Although we cannot know why no equivalent to the Meiji Restoration ever arose in China, there are some factors that we can say might have been responsible for this difference.
First, the Japanese were much more aware that they might need to change. China had always been the “Middle Kingdom” and had always felt that it was superior. Japan had a long history of changing in response to outside influences. This could have made Japan much more likely to embrace some sort of radical change.
Second, Japan is much smaller than China. What this meant is that essentially all Japanese could be aware of the seriousness of the Western threat. People in inland China could have easily discounted the idea that Westerners were a real threat to China. Japanese people essentially all lived near coasts and all knew that they were under threat.
Finally, there was serious tension in Japan...
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
between different ideas of how government should be conducted. There were those who wanted imperial government and those who wanted a shogunate. In China, there was only one way of governing. There had been many dynasties, of course, but there had only been one system of government. This meant that there were no Chinese who were hoping to change the system of government and there was no figure (like the Japanese emperor) who could give legitimacy to an entire new system of government.
For these reasons, a Meiji Restoration was less likely in China than in Japan.
Why was there no equivalent to Japan's Meiji Restoration in China?
I would argue that there are at least two reasons for this.
First, China was a much less feudal and decentralized system that Japan. This meant that there were not any regional lords who had the same kind of clout and legitimacy that the lords of places like Satsuma and Choshu did. This meant that there was less possibility of an uprising led by such lords.
Second, China did not have a figure with the kind of legitimacy that the Japanese emperor had. In Japan, the shoguns ruled, but everyone respected the emperor as well so there was an obvious figure around whom rebels could rally. In China, there was no such figure.
Japan, then, had a system that made a controlled revolution much more possible while China had a system that was much more monolithic and less easily changed.