Assuming we define progressivism as nations and states taking steps to improve the overall wellbeing of their citizens, then

it can be argued that by ridding themselves of their Mongolian oppressors, the Chinese took an enormously progressive forward stride. The remarkably abrupt abandonment of their shipbuilding and exploration programs less than a century after the last of the Zhenghe expeditions were certainly, by our definition of the term, a loss of progression. Likewise, the invention of black powder, drawn from technologies imported by Buddhist monks from India, has contributed to a great deal of human suffering and as such is decidedly nonprogressive at least in terms of overall widespread effect. However, had the Chinese not gained the technological advantage conveyed by black powder and firearms, it is likely that they would have remained under the yoke of the Mongols for a greater period of time. The Mongols were, in a vacuum, neither a progressive nor non-progressive people; the very definition of nomadic peoples tends to involve a strong live and let live approach to both the land and their neighbors. For example, consider the Hadza people in Africa, one of the few surviving hunter-gatherer nomadic peoples that have survived without war, fighting, or the destruction of their lands for over 10,000 years. The Mongols, however, did not live in vacuum; and their approach to their neighbors was very much one of war and conquest. Coupled with their seeming disinterest in recognizing the inherent value of knowledge beyond their immediate sphere of interest, their invasions and occupations of the land were often accompanied by a significant reverse of progress, such as the destruction of libraries and the shrinking of agricultural works and capacity. Thus I argue that by defeating the Mongols and freeing their own people of their control the Chinese more than achieved a level of progression that tipped the balance in their favor despite their abandonment of exploration and global trade, and their perfecting of black powder. Can this same yardstick be applied to the present-day United States? Are we truly a progressive civilization, inasmuch as are the non-progressive actions of invading other countries Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. outweighed by the supposedly resulting benefits realized by ourselves? Put another way, when speaking of nations, can two wrongs make a right?