Responsibility--of the British or of the Chinese--is central to the first opium war. In their respective writings, both John Fairbank and Karl Marx give their opinion as to who they think incited the war and the impact that specific factors had leading up to the conflict. In Fairbank’s piece, he argues that the first opium war was caused by China’s passivism towards the opioid epidemic and incited by their course of action to address it. Marx, on the other hand, holds the British accountable for the impact that was left by their illegal importation of opium. While their views may differ, these two authors give substance to the history of the opium war. The anti-opium movement is actually one that begins with no movement at all. Fairbank’s…show more content… In 1836, a plan is proposed which would “. . .continue to oppose smoking by scholars, officials, and soldiers, but to legalize the opium import under a tariff so as to discourage smuggling and at the same time to prevent the outflow of silver by letting opium only be purchased by bartering Chinese goods, not silver (Fairbank, 455).” It was thought that everyone would rally behind the idea of legalization; in fact, even the authorities at Canton and foreign traders gave their support (Fairbank, 455). But the Chinese government rejected this proposal and instead chose to use the death penalty in order to carry out punishment for those who participated in the growing, using, or selling of opium--domestic or foreign (Fairbank 456). While this was effective in addressing smuggling at Canton, it only worsened the problem elsewhere and furthered the tension between the Chinese and British.
The tension between the Chinese and British bursts after a dunk Englishman kills a Chinese man and the British flee to Macao, which then leaves the war to begin shortly after (Fairbank, 457). The Chinese and British wanted different things. China wanted to completely wipe out the opium trade and hold onto the tribute system, while the British wanted to expand their trade in China and bring an end to the restrictiveness of the tribute system. Britain was willing to do this by any means necessary--even if it meant poisoning another
