The Decline of Minds and Empires

We look at the Chinese Tang Dynasty - and Joe Biden's Mind - and look at those factors that determine the decline of our American Republic.  

Transcript

The Decline of Minds and Empires

The Failure of the Tang Empire and Joe Biden’s Brain

August 2024

All the world’s a stage,

And all the men and women merely players:

They have their exits and their entrances;

And one man in his time plays many parts,

His acts being seven ages. 

At first, the infant,

Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms.

Then the whining school-boy, with his satchel

And shining morning face, creeping like snail

Unwillingly to school. 

And then the lover,

Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad

Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. 

Then a soldier,

Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,

Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,

Seeking the bubble reputation

Even in the cannon’s mouth. 

And then the justice,

In fair round belly with good capon lined,

With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,

Full of wise saws and modern instances;

And so he plays his part. 

The sixth age shifts

Into the lean and slipper’d pantaloon,

With spectacles on the nose and a pouch on the side,

His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide

For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,

Turning again toward childish treble, pipes

And whistles in his sound. 

Last scene of all,

That ends this strange eventful history,

Is second childishness and mere oblivion,

Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

This bit of snarky depression brought to you from Shakespeare’s As You Like It (act 2, scene 7).  

Since we have often talked of Rome, I wanted to explore a different state.  That of Tang-era China, which may not be entirely reflective of Shakespeare’s ominous writings, certainly had its own stages of life. The Tang was an imperial dynasty of China that ruled from 618 to 907.  In comparison with Europe, once the Western Roman Empire fell in 476, nothing comparable replaced it, including the 800s Frankish Holy Roman Empire.  Yet the Tang represented a resurrection of a united China, one that was to be repeated by several imperial dynasties until 1911.  One of the reasons that the Chinese population grew so big was through superior agricultural and technical prowess.  China enjoyed far more advancements than Europe up to the 1500s.  Another part was through the Han, the Jin, the Mongol Yuan, the Ming, and the Qing; China had centuries of unity, while European states were in constant conflict.  

In Mark Edward Lewis’ China’s Cosmopolitan Empire, the Tang Dynasty, the author states, “Most Chinese regard the Tang Dynasty as the highpoint of imperial China, both politically and culturally.”  

Li Yuan, the founder of the Tang dynasty, is a great story all by himself. Although Li Yuan claimed to be of Chinese descent, his family was intermarried with nomadic tribes of North China. Unlike Liu Bang, the founder of the previous Han Dynasty, Li Yuan was not a peasant but rather an official of the short-lived Sui dynasty (581–618). He was expected to suppress peasant revolts and prevent incursions of Turkish nomads into North China. This role emanated from his Duke of Tang and Taiyuan governor titles, modern Shanxi’s capital. Thus, during the collapse of the Sui dynasty, he already had prestige and military experience and was a first cousin of Emperor Yang of the Sui. Li Yuan rose in rebellion in 617, along with his son and his equally militant daughter Princess Pingyang (d. 623), who raised and commanded her own troops, not the last prominent woman of the dynasty. In the winter of 617, Li Yuan occupied Chang’an, relegated Emperor Yang to the position of Taishang Huang, or retired emperor, and acted as regent to the puppet child-emperor, Yang You. On the news of Emperor Yang’s rather convenient murder on June 18, 618, Li Yuan declared himself the emperor of a new dynasty, the Tang. 

According to historian Ma Yan in Chinese Emperors: From the Xia Dynasty to the Fall of the Qing, the author states, “Li Yuan continued similar policies from the Sui but discontinued the arbitrary taxes disliked by the civilians.  The few alterations stabilized the society and built a sound base for the dynasty.”  

As was the custom of Chinese rulers, Li Yuan took a new name upon becoming Emperor. As Gaozu of Tang, he ruled until 626.  The Tang capital, Chang’an (present-day Xi’an), was the world’s most populous city for much of the dynasty’s existence. Two censuses of the 7th and 8th centuries estimated the empire’s population at about 50 million, which grew to 80 million by the dynasty’s end. This contrasts with all of Europe, whose population was around 30 million.  These are estimates, of course. It was not like the Saxon Kingdoms of England or the Carolingians were taking detailed census.  If there were cities that rivaled Tang-era China, they would have been found in places like Constantinople, Bagdad, or Damascus.  

From its numerous subjects, the dynasty raised professional and conscripted armies of hundreds of thousands of troops to contend with nomadic powers for control of Inner Asia and the lucrative trade routes along the Silk Road. Far-flung kingdoms and states paid tribute to the Tang court, while the Tang also indirectly controlled several regions through a protectorate system. In addition to its political hegemony, the Tang exerted a powerful cultural influence over neighboring East Asian nations such as Japan and Korea. Chinese culture flourished and further matured during the Tang era. It is traditionally considered the greatest age for Chinese poetry. 

Unlike the Han or subsequent Ming, the Tang Dynasty expanded their holdings deep into central Asia along the Silk Roads.” The Empire reached its greatest size prior to the Qing dynasty,” adds Lewis.  In one campaign, the Eastern Turkic Khaganate was destroyed after the capture of its ruler, Illig Qaghan, by the famed Tang military officer Li Jing (571–649), who later became a Chancellor of the Empire.

And here is a fascinating dynastic Tang interlude in which the only recognized Empress in Chinese history took power. Although she entered Emperor Gaozong’s court (the third Tang Emperor) as a lowly consort, Wu Zetian rose to the highest seat of power in 690, establishing herself as the short-lived Empress Wu Zhou. Empress Wu’s rise to power was achieved through cruel and calculating tactics: a popular conspiracy theory stated that she killed her own baby girl and blamed it on Gaozong’s empress so that the empress would be demoted. Emperor Gaozong suffered a stroke in 655, and Wu began to make many court decisions for him, discussing state affairs with his councilors, who took orders from her while she sat behind a screen. When Wu’s eldest son, the crown prince, began to assert his authority and advocate policies opposed by Wu, he suddenly died in 675. Many suspected Empress Wu poisoned him. Although the next heir apparent kept a lower profile, in 680, Wu accused him of plotting a rebellion. He was then banished and later obliged to commit suicide.

In 683, Emperor Gaozong died. He was succeeded by Emperor Zhongzong, his eldest surviving son by Wu. Zhongzong tried to appoint his wife’s father as chancellor: after only six weeks on the throne, he was deposed by Empress Wu in favor of his younger brother, Emperor Ruizong. This provoked a group of Tang princes to rebel in 684. Wu’s armies suppressed them within two months. She proclaimed the Tianshou era of Wu Zhou on October 16, 690, and three days later demoted Emperor Ruizong to crown prince. He was also forced to give up his father’s surname, Li, in favor of Empress Wu.[39] She then ruled as China’s only empress regnant.

A palace coup on February 20, 705, forced Empress Wu to yield her position on February 22. The next day, her son Zhongzong was restored to power; the Tang was formally restored on March 3. She died soon after.  Ma Yan adds, “Although she implemented many liberal policies, she ruled with an iron fist and was not well-liked.”  I love this story, and it supports my belief that truth is greater than fiction.   

Here is the issue. Much of the history we do have was written by Buddhist monks.  Lewis notes, “We have little reliable or useful documentation about her activities, apart from a few inscriptions and a handful of Buddhist texts.  This deficiency stems from the fact that Wu was a woman.  All the records of the previous period were composed and edited by men who were not only her political enemies but who regarded her career as a perversion of nature.” Did Wu truly murder her children for power, utilize poisons, and even engage in necromancy? I am of two minds.  First, it is highly suspicious that these tales reflect the claims used against powerful women throughout history, bridging centuries, geography, and cultures.  Of course, a woman this powerful must have committed evil acts.  Yet, on the other hand, though I do not believe all the tales, we know that Wu did rule the empire, either directly or indirectly, and given the cutthroat nature of Chinese imperial politics – among the men – what would it take, how far would a woman have to go, to beat all of these men at their game.  Either way, Wu is an extraordinary historical figure.  

After Wu, during the 44-year reign of Emperor Xuanzong, the Tang dynasty reached its height, a golden age with low economic inflation and a toned-down lifestyle for the imperial court.  Seen as a progressive and benevolent ruler, Xuanzong even abolished the death penalty in the year 747. 

I noted the violence of Chinese politics, and after the reign of Xuanzong came a rebellion so horrific that the Tang never fully recovered.  The An Lushan rebellion was an eight-year civil war (from 755 to 763 AD) that started as a commandery rebellion, attempting to overthrow and replace the imperial government with the rogue Yan dynasty. After the emperor fled to Sichuan, the rebels captured the imperial capital, Chang’an, but eventually succumbed to internal divisions and counter-attacks by the Tang and their allies. The rebellion spanned the reigns of three Tang emperors (Emperor Xuanzong, Suzong, and Daizong). Many who were alive during this period looked back to the earlier part of the dynasty, a golden age.  

The rebellion sapped much of the energy of the dynasty, much as the later Taiping Rebellion would permanently cripple the Qing Dynasty in the 1800s.  The rebellion accelerated a major geographic shift in the center of China. Lewis writes, “One of the greatest changes during the Tang Dynasty was the spatial redefinition of the Chinese Empire. The once dominant basin along the Yellow River ceded supremacy to provinces further south.”

Another Tang legacy, at least since 710, was the gradual rise of regional military governors, the jiedushi, who slowly came to challenge the central government’s power. After the An Lushan Rebellion, the autonomous power and authority accumulated by the jiedushi in Hebei went beyond the central government’s control. After a series of rebellions between 781 and 784 in today’s Hebei, Shandong, Hubei, and Henan provinces, the government had to acknowledge the jiedushi’s hereditary rule without accreditation officially. 

With the central government collapsing in authority over the various regions of the empire, it was recorded in 845 that bandits and river pirates in parties of 100 or more began plundering settlements along the Yangtze River with little resistance. In 858, massive floods along the Grand Canal inundated vast tracts of land and terrain of the North China Plain, which drowned tens of thousands of people in the process. The Chinese belief in the Mandate of Heaven granted to the ailing Tang was also challenged when natural calamities occurred, forcing many to believe that the Tang had lost their right to rule

In addition to natural calamities and kiddushin amassing autonomous control, the Huang Chao Rebellion (874–884) resulted in the sacking of Chang’an and Luoyang and took an entire decade to suppress.  It was the Huang Chao rebellion by the native Han rebel Huang Chao that permanently destroyed the power of the Tang dynasty since Huang Chao not only devastated the north but marched into southern China (which An Lushan failed to do due to the Battle of Suiyang). Huang Chao’s army in south China committed the Guangzhou massacre against foreign Arab and Persian Muslim, Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian merchants in 878–879 at the seaport and trading port of Guangzhou, and captured both Tang dynasty capitals, Luoyang and Chang’an. A medieval Chinese source claimed that Huang Chao killed 8 million people. The Tang never recovered from this rebellion, weakening it for future military powers to replace.  Eventually, the Tang, arguably the most powerful state on Earth during the 600s and 700s, with only the Islamic Empire to dispute that title, faded out of history.  In his China, Empire, and Civilization notes, Edward L Shaughnessy notes, ‘When the dynast fell, its society and institutions disappeared as well.  

No state, regardless of how powerful, rules in perpetuity.  I know, scintillating incisiveness! And the same is true of humans.  

Questions for AD: 

Weren’t you a bi-athlete

Used to Be

Weren’t you a black diamond skier

Used to Be

Aren’t you Andy Tippet?

Used to be 

It is not just my physical abilities that have deserted me.  I discovered dinosaurs and paleontology around the age of eight and could dazzle adults with recall of eras (the Mesozoic, though I could discuss the Protozoic, Paleozoic, and Cenozoic).  When I was 13, I found my first history book (The Battle of Iwo Jima) at 50, and my brain was similar to a computer’s hard drive.  All the information went in, the recall was a matter of seconds, and my accuracy was near unerring.  

In the few years since, not so much. My mental hard drive is complete, so I must recuse data to make room for more. Second-wave feminism was in the 1960s, and Guadalcanal was in 1942, right? I just did a podcast on the Revolutionary War period in the South, so Battle of Camden is in, and Alexander’s Issus is out. I now have to resort to (gasp) looking things up and checking my sources—the horror.  

And that instant recall?  I now do that thing where I try to summon a memory, only to fail, and then five minutes later, it comes to me.  This can be a problem in church or on Zoom calls in that I have to be careful to blurt out the now arisen factoid, “Yeah, Subaltern Studies began in India, still got it!”  only to have people either physically move away or suggest a proper medication.  

Aging does come with a number of benefits.  I could go back now and do almost every job I ever held from first at 22 to my recent leaving of business with far better efficiency and impact. As Bob Segar would say, I now know what to leave in and what to leave out.  It is no coincidence that the latter ten years of my career saw far greater success in promotions, positions, and financial gain than the previous twenty.  It was not that I was a lousy worker for those two decades, but rather, I spent some of my time on pet projects that ultimately did not add value to the organization.  

In fact, my now limited mind means I have to intentionally focus on those priority items (aligning with that of the C-Suite) that I may have yet to do in my early 30s.  In many ways, my 50s are peak time right now.  I still have an enviable memory, coupled with knowing what to do and what not.  Yet, I am aware of two things.  The first is that my mental decline is not reversible and that if I continue along this trajectory, I will be far more impaired by the time I reach my 70s.  This does not mean I cannot be productive and a contributor to the historical narrative; it just means that to remain impactful, I will have to conduct major revisions to how I conduct my business.  

This is a somewhat brilliant insight.  Instead, the question is, does a state know it is in decline now? The United States twilight has been called many times. In the 1920s, many liberals, including future New Dealer Rex Tugwell, thought that the Soviet Union would gain preeminence over the world, dooming the old democratic/capitalist model.   The depression of the 1930s and the rise of fascism might have been the end of the US economy.  

In the 1970s, under the malaise of inflation coupled with high unemployment (stagflation),  I can still remember in the 1980s that we all better learn Japanese. And, of course, today, Mandarin. America will decline; we just do not wben. Despite me beginning my podcast with the dark Shakespeare, I am optimistic it is not today.  

And this brings me, in a bit of a circular journey, to the dropping of Joe Biden from the nomination as Democratic Party candidate.  Joe Biden knew of his decline.  His staff knew, and Jill and Hunter Biden definitely knew.  And arguably, most irritatingly, the media surely knew.  One of the frustrating things about politics today is the lack of repercussions.  I have oft noted that Gary Hart lost his shot at the presidency after an extramarital affair was revealed, but Bill Clinton and Donald Trump have not.  

Barack Obama said that we could keep our doctors.  That was wrong.  I think he knew it was wrong all along, which is a euphemism for he lied.  Yet Obama sailed into a second term and continues to be the most popular president in the Democratic Party since LBJ.  Trump routinely lies and is on his third nomination.  In 2012, Joe Biden told Mitt Romney that he would put black people “Back in chains, y’all,” and in 2020, he was awarded the presidency.  The standards in public decorum, personal morality, and simple veracity have been defined down to the mud pits.  And now we endure an alliance united by the fear and hatred of Trump, lied about the effect of age on Joe Biden’s brain.  

The only person under the illusion that declines do not come with age is either insane or suffering from Alzheimer’s, both of which would disqualify a president.  The story is that Biden chose not to run in 2016 because of the death of his son.  But after the death of his wife and young daughter in the 1970s, he chose to retain his Senate seat.  The more likely story is that Obama was more interested in backing Hillary Clinton than a Vice President with whom he personally had little regard.  

And even Biden’s presence was due entirely to Barack Obama’s selection of him as VP.  Biden had lost ignominiously in 1988 after he was caught in multiple lies.  He ran against Obama in 2008, garnering 3% of the vote in the Dem primary prior to dropping out.  Inevitable? Not really.  But here we are.