Samurai: good or bad?

Browny's argument is not necesarily out-of-point argument.

For both the victor, the Meiji govenment, and newly born lefty point, Marxist, point of views, the Edo must be the darkest history in Japan. I read somewhere that Marx described Japan as the genuine feudalism without knowing ordinary people played a great role in the Edo culture.
8-10% ruling class in Japan was much higher than in Europe, China or wherever, but the samurai did not own any lands, but just had taxation right in the rice-oriented physiocratic system. And it is hard to find other ruling classes saying something like "Thrift is the best policy" (the present politicians and bureaucrats should be after the example of the shogunate).
A young historian found household account books of a methodical samurai who kept them for more than 30 years in the late Edo. It was only one family record, but his book tells me the samurai was not the exploiting devil.

Anyways, 16th and 17th century were greatly different periods.
200 years to go for current Japanese when we can say to our ancesters we create more peace than the Edo.
 
Were not the "feudal lords" samurai, too? This means that the shogun of Japan was a samurai, also.

By asking if samurai were good or bad, you are asking if the entire governing class of Japan was good or bad.
I think this is what I implied in my post... ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom