of them.Three early modernization reforms discussed in this article are the reform of Prussia in1807, Russia in1861and the reform of the Meiji Restoration in Japan in1868. The basic objective of these reforms is very clear, which is through the rapid modernization reforms to enhance national capabilities to respond to a strong external pressure. Therefore, promoting the market economy, industrialization and build a modern society has become an inevitable choice to achieve these objectives. Abolishing serfdom or rigid identity system then naturally become one the object of these reforms. These three reforms are directly related to the reform of the identity system. Their basic trends are equality and liberalization oriented modern identity system, but due to the constraints of various conditions, these specific reform measures in the design and actual implement were realized only with replacement from former inequalities between different groups and classes to new ones in the civil and political rights. Although these convert promote the economic development of these countries political and social progress in varying degrees, these reforms left a particular political institution and political-social structure. Afterwards these arrangements became serious obstacles of promoting equality and liberalization in the society and produce very serious consequences in the later history.Although there are significant differences between measures and the internal and external conditions of these three reforms, they generate these similar phenomenon, which including the very strong administration overwhelming social forces, minority ruling class monopoly political power, ordinary people’s civil rights could be partially achieved while political rights were strictly limited. After the early modernization reforms authoritarian monarchy were established in these countries. Their common flaws are constraining further liberalization and democratization trends of the society and tending to adopt foreign expansion strategy to suppress domestic crisis. In history, only after the failure of international war can these political systems and social structures be broken with foreign help. All in all, a strong authoritarian state tradition can advance preliminary modernization reforms at certain times, but the political system and social structure created by it will act as an obstacle to the further modernization.