There are no such thing as "Han" people. It is a name of a dynasty, for the purpose of unify the nation for easier control. Haha, Manchou influences are shown in modern Chinese writing and dialect, Mandarin!!! It is a Northern tongue..let's faced it, it is still politics matter that never was resolved.
@UnitedPebbles yes, Han is a dynasty. After the nomadic invasion of AD 4th century, indigneous populance was forced to migrant to the south, keeping in mind of restoring their lost territory, hence a unified identity was formed, named after the previous greatest dynasty: Han. Mandarin is based on northern Chinese dialect, although not totally northern dialect.
Any one confused about this video should learn some hisorty!!! It shows the Bronze Age!!! Qin Dynasty in 250 BC!!! Qing Dynasty was after 1600 AD!!! almost 2000 Years!!!!
It is irrelevant whether Manchu thinks they're Chinese or not, the rest of the world classified them as such. Also, this is the same as people in the US who distinguish themselves as Irish or Italian descent and still proud of that fact but they're still "Americans". The same can be with Manchus, Hans or whatever. "Qing isn't China"..no not back then but now they've been assimilated. They should've thought about the recourse before invading Ming China or let Empress Dowager screw things up.
@need2speed75 this isn't an argument over national citizenship. it's a clarification of ethnic descent. Manchus are not Chinese in the same way a Welshman isn't English. a Welshman is Celtic, whereas an Anglo-Saxon is Germanic. Manchus are a Tungusic people. Hans are Sinitic and are the ethno-linguistic descendants of the people who created the Chinese Civilization. Terms become confusing when you use them in the duo context of citizenship and ethnicity.
@theboyuan0jcfan That's fine, but lots of folks get confused over what is "Chinese." People may seem to think that the Chinese civilization has always been these 56 different ethnic groups and don't understand what the Hans have to do with it all. Even the national identity sense has issues. There are more than a few ethnic minorities who do not want to be considered as "Chinese" in that sense. Tibetans and Uyghurs are the most vocal of course.
@theboyuan0jcfan I don't think that matters. You cannot coerce a sense of nationalism where there is in fact disparity in reality. And you should not. Tibetans are not ethnic Chinese. Uyghurs are not ethnic Chinese. They shouldn't have to be labeled as Chinese if they do not want to be.
@F0reseer again, it was the Manchu ruling class during the Qing Dynasty that came up with the concept of Zhonghua Minzu(supra-cluster Chinese race), consisting of all long-settled ethnic groups in the Qing empire. We just accepted and inherited this concept and expand upon to define all 56 ethnic groups of modern China as Zhonghua Minzu(not the Western Qin=China concept since Roman empire).
@theboyuan0jcfan And a Uighur can be a Turk and a Chinese ethnic at the same time. We do have cultural similarities in terms of fashion. Heyhey! You know? We don't care how others define their ethnicity like the British. But we uphild our own definition and concept. Others should understand from our viewpoint instead of being ethno-centric. I know we cant coerce some ethnic groups to accept, but with time, interaction and education, things will work.
@theboyuan0jcfan why should they work? Uyghurs are fundamentally alien to the Chinese. Different culture, customs, religion, language, origin. They were simply conquered and after millennia, they have not integrated. We should just let them have their own land, or allow them to integrate like Americans truly do.
@F0reseer So what if they are conquered? No people in this world in history has not conquered nor been conquered. You say they are different from whom? Chinese? Well, if youare speaking in terms of the Western Roman times Qin=China, so Chinese are just Han concept, youare so what right. But according to our中华民族concept,中国人=56个民族。Ham is just but 1 out of 56 ethnic groups that are collectively called中华民族（Chinese from our perspective since Qing period）
@theboyuan0jcfan Maybe mainland Han Chinese are indoctrinated with this CCP hogwash. But I know virtually of no overseas Chinese or Hong Kong Chinese who think so. I should know, I am one. What matters is that not all of us accepts it. There are many ethnic Chinese who do not accept this 中国人=56个民族 farce.
@F0reseer Well, the sipra-custer Chinese race concept did not originate with CCP. It was innovated by the Manchu rulers during the Qing period. The Chinese whm you refered to unaccepting of this notion may not be nationalist. But I am a nationalist, therefore I accept this notion for our identity.
@theboyuan0jcfan Well I've already pointed out the short comings of a nationalistic perspective. Further more it is a political construct not based on reality. Only the Hans are Sinitic in China. Why create an illusion that suggests everyone else is too? That's your problem, you label everyone a "radical" if they want nothing to do with your outdated empty shell of a communist government. It's got absolutely nothing to do with being Chinese or not. China does not equal CCP.
@F0reseer I only label those who resort to violence, disrespecting diversity as radicals. The Zhonghua Minzu concept is not an outdated empty sheel. It is not a communist concept either, but one which originates from Manchu Qing Dynasty.
@theboyuan0jcfan Zhonghua Minzu is empty. Mongolians are an ethnic minority in China. According to the concept of Zhonghua Minzu, do we incorporate Genghis Khan as a "Chinese" legacy then? The CCP has been resorting to violence and disrespect of diversity for years. Need I remind you of Tiananmen Square?
@F0reseer again, i disagree with u. 64 incident is a socio-political issue hijacked by mobs, has nothing to do with respecting diversity, but has to do with upholding principles. Genghis Khan is a Chinese emperor: Emperor Yuan Taizu.
@F0reseer Customs are different? Well, we do share common values. Religion different? Well, we respect diversity and there are Muslims among other ethnic groups, icluding Han as well. Language? Well, India is more linguistic different from within. Origin? Well, we are all homo-sapiens originating from Africa. And I do see the trend that they are integrating. Otherwise, how do you explain for fashion that drews upon both Han and Uighur characteristics?
@theboyuan0jcfan how do YOU explain the VERY RECENT Uyghur vs. Han tensions? How do you explain the cry for Xinjiang independence? So what if they were conquered? So that we should give their land back. Hong Kong was conquered and ceded to the UK. They gave it back.
@F0reseer Well, 2 groups of people with common ethnic but different dialect group could end up fighting. Tensions could be due to various complex factors, be it social, economical or cultural. Xinjiang is part of China since Han, Tang and Qing period. There is no need to dispute that because according to any other way of reasoning, we could say Britain belongs to Italy or whatever. What I as a nationalist accepts is whatever works in our nation's interest.
@theboyuan0jcfan The problem with looking at things from the nationalistic view is that you ALWAYS marginalize those who's origin is from a different ethnic group. Because you have to incorporate state politics, only the collective matters. The anthropological perspective (cultural/linguistic/ethnic identity) is the only truly humanistic one that lends power and identity to each individual group.
@theboyuan0jcfan Cultural legacy is much more important than nationalistic pride. Because governments and regimes topple and give way to new rule. It is the people who carry on the traditions, the language, and the identity and culture they possess as a group. The government only exists to defend and protect people's ability to do so.
@theboyuan0jcfan I'm fine with nationalism being a part of culture, because both inform one another and evolve together. However, It is important to make categorical distinctions between ethnic entities and nation-state entities. It's ridiculous to deliberately make vague what is Chinese Civilization. Uyghurs, Manchus, Zhuangs, Hmongs, etc. DID NOT invent Sinitic writing or Sinitic languages. Hans did.
@F0reseer now, this is what is called being narrow and disrecpecting diversity. China/Chinese are words invented by the West while we call ourselves中国人. 中国started with the founding of ROC. Short for中华民国, also short for中华人民共和国. again, we just accept what the Manchus created because it works for our common interest, regardless of ethnicity.
@theboyuan0jcfan 中国 literally means the country in the center of the world. It does not make sense in English and western world would never accept this arrogance of Chinese. Nevertheless, Manchu was not Chinese in that time (16th-19th centuries). Chinese tries their best to deny it because they don't want to accept the fact that they were conquered THREE TIMES by smaller countries such as Mongol, Manchu and Japan.
@ngocquang19877 Chinese means Manchu, Han, Mongol etc. Manchu was Chinese because they invented the term CHINESE retard. Chinese dont deny... what the fuck? get your facts right you piece of shit be4 you watch CHINESE HISTORY videos. For fucks sake the ignorance....
@DragonOfQin Manchu was not Chinese people at the time. Han people even didn't have rights to marry Manchu women. The majority of Chinese people (Han people accounts for 99% population of Chinese of the time) were ruled by a foreign government in 260 years. 中国人是东亚病夫.
@ngocquang19877 91% of Chinese in China are HANS now. SO how were Hans 99% of Chinese population? Source please. Ruled by Manchu with great leaders such as KangXi and QianLong. PS: 1st Emperor of Qing was Manchu Minister OF MING! So now does Napolean's French Empire FRENCH when Napolean was ITALIAN? Please ans this question. Was Macedonia GREECE? Since Alexander was MACEDONIAN? Ans this as well. PS: Only Hans in 8 banners could intermingle others could not.
@DragonOfQin There was ONLY Napoleon who was Italian in the France's governors. Manchu ruled the entire Qing dynasty. Macedonia is Macedonia and Greece is Greece. Two countries are different.
@ngocquang19877 Alexander's Macedonia was Greece dumbass. Tell that to Greeks stupid shit! LOL! What are you a Jap? Just stay out of other people's history. You haven't answered by other question. How was Qing 99% Han? When under CCP there is only 91% Han?
@DragonOfQin Macedon was Hellenic but wasn't part of Greek Proper. I think ngocquang19877 was referring to its ancient beginnings as a separate entity. Alexander conquered the rest of Greece. But I suppose that is no different than say, Qin conquering the other 6 kingdoms. It's not really analogous to Manchurian conquering China.
@DragonOfQin Alexander did not conquer greece. It was Phillips. Alexander was a student of Plato so he was not Greek? Everything about him was Greek. So what the fuck are you talking about? Macedonia was Greece and Qing was China. Why would Qian Long in his letter to King George state that his ancestors practiced the system of the Mandate of Heaven which is a Chinese concept? Why? You wear dragons, you speak Mandarin, you write Mandarin, you call yourself descendant of dragon, you are chinese.
@DragonOfQin Philip II was king, but Alexander most certainly led conquests under his rule. Alexander was "Hellenic" but as far as "Greek" is concerned, Macedonians were part Phrygian and not pure Hellens. Macedonians were Hellenicized, I frikkin SAID THAT in my last post. They were considered "fringe" by the rest of the Greek States for a time, that's why I said they were not "Greek Proper."
@F0reseer How does the persecption others have toards their identity got anything to do with how we as the Chinese nation perceives ourselves? Our identity is only for us to decide!
@F0reseer So we should forsake our dignity just to meet the requirements of what is correct in terms of what the mainstream Westerners think? That's not respecting our viewpoint.
@theboyuan0jcfan Don't know how Westerners got into your argument. These aren't requirements. And what I said is self-evident. Anyone with a brain will draw the same conclusion. You don't have dignity now. If you're Manchu, claim you're Manchu, don't claim you're Chinese by race. Respect and be proud of your own line of descent. If you're mixed, THEN you can logically claim yourself as biracial.
@F0reseer The Greeks and the Chinese claim Macedonia and Qing as their own. Greeks say Alexander spoke greek, wrote greek, believed in Greek gods, etc. Chinese say QianLong, KangXi, etc. spoke Mandarin, wrote Mandarin, believed in the middle kingdom, etc. You see the parallels? You know the world accepts that Macedonia was greek and in the US we accept that QIng was China. Besides my mom has Manchu blood yet she calls herself Han. LOL!
@DragonOfQin Your mom's either mixed or confused. Qing was China. Because it conquered China. But Qing was not Chinese, they didn't even wear Chinese clothing. Macedonia is still contested today and is in fact its own country. do some research.
@F0reseer Qing conquered Han, not the Chinese. They wear not the Han costume, ok? What happened is just 1 block of Chinese conquering the other blocks of Chinese.
@theboyuan0jcfan Manchurians are not Chinese. They did not give rise to the Chinese civilization. If you are to talk about a cultural entity, you should stick to cultural roots. what happened was a foreign force conquering the Chinese, because at the time of the conquest, the Qing were indubitably Manchurian.
@F0reseer I am a Manchurian, though I'm Han. A Malaysian is not always Malay. Anyway, Chinese civilisation is a mixture of many ethnic cultures. Han can be the main branch, but not the only branch.
@theboyuan0jcfan Again, I'm not talking about nationality here but ethnicity. Chinese civilization was a mixture of many cultures. Many SINITIC cultures. But Mongols, Tibetans, Manchus, etc. were not Chinese. The Japanese are more sinicized than the Mongols for crying out loud.
@F0reseer Greeks dont care Chinese dont care. You speak mandarin, you write mandarin, you wear dragons, you claim to be descendant of the dragon under the Mandate of Heaven, you call yourself a Middle Kingdom celestial dweller and you fight for Middle Kingdom interest, YOU ARE CHINESE. KangXi, QianLong and Hong Taiji were the 3 great emperors who favored Hans. PS: Hong was actually a Ming advisor who framed Gen. Yuan ChongHuan to get executed. QianLong will redeem Gen. Yuan's reputation later.
@DragonOfQin Chinese do care and Greeks do care. There are many Greeks who object to the Republic of Macedonia's use of the name, and many Macedonians who hate it when they are equated with Greek people. If the Chinese didn't care Sun Yat-Sen wouldn't have led the xinhai revolution to overthrow the qing dynasty.
@F0reseer Sun Yat Sen was using Han supremacy as a TOOL. Hans didn't mind Manchus for 3 fucking centuries since Manchus produced 4 great emperors. Only til the 2 Opium Wars did the Qing lose favor and many Hans decided their time was up. Hans overthrew Qing not because they were Manchu but because Qing was bullied and embarassed by the Western powers.
@F0reseer No difference. They are the same people. Han was both Legalism and Confucianism. Qin was Legalism. If Qin was not overthrown there wouldn't be Hans but Qin Chinese today. Han Dynasty just followed through Qin system. Same language, weights, measurements, Legalism, etc under Han banner. So what is your point? Han lasted 4 centuries while Qin 15 years. Thus Chinese identity forged under Han.
@DragonOfQin "No difference. They are the same people"
Er...that's what I was trying to say. The difference is that there is no difference, and I called you to "see" it....get it now? It's was an ironical statement.
@DragonOfQin Qing was Tungusic. The term "Chinese" refers to a Sino-Tibetan people. I'm using the term in its ethnic sense. Qian Long's frikkin name was: Aisin-Gioro hala i Hung Li. 愛新覺羅弘曆. Does Aisin-Gioro sound like a Chinese surname to you? His "ancestors" adopted Chinese culture, but he is no more Chinese than an Englishman whose ancestors adopted French/Norman culture is Latin.
@F0reseer Aisin-Gioro is Manchu and not Han, but Han and Manchu are both Chinese, or should I stop using this Latin-Anglo word and instead use Zhonghua this Chinese word so that you can stop misunderstanding what I am saying? Murong is one of the surnames in the Hundred Famiy Suranme book during the Song period, but Murong is not Han, it is Syanbi, which is one of the building blocks of the Chinese nation, whose influence is small but not without significance.
@theboyuan0jcfan Sorry. There is no such thing as Zhonghua. It's a stupid, inaccurate made-up term that signifies virtually nothing. Only Han is Chinese. Pure and simple. Hans started Chinese civilization, created Chinese culture, language, history, architecture. Manchus only copied. Are you thick?
@F0reseer It is nothing only if you take it in pure materialistic persecptive. But even anthropology is largely idealistic, who are you to deny me of my cup of nationalism?
@theboyuan0jcfan I'm denying your "cup of nationalism" because it is illogical. to claim a non-sinitic group as part of the Sinitic ethno-linguisitic-cultural entity is misleading and bad categorizing. Anthropology is scientific, not idealistic.
@F0reseer Social scientific is still idealistic because its basis is human being and not nature. I don't care what terms others put on us. Terms like Sinitic or whatever doesn't bother our perception that the supra cluster Chinese race is not just Han, but a mixture of 56 ethnics.
@theboyuan0jcfan Saying that the Chinese "race" includes 56 ethnicities is like saying the English "race" includes Punjabs. You're not talking about race here anymore but citizenship. Racially, only Hans are Chinese. Citizenship-wise, everyone living in China is Chinese. I thought I clarified that.
@F0reseer Qian Long was also called Qian Long does that sound like Manchu do it? Qian Long said his ancestors WERE CHINESE he didn't say his ancestors ADOPTED chinese culture. He clearly told George that WE HAD BEEN PRACTICING THE MANDATE OF HEAVEN FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. 1) Manchu didnt practice mandate of heaven for 1000s of years. So did Qian Long mean? He certainly wasn't a retard.
@DragonOfQin Qian Long is a title. Aisin-Gioro is a family name. I hope I don't need to point out the difference. his ancestors were from the Gioro clan of the Manchurian tribes of the north. Qian Long was a frakking politician. They say the darnest things to be politically correct. I also hope I don't need to explain what a politician is to you. The koreans practiced Confucianism, so did Japan. Korea was even a protectorate of Imperial China at one point. Does that make them Chinese as well?
@F0reseer Only if historical circumstances permit, then Koreans of Korea would be part of China. It is no easy course of historical development. Yet many multi-ethnic nations have the same bloody history before unification. And they would scorn you for telling that they are wrong. Think the modern French and Germans and you'll know. Yes, Qianlong is a politician, but the policies he used worked for our interest, liked by me as a nationalist, so I do not have a reason to say he's wrong.
@theboyuan0jcfan You speak Mandarin, you wear dragons, you write Mandarin, you claim to be descendant of the dragon under the Mandate of heaven, call yourself Middle Kingdom dwellers and fight for Middle Kingdom interest you are Chinese. All these categories fit with the Qing but not with Korea. Korea was a vassal state. QianLong even cleared Gen. Yuan ChongHuan's name as a traitor in MING DYNASTY. This shows you how much Qian was assimilated in2 Han culture and interests.
@DragonOfQin I'm speaking about it in an ethnic sense. The Qing ruling family as a whole was not a Chinese ethnic entity. Manchurians are not Chinese, just like Jews are not Germans and Parminder Nagra isn't Anglo-Saxon.
@F0reseer How many times must I repeat myself? Manchus did not see themselves as Han, but they see themselves as Chinese(Zhonghua Minzu), a term they invented and we accepted. Stop equating Chinese as just Han, ok?
@theboyuan0jcfan I do not consider any policies under Qing rule to be "toward our interest," as long as the bloody Queue Order was still enforced. Both Korea and Japan are WAY more Sinicized than Mongols, Turks, Tibetans, Hmong, or Dai. But they are completely distinct peoples who do not share any ancestry with the Yellow River cultures that started Chinese civilization.
@F0reseer They started the Han civilisation, not the Chinese civilisation, or maybe the main building block of the Chinese civilisation. I do not subscribe to all that Han chauvinistic argument of how much cultural influence Hans have had on other people outside China vs inside of China either. Qing's legacy has its good and bad parts. But I'm saying that they worked in forging our national identity as Zhonghua Minzu.
@F0reseer You speak Mandarin, you wear dragons, you write Mandarin, you claim to be descendant of the dragon under the Mandate of heaven, call yourself Middle Kingdom dwellers and fight for Middle Kingdom interest you are Chinese. All these categories fit with the Qing but not with Korea. Korea was a vassal state. QianLong even cleared Gen. Yuan ChongHuan's name as a traitor in MING DYNASTY. This shows you how much Qian was assimilated in2 Han culture and interests.
@ngocquang19877 PS: MIDDLE KINGDOM men are sick man of Asia. Thats what it says. So you contradict yourself. By saying that you mean, Uyghurs, Manchus, Mongols, Hans, etc. Are all sick men of Asia becuz all these groups live in the Middle Kingdom.
@ngocquang19877 Han, not the Chinese, was conquered by Mongol and Manchu. Because you are like saying one block of Chinese conquering other blocks. Japan? No, they failed in conquering us. They only occupied less than half of our nation. And an occupation is not the same as conquest. To conquer is not just about occupying land, but also about the hearts and minds of the people.
@theboyuan0jcfan Mongols ARE NOT CHINESE. They have their own frakking country for Chrissakes! It's called Mongolia. They have their own language, called Mongolian. WTF is wrong with you? If you know your history at all, under Mongol rule, the Hans were the lowest ranked race. Hans are Sinitic. Know what that term means? Sinitic? Mongols are Tungusic. I thought we've been over this.
@F0reseer Mongols are Chinese by the Manchu definition again. They are independent only due to historical circumstances in which Chiang Kai-shek making concession to the Soviet Union in exchange for Soviet support in ridding Manchuria of Japanese invaders. Mongols may treat Hans badly in the 13-14th century, but that does not prove they are not Chinese.
@theboyuan0jcfan Again, if you are going to include all assimilated cultures into the term Chinese, you might as well call the Mongolian language a "Chinese" language. Which is scientifically incorrect and misleading.
@F0reseer There is no Chinese language, unless you consider it to be the collective of all languages and dialects spoken by Chinese people of all ethnicity. What we call Mandarin is Hanyu(Han's language).
@F0reseer Sinic?Tungunsic? Well, they have no scientific grounds in terms of genes, so we can place them in intersecting subsets of two sets on the Venn Diagram.
@theboyuan0jcfan Actually they do have scientific grounds in terms of genes. There has been a few studies done in human haplogroup genotyping that shows all Han-descendants share closer genetic relations than all non-Han groups. Also, Sinitic and Tungusic have scientific grounds in anthropological terms.
@F0reseer Anthropological classification is sorting by idealistic means, while genetic sorting is through physical scientific means. I don't know who is still researching to make connections between genes and races, but the researches till present shows that genes have nothing to do with race.
@theboyuan0jcfan Race and genes are different things but they overlap significantly. Genetic sorting is meaningless without anthropological contexts when we're talking about an ethnic group. And genetic studies HAVE SHOWN that all Hans share similar genes when compared to every other nonHan group.
@ngocquang19877 Before anyone knows how big or what shape the world is or looks like, they would think that they are at the center of the world. Because why would their gods put them anywhere else but center? It is not being arrogance and not just the Chinese believes this. When it was just the Mesopotamia that was flooded by a tidal wave during an earthquake in the Persian Gulf 6000 years ago, people there thought the whole world was flooded by God(Noah's Ark legend).
@theboyuan0jcfan You're arguing semantics. Cantonese people often call themselves 唐人, especially the older generations. Chinese is simply a term that internationally works to describe us. Fact remains that most of the ancient dynasties in the region currently named as 中國 are all Chinese, of and belong to and created by the Sinitic peoples. It does not work for our common interest. We need to quit lying to ourselves.
@F0reseer Now whose narrow? I don't equate Han with Chinese. I am open to acceptng other ethnics into the Chinese nation. I don't believe in apartheid and racism. I repeat: Iam a Chinese nationalist, not a Han chauvinist!
@theboyuan0jcfan Being a :Chinese nationalist necessitates being a racist. Because you try to assimilate all non-Sinitic cultures into your own. i'm not a Han Chauvinist. I'm just an anthropologist.
@F0reseer I am a nationalist, but I do not hate other cultures. That's why I am not a racist. Race being a social construct which is human mental in nature is a purely idealistic and not materialistic, ie there is no race in physical science. In that case, being idealistic, we can be open to add more spice to the Chinses concept of our race.
@F0reseer Cantonese are people of Guangdong province, speaking a different dialect of Han's language. But what we are saying means the same thing. Although they are more apolitical, they are no less nationalistic than any other people.
@theboyuan0jcfan "we are all homo-sapiens originating from Africa"
Well, the entire biosphere is carbon-based life originated on Earth. If you want to reduce everything to the least common denominator, nothing is different from anything else. I don't know what this fashion thing you're referring to is. I do know that the Uyghur vs Chinese conflicts are ethnically motivated.
@F0reseer Uighur ae also Chinese. So Uighur vs Chinese means Uighur vs themselves? Doesn't make any sense. But you do know that no nation in this world shows tolerance for separatism. If radicals who cant get enough of welfare incentives or even bribery to keep them away from separatism continue to disappoint us, we will have to stem them out. Ethnical problems can be mitigated with policies, but ETIM's problem is politically motivated.
@theboyuan0jcfan "So Uighur vs Chinese means Uighur vs themselves? Doesn't make any sense."
Obviously I meant Chinese in the ethnic sense. And if Xinjiang wants independence, they obviously don't want to be Chinese in the nationalist sense either. When the area that is Xinjiang today became a protectorate of Han, society and peoples were vastly different. And if they were forced by us in the past, they have every right to demand independence today from us.
@F0reseer I dont see why suffering the Uighurs endured in the past is an excuse enough to justify separatism. One time you suffer under me, next time I suffer under you, and cycles on. Therefore, it is pointless to say who is at the wrong. We will not give up Xinjiang no matter what, because this is a national principle issue related to core interests. Only an idiot will give up a vast strategic interior and a huge resource basin.
@theboyuan0jcfan No, the fact that they aren't Sinitic and currently want to separate and that they are still enduring suffering currently at the hands of the Chinese government makes a strong case for their independence. If they have so much in common with the Hans (face it, we're more than 95% of China's population, in all practicality, China=Hans) why have there been so much conflict?
@F0reseer I dont accept ur Han chauvinism. we may be dominant, but we r still just 1 in 56. I'm a Chinese nationalist, not a Han chauvinist. and the conflict u are talking about is complex. there are instigation from foreign-based separatists, socio-economic divide, lack of education leading to intolerance for diversity. and most importantly, according to Marx, ethnic problem is in fact socio-class problem.
@theboyuan0jcfan I don't think it chauvinistic at all to give credit where credit is due. Hans created Chinese civilization, literature, art, culture, language, etc. and Hans influenced the entire East Asian continent. Hans started the ROC as well as the PROC. What you're saying is hogwash. It's only chauvinistic to demand minorities to obey the majority because it serves our interests. Marx is wrong. My God, it's the 21st century. Grow out of that phase already.
@F0reseer When Han started building the Chinese civilisation, the word Han hasn't appear. Han is made up of Liuwan, Dongyi, Guqiang, etc, the tribes and sub-tribes of Nvwa and Fuxi. Han appeared in the AD 4th century. Han is the major building block of the Chinese civilisation but not its only building block. How is it that the majority coerce minorities to obey when it is the minorities themselves who wants to be considered Chinese instead of being alienated?
@F0reseer I'm from Shenyang. I have neighbors back home who r Koreans(from China and not Korea), Xibo and Manchus. They will be pissed at Han if we reject them as a fellow Chinese compatriot, pissed at not being recognised as a Chines and not the other way round according to u.
@theboyuan0jcfan No, they may be pissed if they get mistakened for ethnic Chinese. I'm sure they're fine with being recognized as Chinese Nationals. This whole discussion I've tried only to emphasize the importance of ethnicity over citizenship. Rather disparities are due to socio-economics and class or not, they appear to coincide more or less completely with ethnic demarcation. More so for the more obvious minorities than others (ex: Uyghurs who look Middle-Eastern).
@F0reseer Race is a socio-classification that has nothing to do with genes, so I don't agree with that obivous minority interms of physcial science. But in terms of social science, social-class difference are not related to ethnicity, but to culture, which explains why Jews are good merchants, because the Jewish culture works well in terms of the secience of business.
@F0reseer And nationalism is about identity which we accept, works for our common interest at best. Since Manchus don't see a different between nationality and ethnicity during Qing era, then they put everything ethnic within Qing empire into the Chinese race. Ths is the status-quo and should remian so regardless of how you or any other people think.
You don't have a common interest. You have Tibetan interests, Uyghur interests, Han interests, Hmong, Hong Kong, Macau, etc. etc. interests. And yet you are perpetually trying to COERCE a commonality that simply IS NOT THERE for the sake of Communist Party Interest.
@F0reseer This is interest is not just the interest of the party, but the whole nation's interest! Do you rather see the nation I deeply love split up!? I don't get it! Why is it always that we strived so hard to keep a nation united after decades of fragmenttion only to ended up having people like you saying things like works against unity!?
@theboyuan0jcfan Of course it is national interest. I'm just saying not to use some silly notion of an all-inclusive Chinese Race (which doesn't exist) to try to placate the separatists. If you haven't noticed, the more we try to do it, the more pissed off they minorities get. It's not recognition of diversity at all, it's shoving their identities under one single Umbrella Term that's got nothing to do with the Uyghur cultural line: Chinese.
@F0reseer Chinese is a Western word, with a concept different from our concept of中华民族behind it. They will be pissed off if we say they are Han, which they r not, but they are 中华民族since Qing Dynasty. They should be pissed off during Qing times and not now if u r right. but if they r not pissed off since Qing due to this racial concept, then the modern "got pissed off" problem does not have anything to do with this concept. clearly, it must be some OTHER reasons. (Marx's class problem)
@theboyuan0jcfan "中华民族" isn't even a Chinese concept. It's a Manchurian concept according to you. I find it hypocritical of you to reject "Western" concepts while so accepting this particular non-Han concept. You said Han is 1 in 56, bringing that up to appear all-inclusive. Well the PRC is 1 in the world. If you're truly inclusive, why have this us vs. the West attitude that I'm getting from you?
@F0reseer Because we as an independent nation do have our own dignity. We are our own masters and will decide on how we want to perceive ourselves instead of letting others tell us who we should be recognised. This is a matter of principles!
@F0reseer And the CCP is made up of Chinese people like myself, so we are still our own masters. Anyway, being one's own master in the purest sense is total individualism, which does not ever exist. I prefer viewing the CCP as being a guidance instead of master.
@theboyuan0jcfan The American government is an example of guidance, you live in an oligarchy and controls the people. The people should be the force behind legislation, enforcement, and governing, not "those in power."
@F0reseer And those in power are voted in by people through a pyramidic process called indirect voting in the people's representative system where the grassroot votes for representatives in the next level, who in turn votes for the next higher evel of authority and so on. I'm not saying our system is flawless, but at least we are working to perfect our system, which takes time. And before we achieve near perfection, you can call us a oligarchy or whatever.
@theboyuan0jcfan There is no such thing as perfection. But you need to at least move in the right direction, how about having a few more political parties other than the CCP for a change, huh? Why are there only communists? Where are the democrats? China is not free and has no liberty.
@F0reseer Not that we are unwilling to go towards better system of governance, but it really takes a long time if we can be pragmatic and objective about Chinese politics.
@F0reseer Anyway, how is the modern American system a form of guidance when politicans are only saying and doing what is popular to the large ignorant part od society or what lobbyists want? Should politicians tell people that it takes more than one term in office to correct the American economy due to economic and burecractic circumstances? They shold, but they don't want to, because that means they will not not be voted for. Political interest above what is right. Guidence indeed!
@theboyuan0jcfan People who vote aren't "ignorant." It's called an education. Americans don't rely on politicians to "guide" us. We guide ourselves. What makes you think that a "large" part of society is "ignorant." I'm in a special interest group. I lobby for environmental protection. I'm also just an average citizen. Talk to me about "what is right" when you can have freedom of assembly, speech, religion, and banishment of cencorship in China.
@F0reseer I see your point and you are correct that Manchu is a different ethnic than Hans and were from two different civilizations. However, the title and video suggest that at present, they aren't Chinese. I define "Chinese" as generic as "Americans" or "British" just your example. I misunderstood the title and responded that back then 1600's China was Qing because the Manchus conquered China, but in the end, they were assimilated and Qing became part of China.
@need2speed75 They still aren't Chinese at present, in an ethnic sense, if they are pure blooded. They are of course Chinese, however, in the national citizenship sense. I don't like to define things in a "generic" way. Saying someone is "British" is fine but that means so little now, considering Scotland wanting to be independent. The Welsh, the Irish, and the Scots have very strong identities....I've pissed some off by calling them "british" before.
@F0reseer well, people of britain are british. they may be pissed at being called english, but there is no reason to be pissed at being called british.
@theboyuan0jcfan Outsiders define them as "British." People who live in Britain seldom refer to themselves as British. And as I said, those in Scotland who are pushing for independence would not want to be called "British" in a nationalistic sense, but they may be okay with it only in the geographic sense.
@lilvietkiidd Zhuge Liang probably invented the repeatitive shot crossbow, not the first crossbow. Besides, all the things to have been rumoured invented by him was based on fictional novels, not very reliable.
I am totally ashamed of my filthy liar race which likes to distort and claim many races' origins and heritages,so here I apologize to Manchus and Han Chinese.90% of my fellow koreans are simply shameless !
All 56 ethnic tribes, clans, and groups of modern day china (People's Republic of China) are all chinese (not communist not Han, but they are all chinese people). Each prove they are chinese through their adaptation and performance of chinese customs or culture through their lives and history. Each clan has also admitted they are chinese people. Although they are chinese, they are put into groups (suck as Han, Tibet, Mongolia, Manchu) because of their unique differences. BUTWE ARE ALL CHINESE!!!
The Qin royal family and people of the Qin state were Jurchens speaking the Jurchen tongue at the imperial court and culturally, ethnically different from the Chinese people of the other states they conquered. This just defeats your assumption that the Qin are Chinese as we know the Manchus are descended from Jurchens. So the Jurchens united China not once but twice in her history, during Qin AND the Qing dynasty, centuries apart.
@Kundavozhd "China" is just a Latin word invented by Romans. We call our ntion "Zhong Guo", which is a totally different concept of nationhood all together. Chinese from Qin Empire may be ancestors of the Han ethnic, but the supra-cluster Chinses race(Zhonghua Minzu) is made up of 56 modern ethnic groups and their ancient ethnic ancestors within the boudaries of the region called modern China.
@Kundavozhd Very correct, yet every one seperates manchu from china, that is wrong, manchu is seperated from Han. Manchu is china's ethnicity, while Han is also china's ethnicity though han was the original, tibet, mongolians, and many others all are chinese clans and ethnic tribes. Each had a history of domination over china, but all are chinese people, just different tribes.
@tacosvsburitos kundavozhd is not entirely correct. in fact, he's really wrong when he claimed that "the Qin family are Jurchens", when the truth is that the Qin are Han. the Qing are Jurchen/Manchu no doubt, but Qin is Han ethnic.
he's basically from the same bandwagon that makes videos like "Manchu history - 4. Qing dynasty is NOT China", of which this video is a direct reply to. he's probably a person who claims "Confucius as being Korean" or other BS.
@Kundavozhd the rulers of the Qing are manchurian/jurchen, BUT the rulers of Qin are han chinese. even if you look at the geographical state of qin (during the spring and autumn/warring states period), you'll see it's no where near manchuria (where the jurchens lived).
the qin (han) united china, the qing (manchu/jurchen) broke china and made her weak. in fact, china's most shameful history happened almost entirely during the qing dynasty, like losing land to foreign occupiers.
Qin was a Han Chinese dynasty established by QinShi Huang over 2000 years ago. Qin has NOTHING to do with Manchurians. Qin was the first dynasty to unify China.
Qing dynasty is not china. those barbarians will never be chinese. they failed china theirfore their leaders deserve death. china will return back to glory soon enough
@ervin920 I do not agree with you. I am from Shenyang, northeastern China. There are Manchus in Shenyang and they don not see themselves as outsiders. They admit that they are Chinese as well.
@theboyuan0jcfan China is multi ethnic like America! The korean bitches try to distort by saying that China only has han chinese,all others are not counted! That is ridiculous,are the American Asians not counted as American citizens?
Ask outside world & the west what chinese means. chinese language is han, chinese means people of yellow river, Great Wall, a world 7 wonders. East Asia sent false sayings to outside world, eg. manchu created chinese civilization, which is false 100%. The word "china" came from silk road of han dynasty 2000 years ago. manchu is very young, attacked china, uses han language. han was colony of qing, but manchu was colony of Ming Dynasty, too. Chinese in real English means han only, never manchu.
@tukkatathai Howeer, it was the MAnchu who came up with the term 中华民族(zhonghuaminzu), which means the supra-cluster Chinese race to define all subjects in their empire. ROC and PRC inherited that definition. "China" is a Western definition which happened during Roman times when China had the Qin Dynasty, which is slightly earlier than Rome. Hence the name China-land of the Qin in Latin(language of Rome).
@tukkatathai Since the West is the most influential in the world, their definition of China became more well-known versus our own definition of ourselves.
@faculty3 you pathedic monkey, learn to be less barbaric, I believe ervin is wrong as well and he is a good youtube friend of mine, but there is no need for swearing and cursing. Leave and go pick lice of your father.
@ervin920 you are a faggot beyond pathedic. I am a Han and I love china. How people now try to tear china apart bit by bit similar to china before world war two is pathedic. China was strong, but corrupt, not united, and poor. We must all work together, Mongolians, Tibet, Hans, Manchurian, all 56 ethnic tribes should realize we are all chinese. I'm not saying communists are good or bad, im saying chinese people are strong.
@tacosvsburitos sorry man i didn't see it was you........ didn't mean to call you pathedic, im saying we should gather chinese people, make chinese people realize we all live in harmony and must fight to preserve our powerful country. Forgive me brother, you are awsome
There are no such thing as "Han" people. It is a name of a dynasty, for the purpose of unify the nation for easier control. Haha, Manchou influences are shown in modern Chinese writing and dialect, Mandarin!!! It is a Northern tongue..let's faced it, it is still politics matter that never was resolved.
UnitedPebbles 1 week ago
@UnitedPebbles yes, Han is a dynasty. After the nomadic invasion of AD 4th century, indigneous populance was forced to migrant to the south, keeping in mind of restoring their lost territory, hence a unified identity was formed, named after the previous greatest dynasty: Han. Mandarin is based on northern Chinese dialect, although not totally northern dialect.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 week ago
Any stupid person can believe the last Dynasty in China that created by Manchuris would still craft bronze equipments for military?? Insaned....
hotelpan 3 months ago
Any one confused about this video should learn some hisorty!!! It shows the Bronze Age!!! Qin Dynasty in 250 BC!!! Qing Dynasty was after 1600 AD!!! almost 2000 Years!!!!
hotelpan 3 months ago
It is irrelevant whether Manchu thinks they're Chinese or not, the rest of the world classified them as such. Also, this is the same as people in the US who distinguish themselves as Irish or Italian descent and still proud of that fact but they're still "Americans". The same can be with Manchus, Hans or whatever. "Qing isn't China"..no not back then but now they've been assimilated. They should've thought about the recourse before invading Ming China or let Empress Dowager screw things up.
need2speed75 3 months ago
@need2speed75 this isn't an argument over national citizenship. it's a clarification of ethnic descent. Manchus are not Chinese in the same way a Welshman isn't English. a Welshman is Celtic, whereas an Anglo-Saxon is Germanic. Manchus are a Tungusic people. Hans are Sinitic and are the ethno-linguistic descendants of the people who created the Chinese Civilization. Terms become confusing when you use them in the duo context of citizenship and ethnicity.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer I am speaking in a nationalistic identity sense, different from an ethno-academic sense.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan That's fine, but lots of folks get confused over what is "Chinese." People may seem to think that the Chinese civilization has always been these 56 different ethnic groups and don't understand what the Hans have to do with it all. Even the national identity sense has issues. There are more than a few ethnic minorities who do not want to be considered as "Chinese" in that sense. Tibetans and Uyghurs are the most vocal of course.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer And that is something I as a nationalist cannot accept.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I don't think that matters. You cannot coerce a sense of nationalism where there is in fact disparity in reality. And you should not. Tibetans are not ethnic Chinese. Uyghurs are not ethnic Chinese. They shouldn't have to be labeled as Chinese if they do not want to be.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer again, it was the Manchu ruling class during the Qing Dynasty that came up with the concept of Zhonghua Minzu(supra-cluster Chinese race), consisting of all long-settled ethnic groups in the Qing empire. We just accepted and inherited this concept and expand upon to define all 56 ethnic groups of modern China as Zhonghua Minzu(not the Western Qin=China concept since Roman empire).
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan And a Uighur can be a Turk and a Chinese ethnic at the same time. We do have cultural similarities in terms of fashion. Heyhey! You know? We don't care how others define their ethnicity like the British. But we uphild our own definition and concept. Others should understand from our viewpoint instead of being ethno-centric. I know we cant coerce some ethnic groups to accept, but with time, interaction and education, things will work.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan why should they work? Uyghurs are fundamentally alien to the Chinese. Different culture, customs, religion, language, origin. They were simply conquered and after millennia, they have not integrated. We should just let them have their own land, or allow them to integrate like Americans truly do.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer So what if they are conquered? No people in this world in history has not conquered nor been conquered. You say they are different from whom? Chinese? Well, if youare speaking in terms of the Western Roman times Qin=China, so Chinese are just Han concept, youare so what right. But according to our中华民族concept,中国人=56个民族。Ham is just but 1 out of 56 ethnic groups that are collectively called中华民族（Chinese from our perspective since Qing period）
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Maybe mainland Han Chinese are indoctrinated with this CCP hogwash. But I know virtually of no overseas Chinese or Hong Kong Chinese who think so. I should know, I am one. What matters is that not all of us accepts it. There are many ethnic Chinese who do not accept this 中国人=56个民族 farce.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer Well, the sipra-custer Chinese race concept did not originate with CCP. It was innovated by the Manchu rulers during the Qing period. The Chinese whm you refered to unaccepting of this notion may not be nationalist. But I am a nationalist, therefore I accept this notion for our identity.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Well I've already pointed out the short comings of a nationalistic perspective. Further more it is a political construct not based on reality. Only the Hans are Sinitic in China. Why create an illusion that suggests everyone else is too? That's your problem, you label everyone a "radical" if they want nothing to do with your outdated empty shell of a communist government. It's got absolutely nothing to do with being Chinese or not. China does not equal CCP.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer I only label those who resort to violence, disrespecting diversity as radicals. The Zhonghua Minzu concept is not an outdated empty sheel. It is not a communist concept either, but one which originates from Manchu Qing Dynasty.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Zhonghua Minzu is empty. Mongolians are an ethnic minority in China. According to the concept of Zhonghua Minzu, do we incorporate Genghis Khan as a "Chinese" legacy then? The CCP has been resorting to violence and disrespect of diversity for years. Need I remind you of Tiananmen Square?
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer again, i disagree with u. 64 incident is a socio-political issue hijacked by mobs, has nothing to do with respecting diversity, but has to do with upholding principles. Genghis Khan is a Chinese emperor: Emperor Yuan Taizu.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@F0reseer Customs are different? Well, we do share common values. Religion different? Well, we respect diversity and there are Muslims among other ethnic groups, icluding Han as well. Language? Well, India is more linguistic different from within. Origin? Well, we are all homo-sapiens originating from Africa. And I do see the trend that they are integrating. Otherwise, how do you explain for fashion that drews upon both Han and Uighur characteristics?
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan how do YOU explain the VERY RECENT Uyghur vs. Han tensions? How do you explain the cry for Xinjiang independence? So what if they were conquered? So that we should give their land back. Hong Kong was conquered and ceded to the UK. They gave it back.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer Well, 2 groups of people with common ethnic but different dialect group could end up fighting. Tensions could be due to various complex factors, be it social, economical or cultural. Xinjiang is part of China since Han, Tang and Qing period. There is no need to dispute that because according to any other way of reasoning, we could say Britain belongs to Italy or whatever. What I as a nationalist accepts is whatever works in our nation's interest.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan The problem with looking at things from the nationalistic view is that you ALWAYS marginalize those who's origin is from a different ethnic group. Because you have to incorporate state politics, only the collective matters. The anthropological perspective (cultural/linguistic/ethnic identity) is the only truly humanistic one that lends power and identity to each individual group.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer There will be balance between the interest of everyone, collective or individual.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Cultural legacy is much more important than nationalistic pride. Because governments and regimes topple and give way to new rule. It is the people who carry on the traditions, the language, and the identity and culture they possess as a group. The government only exists to defend and protect people's ability to do so.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer And nationalism is also part of culture carried on by people.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I'm fine with nationalism being a part of culture, because both inform one another and evolve together. However, It is important to make categorical distinctions between ethnic entities and nation-state entities. It's ridiculous to deliberately make vague what is Chinese Civilization. Uyghurs, Manchus, Zhuangs, Hmongs, etc. DID NOT invent Sinitic writing or Sinitic languages. Hans did.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer now, this is what is called being narrow and disrecpecting diversity. China/Chinese are words invented by the West while we call ourselves中国人. 中国started with the founding of ROC. Short for中华民国, also short for中华人民共和国. again, we just accept what the Manchus created because it works for our common interest, regardless of ethnicity.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan 中国 literally means the country in the center of the world. It does not make sense in English and western world would never accept this arrogance of Chinese. Nevertheless, Manchu was not Chinese in that time (16th-19th centuries). Chinese tries their best to deny it because they don't want to accept the fact that they were conquered THREE TIMES by smaller countries such as Mongol, Manchu and Japan.
ngocquang19877 2 months ago
@ngocquang19877 Chinese means Manchu, Han, Mongol etc. Manchu was Chinese because they invented the term CHINESE retard. Chinese dont deny... what the fuck? get your facts right you piece of shit be4 you watch CHINESE HISTORY videos. For fucks sake the ignorance....
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Manchu was not Chinese people at the time. Han people even didn't have rights to marry Manchu women. The majority of Chinese people (Han people accounts for 99% population of Chinese of the time) were ruled by a foreign government in 260 years. 中国人是东亚病夫.
ngocquang19877 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 91% of Chinese in China are HANS now. SO how were Hans 99% of Chinese population? Source please. Ruled by Manchu with great leaders such as KangXi and QianLong. PS: 1st Emperor of Qing was Manchu Minister OF MING! So now does Napolean's French Empire FRENCH when Napolean was ITALIAN? Please ans this question. Was Macedonia GREECE? Since Alexander was MACEDONIAN? Ans this as well. PS: Only Hans in 8 banners could intermingle others could not.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin There was ONLY Napoleon who was Italian in the France's governors. Manchu ruled the entire Qing dynasty. Macedonia is Macedonia and Greece is Greece. Two countries are different.
ngocquang19877 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 Alexander's Macedonia was Greece dumbass. Tell that to Greeks stupid shit! LOL! What are you a Jap? Just stay out of other people's history. You haven't answered by other question. How was Qing 99% Han? When under CCP there is only 91% Han?
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Macedon was Hellenic but wasn't part of Greek Proper. I think ngocquang19877 was referring to its ancient beginnings as a separate entity. Alexander conquered the rest of Greece. But I suppose that is no different than say, Qin conquering the other 6 kingdoms. It's not really analogous to Manchurian conquering China.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer There was no Greece during that time. The greek states were fighting amonst themselves. So whats uP?
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Alexander did not conquer greece. It was Phillips. Alexander was a student of Plato so he was not Greek? Everything about him was Greek. So what the fuck are you talking about? Macedonia was Greece and Qing was China. Why would Qian Long in his letter to King George state that his ancestors practiced the system of the Mandate of Heaven which is a Chinese concept? Why? You wear dragons, you speak Mandarin, you write Mandarin, you call yourself descendant of dragon, you are chinese.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Philip II was king, but Alexander most certainly led conquests under his rule. Alexander was "Hellenic" but as far as "Greek" is concerned, Macedonians were part Phrygian and not pure Hellens. Macedonians were Hellenicized, I frikkin SAID THAT in my last post. They were considered "fringe" by the rest of the Greek States for a time, that's why I said they were not "Greek Proper."
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer How does the persecption others have toards their identity got anything to do with how we as the Chinese nation perceives ourselves? Our identity is only for us to decide!
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Well apparently we have a difference in opinion.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer And I think you should respect our different opinion instead of keeping on telling me that my principles are wrong!
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Your "principles" are wrong because they are. It's not a matter of opinion. but what's logical in categorizing human population.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer So we should forsake our dignity just to meet the requirements of what is correct in terms of what the mainstream Westerners think? That's not respecting our viewpoint.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Don't know how Westerners got into your argument. These aren't requirements. And what I said is self-evident. Anyone with a brain will draw the same conclusion. You don't have dignity now. If you're Manchu, claim you're Manchu, don't claim you're Chinese by race. Respect and be proud of your own line of descent. If you're mixed, THEN you can logically claim yourself as biracial.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer It is hegemonic, tyrannic to impose others' persecptive on us while disregarding our own persecptive.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@theboyuan0jcfan "It is hegemonic, tyrannic to impose others' persecptive on us while disregarding our own persecptive."
It's also hegemonic, tyrannic to impose your perspective on Tibet and Xinjiang while disregarding their own perspectives.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer The Greeks and the Chinese claim Macedonia and Qing as their own. Greeks say Alexander spoke greek, wrote greek, believed in Greek gods, etc. Chinese say QianLong, KangXi, etc. spoke Mandarin, wrote Mandarin, believed in the middle kingdom, etc. You see the parallels? You know the world accepts that Macedonia was greek and in the US we accept that QIng was China. Besides my mom has Manchu blood yet she calls herself Han. LOL!
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Your mom's either mixed or confused. Qing was China. Because it conquered China. But Qing was not Chinese, they didn't even wear Chinese clothing. Macedonia is still contested today and is in fact its own country. do some research.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Qing conquered Han, not the Chinese. They wear not the Han costume, ok? What happened is just 1 block of Chinese conquering the other blocks of Chinese.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Manchurians are not Chinese. They did not give rise to the Chinese civilization. If you are to talk about a cultural entity, you should stick to cultural roots. what happened was a foreign force conquering the Chinese, because at the time of the conquest, the Qing were indubitably Manchurian.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer I am a Manchurian, though I'm Han. A Malaysian is not always Malay. Anyway, Chinese civilisation is a mixture of many ethnic cultures. Han can be the main branch, but not the only branch.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Again, I'm not talking about nationality here but ethnicity. Chinese civilization was a mixture of many cultures. Many SINITIC cultures. But Mongols, Tibetans, Manchus, etc. were not Chinese. The Japanese are more sinicized than the Mongols for crying out loud.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Greeks dont care Chinese dont care. You speak mandarin, you write mandarin, you wear dragons, you claim to be descendant of the dragon under the Mandate of Heaven, you call yourself a Middle Kingdom celestial dweller and you fight for Middle Kingdom interest, YOU ARE CHINESE. KangXi, QianLong and Hong Taiji were the 3 great emperors who favored Hans. PS: Hong was actually a Ming advisor who framed Gen. Yuan ChongHuan to get executed. QianLong will redeem Gen. Yuan's reputation later.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Chinese do care and Greeks do care. There are many Greeks who object to the Republic of Macedonia's use of the name, and many Macedonians who hate it when they are equated with Greek people. If the Chinese didn't care Sun Yat-Sen wouldn't have led the xinhai revolution to overthrow the qing dynasty.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Sun is opposed with monarchy rule, and not racistly opposed to the Manchu people.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I never said Sun was a racist. But he was not shy of stating that Qing wasn't a Chinese monarchy.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Sun Yat Sen was using Han supremacy as a TOOL. Hans didn't mind Manchus for 3 fucking centuries since Manchus produced 4 great emperors. Only til the 2 Opium Wars did the Qing lose favor and many Hans decided their time was up. Hans overthrew Qing not because they were Manchu but because Qing was bullied and embarassed by the Western powers.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin so what you're saying is that Hans did mind the Qing.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Yes they did under the first few Emperors such as Kangxi and QianLong.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin well I'm sure when the Qing started to suck again towards the end, the Hans minded them again.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer of course. When Qin started to suck Hans rebelled. How many times did Hans rebel? Just count how many dynasties Hans got.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin When Qin started to suck Qins rebelled. And then after a while started to call themselves Han. See the difference?
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer No difference. They are the same people. Han was both Legalism and Confucianism. Qin was Legalism. If Qin was not overthrown there wouldn't be Hans but Qin Chinese today. Han Dynasty just followed through Qin system. Same language, weights, measurements, Legalism, etc under Han banner. So what is your point? Han lasted 4 centuries while Qin 15 years. Thus Chinese identity forged under Han.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DragonOfQin "No difference. They are the same people"
Er...that's what I was trying to say. The difference is that there is no difference, and I called you to "see" it....get it now? It's was an ironical statement.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Qing was Tungusic. The term "Chinese" refers to a Sino-Tibetan people. I'm using the term in its ethnic sense. Qian Long's frikkin name was: Aisin-Gioro hala i Hung Li. 愛新覺羅弘曆. Does Aisin-Gioro sound like a Chinese surname to you? His "ancestors" adopted Chinese culture, but he is no more Chinese than an Englishman whose ancestors adopted French/Norman culture is Latin.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Aisin-Gioro is Manchu and not Han, but Han and Manchu are both Chinese, or should I stop using this Latin-Anglo word and instead use Zhonghua this Chinese word so that you can stop misunderstanding what I am saying? Murong is one of the surnames in the Hundred Famiy Suranme book during the Song period, but Murong is not Han, it is Syanbi, which is one of the building blocks of the Chinese nation, whose influence is small but not without significance.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Sorry. There is no such thing as Zhonghua. It's a stupid, inaccurate made-up term that signifies virtually nothing. Only Han is Chinese. Pure and simple. Hans started Chinese civilization, created Chinese culture, language, history, architecture. Manchus only copied. Are you thick?
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer It is nothing only if you take it in pure materialistic persecptive. But even anthropology is largely idealistic, who are you to deny me of my cup of nationalism?
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I'm denying your "cup of nationalism" because it is illogical. to claim a non-sinitic group as part of the Sinitic ethno-linguisitic-cultural entity is misleading and bad categorizing. Anthropology is scientific, not idealistic.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Social scientific is still idealistic because its basis is human being and not nature. I don't care what terms others put on us. Terms like Sinitic or whatever doesn't bother our perception that the supra cluster Chinese race is not just Han, but a mixture of 56 ethnics.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Saying that the Chinese "race" includes 56 ethnicities is like saying the English "race" includes Punjabs. You're not talking about race here anymore but citizenship. Racially, only Hans are Chinese. Citizenship-wise, everyone living in China is Chinese. I thought I clarified that.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Qian Long was also called Qian Long does that sound like Manchu do it? Qian Long said his ancestors WERE CHINESE he didn't say his ancestors ADOPTED chinese culture. He clearly told George that WE HAD BEEN PRACTICING THE MANDATE OF HEAVEN FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. 1) Manchu didnt practice mandate of heaven for 1000s of years. So did Qian Long mean? He certainly wasn't a retard.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin Qian Long is a title. Aisin-Gioro is a family name. I hope I don't need to point out the difference. his ancestors were from the Gioro clan of the Manchurian tribes of the north. Qian Long was a frakking politician. They say the darnest things to be politically correct. I also hope I don't need to explain what a politician is to you. The koreans practiced Confucianism, so did Japan. Korea was even a protectorate of Imperial China at one point. Does that make them Chinese as well?
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Only if historical circumstances permit, then Koreans of Korea would be part of China. It is no easy course of historical development. Yet many multi-ethnic nations have the same bloody history before unification. And they would scorn you for telling that they are wrong. Think the modern French and Germans and you'll know. Yes, Qianlong is a politician, but the policies he used worked for our interest, liked by me as a nationalist, so I do not have a reason to say he's wrong.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan You speak Mandarin, you wear dragons, you write Mandarin, you claim to be descendant of the dragon under the Mandate of heaven, call yourself Middle Kingdom dwellers and fight for Middle Kingdom interest you are Chinese. All these categories fit with the Qing but not with Korea. Korea was a vassal state. QianLong even cleared Gen. Yuan ChongHuan's name as a traitor in MING DYNASTY. This shows you how much Qian was assimilated in2 Han culture and interests.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@DragonOfQin I'm speaking about it in an ethnic sense. The Qing ruling family as a whole was not a Chinese ethnic entity. Manchurians are not Chinese, just like Jews are not Germans and Parminder Nagra isn't Anglo-Saxon.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer How many times must I repeat myself? Manchus did not see themselves as Han, but they see themselves as Chinese(Zhonghua Minzu), a term they invented and we accepted. Stop equating Chinese as just Han, ok?
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I do not consider any policies under Qing rule to be "toward our interest," as long as the bloody Queue Order was still enforced. Both Korea and Japan are WAY more Sinicized than Mongols, Turks, Tibetans, Hmong, or Dai. But they are completely distinct peoples who do not share any ancestry with the Yellow River cultures that started Chinese civilization.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer They started the Han civilisation, not the Chinese civilisation, or maybe the main building block of the Chinese civilisation. I do not subscribe to all that Han chauvinistic argument of how much cultural influence Hans have had on other people outside China vs inside of China either. Qing's legacy has its good and bad parts. But I'm saying that they worked in forging our national identity as Zhonghua Minzu.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@F0reseer You speak Mandarin, you wear dragons, you write Mandarin, you claim to be descendant of the dragon under the Mandate of heaven, call yourself Middle Kingdom dwellers and fight for Middle Kingdom interest you are Chinese. All these categories fit with the Qing but not with Korea. Korea was a vassal state. QianLong even cleared Gen. Yuan ChongHuan's name as a traitor in MING DYNASTY. This shows you how much Qian was assimilated in2 Han culture and interests.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 PS: MIDDLE KINGDOM men are sick man of Asia. Thats what it says. So you contradict yourself. By saying that you mean, Uyghurs, Manchus, Mongols, Hans, etc. Are all sick men of Asia becuz all these groups live in the Middle Kingdom.
DragonOfQin 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 Han, not the Chinese, was conquered by Mongol and Manchu. Because you are like saying one block of Chinese conquering other blocks. Japan? No, they failed in conquering us. They only occupied less than half of our nation. And an occupation is not the same as conquest. To conquer is not just about occupying land, but also about the hearts and minds of the people.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Mongols ARE NOT CHINESE. They have their own frakking country for Chrissakes! It's called Mongolia. They have their own language, called Mongolian. WTF is wrong with you? If you know your history at all, under Mongol rule, the Hans were the lowest ranked race. Hans are Sinitic. Know what that term means? Sinitic? Mongols are Tungusic. I thought we've been over this.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Mongols are Chinese by the Manchu definition again. They are independent only due to historical circumstances in which Chiang Kai-shek making concession to the Soviet Union in exchange for Soviet support in ridding Manchuria of Japanese invaders. Mongols may treat Hans badly in the 13-14th century, but that does not prove they are not Chinese.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Again, if you are going to include all assimilated cultures into the term Chinese, you might as well call the Mongolian language a "Chinese" language. Which is scientifically incorrect and misleading.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer There is no Chinese language, unless you consider it to be the collective of all languages and dialects spoken by Chinese people of all ethnicity. What we call Mandarin is Hanyu(Han's language).
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer Sinic?Tungunsic? Well, they have no scientific grounds in terms of genes, so we can place them in intersecting subsets of two sets on the Venn Diagram.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Actually they do have scientific grounds in terms of genes. There has been a few studies done in human haplogroup genotyping that shows all Han-descendants share closer genetic relations than all non-Han groups. Also, Sinitic and Tungusic have scientific grounds in anthropological terms.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Anthropological classification is sorting by idealistic means, while genetic sorting is through physical scientific means. I don't know who is still researching to make connections between genes and races, but the researches till present shows that genes have nothing to do with race.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Race and genes are different things but they overlap significantly. Genetic sorting is meaningless without anthropological contexts when we're talking about an ethnic group. And genetic studies HAVE SHOWN that all Hans share similar genes when compared to every other nonHan group.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@ngocquang19877 Before anyone knows how big or what shape the world is or looks like, they would think that they are at the center of the world. Because why would their gods put them anywhere else but center? It is not being arrogance and not just the Chinese believes this. When it was just the Mesopotamia that was flooded by a tidal wave during an earthquake in the Persian Gulf 6000 years ago, people there thought the whole world was flooded by God(Noah's Ark legend).
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan You're arguing semantics. Cantonese people often call themselves 唐人, especially the older generations. Chinese is simply a term that internationally works to describe us. Fact remains that most of the ancient dynasties in the region currently named as 中國 are all Chinese, of and belong to and created by the Sinitic peoples. It does not work for our common interest. We need to quit lying to ourselves.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer Now whose narrow? I don't equate Han with Chinese. I am open to acceptng other ethnics into the Chinese nation. I don't believe in apartheid and racism. I repeat: Iam a Chinese nationalist, not a Han chauvinist!
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Being a :Chinese nationalist necessitates being a racist. Because you try to assimilate all non-Sinitic cultures into your own. i'm not a Han Chauvinist. I'm just an anthropologist.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer I am a nationalist, but I do not hate other cultures. That's why I am not a racist. Race being a social construct which is human mental in nature is a purely idealistic and not materialistic, ie there is no race in physical science. In that case, being idealistic, we can be open to add more spice to the Chinses concept of our race.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer Cantonese are people of Guangdong province, speaking a different dialect of Han's language. But what we are saying means the same thing. Although they are more apolitical, they are no less nationalistic than any other people.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan "we are all homo-sapiens originating from Africa"
Well, the entire biosphere is carbon-based life originated on Earth. If you want to reduce everything to the least common denominator, nothing is different from anything else. I don't know what this fashion thing you're referring to is. I do know that the Uyghur vs Chinese conflicts are ethnically motivated.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer Uighur ae also Chinese. So Uighur vs Chinese means Uighur vs themselves? Doesn't make any sense. But you do know that no nation in this world shows tolerance for separatism. If radicals who cant get enough of welfare incentives or even bribery to keep them away from separatism continue to disappoint us, we will have to stem them out. Ethnical problems can be mitigated with policies, but ETIM's problem is politically motivated.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan "So Uighur vs Chinese means Uighur vs themselves? Doesn't make any sense."
Obviously I meant Chinese in the ethnic sense. And if Xinjiang wants independence, they obviously don't want to be Chinese in the nationalist sense either. When the area that is Xinjiang today became a protectorate of Han, society and peoples were vastly different. And if they were forced by us in the past, they have every right to demand independence today from us.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer I dont see why suffering the Uighurs endured in the past is an excuse enough to justify separatism. One time you suffer under me, next time I suffer under you, and cycles on. Therefore, it is pointless to say who is at the wrong. We will not give up Xinjiang no matter what, because this is a national principle issue related to core interests. Only an idiot will give up a vast strategic interior and a huge resource basin.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan No, the fact that they aren't Sinitic and currently want to separate and that they are still enduring suffering currently at the hands of the Chinese government makes a strong case for their independence. If they have so much in common with the Hans (face it, we're more than 95% of China's population, in all practicality, China=Hans) why have there been so much conflict?
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer I dont accept ur Han chauvinism. we may be dominant, but we r still just 1 in 56. I'm a Chinese nationalist, not a Han chauvinist. and the conflict u are talking about is complex. there are instigation from foreign-based separatists, socio-economic divide, lack of education leading to intolerance for diversity. and most importantly, according to Marx, ethnic problem is in fact socio-class problem.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I don't think it chauvinistic at all to give credit where credit is due. Hans created Chinese civilization, literature, art, culture, language, etc. and Hans influenced the entire East Asian continent. Hans started the ROC as well as the PROC. What you're saying is hogwash. It's only chauvinistic to demand minorities to obey the majority because it serves our interests. Marx is wrong. My God, it's the 21st century. Grow out of that phase already.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer When Han started building the Chinese civilisation, the word Han hasn't appear. Han is made up of Liuwan, Dongyi, Guqiang, etc, the tribes and sub-tribes of Nvwa and Fuxi. Han appeared in the AD 4th century. Han is the major building block of the Chinese civilisation but not its only building block. How is it that the majority coerce minorities to obey when it is the minorities themselves who wants to be considered Chinese instead of being alienated?
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer Marx will be right so long as there are still social-class related conflicts existing in the world toady.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer I'm from Shenyang. I have neighbors back home who r Koreans(from China and not Korea), Xibo and Manchus. They will be pissed at Han if we reject them as a fellow Chinese compatriot, pissed at not being recognised as a Chines and not the other way round according to u.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan No, they may be pissed if they get mistakened for ethnic Chinese. I'm sure they're fine with being recognized as Chinese Nationals. This whole discussion I've tried only to emphasize the importance of ethnicity over citizenship. Rather disparities are due to socio-economics and class or not, they appear to coincide more or less completely with ethnic demarcation. More so for the more obvious minorities than others (ex: Uyghurs who look Middle-Eastern).
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer Race is a socio-classification that has nothing to do with genes, so I don't agree with that obivous minority interms of physcial science. But in terms of social science, social-class difference are not related to ethnicity, but to culture, which explains why Jews are good merchants, because the Jewish culture works well in terms of the secience of business.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer And nationalism is about identity which we accept, works for our common interest at best. Since Manchus don't see a different between nationality and ethnicity during Qing era, then they put everything ethnic within Qing empire into the Chinese race. Ths is the status-quo and should remian so regardless of how you or any other people think.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan "works for our common interest at best"
You don't have a common interest. You have Tibetan interests, Uyghur interests, Han interests, Hmong, Hong Kong, Macau, etc. etc. interests. And yet you are perpetually trying to COERCE a commonality that simply IS NOT THERE for the sake of Communist Party Interest.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer This is interest is not just the interest of the party, but the whole nation's interest! Do you rather see the nation I deeply love split up!? I don't get it! Why is it always that we strived so hard to keep a nation united after decades of fragmenttion only to ended up having people like you saying things like works against unity!?
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer There wil be balance between all Chinese people's interest.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Of course it is national interest. I'm just saying not to use some silly notion of an all-inclusive Chinese Race (which doesn't exist) to try to placate the separatists. If you haven't noticed, the more we try to do it, the more pissed off they minorities get. It's not recognition of diversity at all, it's shoving their identities under one single Umbrella Term that's got nothing to do with the Uyghur cultural line: Chinese.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer Chinese is a Western word, with a concept different from our concept of中华民族behind it. They will be pissed off if we say they are Han, which they r not, but they are 中华民族since Qing Dynasty. They should be pissed off during Qing times and not now if u r right. but if they r not pissed off since Qing due to this racial concept, then the modern "got pissed off" problem does not have anything to do with this concept. clearly, it must be some OTHER reasons. (Marx's class problem)
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan "中华民族" isn't even a Chinese concept. It's a Manchurian concept according to you. I find it hypocritical of you to reject "Western" concepts while so accepting this particular non-Han concept. You said Han is 1 in 56, bringing that up to appear all-inclusive. Well the PRC is 1 in the world. If you're truly inclusive, why have this us vs. the West attitude that I'm getting from you?
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer And since Manchu is Chinese, a Manchurian concept is also a Chinese concept.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer Because we as an independent nation do have our own dignity. We are our own masters and will decide on how we want to perceive ourselves instead of letting others tell us who we should be recognised. This is a matter of principles!
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan You are NOT your own masters. The CCP is your master.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer And the CCP is made up of Chinese people like myself, so we are still our own masters. Anyway, being one's own master in the purest sense is total individualism, which does not ever exist. I prefer viewing the CCP as being a guidance instead of master.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan The American government is an example of guidance, you live in an oligarchy and controls the people. The people should be the force behind legislation, enforcement, and governing, not "those in power."
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer And those in power are voted in by people through a pyramidic process called indirect voting in the people's representative system where the grassroot votes for representatives in the next level, who in turn votes for the next higher evel of authority and so on. I'm not saying our system is flawless, but at least we are working to perfect our system, which takes time. And before we achieve near perfection, you can call us a oligarchy or whatever.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan There is no such thing as perfection. But you need to at least move in the right direction, how about having a few more political parties other than the CCP for a change, huh? Why are there only communists? Where are the democrats? China is not free and has no liberty.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@F0reseer Not that we are unwilling to go towards better system of governance, but it really takes a long time if we can be pragmatic and objective about Chinese politics.
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@F0reseer Anyway, how is the modern American system a form of guidance when politicans are only saying and doing what is popular to the large ignorant part od society or what lobbyists want? Should politicians tell people that it takes more than one term in office to correct the American economy due to economic and burecractic circumstances? They shold, but they don't want to, because that means they will not not be voted for. Political interest above what is right. Guidence indeed!
theboyuan0jcfan 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan People who vote aren't "ignorant." It's called an education. Americans don't rely on politicians to "guide" us. We guide ourselves. What makes you think that a "large" part of society is "ignorant." I'm in a special interest group. I lobby for environmental protection. I'm also just an average citizen. Talk to me about "what is right" when you can have freedom of assembly, speech, religion, and banishment of cencorship in China.
F0reseer 1 month ago
@theboyuan0jcfan I have never accepted any such Zhonghua Minzu concept.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer You dont needd to accept it either. What matters is that we accept it.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@F0reseer I see your point and you are correct that Manchu is a different ethnic than Hans and were from two different civilizations. However, the title and video suggest that at present, they aren't Chinese. I define "Chinese" as generic as "Americans" or "British" just your example. I misunderstood the title and responded that back then 1600's China was Qing because the Manchus conquered China, but in the end, they were assimilated and Qing became part of China.
need2speed75 2 months ago
@need2speed75 They still aren't Chinese at present, in an ethnic sense, if they are pure blooded. They are of course Chinese, however, in the national citizenship sense. I don't like to define things in a "generic" way. Saying someone is "British" is fine but that means so little now, considering Scotland wanting to be independent. The Welsh, the Irish, and the Scots have very strong identities....I've pissed some off by calling them "british" before.
F0reseer 2 months ago
@F0reseer well, people of britain are british. they may be pissed at being called english, but there is no reason to be pissed at being called british.
theboyuan0jcfan 2 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan Outsiders define them as "British." People who live in Britain seldom refer to themselves as British. And as I said, those in Scotland who are pushing for independence would not want to be called "British" in a nationalistic sense, but they may be okay with it only in the geographic sense.
F0reseer 2 months ago
Qing dynasty is china
augustuszhang 4 months ago
i thought zhuge liang invented the crossbows ? in the han dynasty , or did he invent something else like the crossbow ?
lilvietkiidd 4 months ago
@lilvietkiidd Zhuge Liang probably invented the repeatitive shot crossbow, not the first crossbow. Besides, all the things to have been rumoured invented by him was based on fictional novels, not very reliable.
theboyuan0jcfan 4 months ago 2
Qin was a Han Chinese dynasty established by QinShi Huang over 2000 years ago. Qin has NOTHING to do with Manchurians.
TheXanian 5 months ago
Qin has nothing to do with Manchurians. Manchu established the Qing Dynasty, NOT Qin Dynasty.
TheXanian 5 months ago
I am totally ashamed of my filthy liar race which likes to distort and claim many races' origins and heritages,so here I apologize to Manchus and Han Chinese.90% of my fellow koreans are simply shameless !
realtruekorean 5 months ago
Uh how is this video relevant to the title?
purelego 5 months ago
All 56 ethnic tribes, clans, and groups of modern day china (People's Republic of China) are all chinese (not communist not Han, but they are all chinese people). Each prove they are chinese through their adaptation and performance of chinese customs or culture through their lives and history. Each clan has also admitted they are chinese people. Although they are chinese, they are put into groups (suck as Han, Tibet, Mongolia, Manchu) because of their unique differences. BUTWE ARE ALL CHINESE!!!
tacosvsburitos 7 months ago
The Qin royal family and people of the Qin state were Jurchens speaking the Jurchen tongue at the imperial court and culturally, ethnically different from the Chinese people of the other states they conquered. This just defeats your assumption that the Qin are Chinese as we know the Manchus are descended from Jurchens. So the Jurchens united China not once but twice in her history, during Qin AND the Qing dynasty, centuries apart.
Kundavozhd 7 months ago
@Kundavozhd "China" is just a Latin word invented by Romans. We call our ntion "Zhong Guo", which is a totally different concept of nationhood all together. Chinese from Qin Empire may be ancestors of the Han ethnic, but the supra-cluster Chinses race(Zhonghua Minzu) is made up of 56 modern ethnic groups and their ancient ethnic ancestors within the boudaries of the region called modern China.
theboyuan0jcfan 7 months ago
@Kundavozhd Very correct, yet every one seperates manchu from china, that is wrong, manchu is seperated from Han. Manchu is china's ethnicity, while Han is also china's ethnicity though han was the original, tibet, mongolians, and many others all are chinese clans and ethnic tribes. Each had a history of domination over china, but all are chinese people, just different tribes.
tacosvsburitos 7 months ago
@tacosvsburitos kundavozhd is not entirely correct. in fact, he's really wrong when he claimed that "the Qin family are Jurchens", when the truth is that the Qin are Han. the Qing are Jurchen/Manchu no doubt, but Qin is Han ethnic.
he's basically from the same bandwagon that makes videos like "Manchu history - 4. Qing dynasty is NOT China", of which this video is a direct reply to. he's probably a person who claims "Confucius as being Korean" or other BS.
I hate plagiarists like him.
ThePeeBottle 6 months ago
@Kundavozhd Fuk I hate koreans
RalghaNarHhallasClan 6 months ago
@Kundavozhd the rulers of the Qing are manchurian/jurchen, BUT the rulers of Qin are han chinese. even if you look at the geographical state of qin (during the spring and autumn/warring states period), you'll see it's no where near manchuria (where the jurchens lived).
the qin (han) united china, the qing (manchu/jurchen) broke china and made her weak. in fact, china's most shameful history happened almost entirely during the qing dynasty, like losing land to foreign occupiers.
ThePeeBottle 6 months ago
@Kundavozhd
Qin was a Han Chinese dynasty established by QinShi Huang over 2000 years ago. Qin has NOTHING to do with Manchurians. Qin was the first dynasty to unify China.
TheXanian 5 months ago
@Kundavozhd During Qin times Jurchen didn't even exist. Also Jurchen came from the northEAST while Qin is from the northWEST.
iMisogynist 5 months ago
what are the movies used to make this video? I am eager to research them and watch them!
jizmacdacusha 7 months ago
@jizmacdacusha TV series "The Qin Empire" Movie "Battle of Wits" Movie "Jiangshanmeiren" and two other documentaries
theboyuan0jcfan 7 months ago
Qing dynasty is not china. those barbarians will never be chinese. they failed china theirfore their leaders deserve death. china will return back to glory soon enough
ervin920 7 months ago
@ervin920 I do not agree with you. I am from Shenyang, northeastern China. There are Manchus in Shenyang and they don not see themselves as outsiders. They admit that they are Chinese as well.
theboyuan0jcfan 7 months ago 13
@theboyuan0jcfan china recognises 56 different ethnic groups, all contribute to the glorious chinese race
jobjed 7 months ago
@theboyuan0jcfan China is multi ethnic like America! The korean bitches try to distort by saying that China only has han chinese,all others are not counted! That is ridiculous,are the American Asians not counted as American citizens?
faculty3 7 months ago
Ask outside world & the west what chinese means. chinese language is han, chinese means people of yellow river, Great Wall, a world 7 wonders. East Asia sent false sayings to outside world, eg. manchu created chinese civilization, which is false 100%. The word "china" came from silk road of han dynasty 2000 years ago. manchu is very young, attacked china, uses han language. han was colony of qing, but manchu was colony of Ming Dynasty, too. Chinese in real English means han only, never manchu.
tukkatathai 4 months ago
@tukkatathai Howeer, it was the MAnchu who came up with the term 中华民族(zhonghuaminzu), which means the supra-cluster Chinese race to define all subjects in their empire. ROC and PRC inherited that definition. "China" is a Western definition which happened during Roman times when China had the Qin Dynasty, which is slightly earlier than Rome. Hence the name China-land of the Qin in Latin(language of Rome).
theboyuan0jcfan 4 months ago
@tukkatathai Since the West is the most influential in the world, their definition of China became more well-known versus our own definition of ourselves.
theboyuan0jcfan 4 months ago
@ervin920 you retarded son of bitch
faculty3 7 months ago
@faculty3 you pathedic monkey, learn to be less barbaric, I believe ervin is wrong as well and he is a good youtube friend of mine, but there is no need for swearing and cursing. Leave and go pick lice of your father.
tacosvsburitos 7 months ago
@ervin920 you are a faggot beyond pathedic. I am a Han and I love china. How people now try to tear china apart bit by bit similar to china before world war two is pathedic. China was strong, but corrupt, not united, and poor. We must all work together, Mongolians, Tibet, Hans, Manchurian, all 56 ethnic tribes should realize we are all chinese. I'm not saying communists are good or bad, im saying chinese people are strong.
tacosvsburitos 7 months ago
@tacosvsburitos sorry man i didn't see it was you........ didn't mean to call you pathedic, im saying we should gather chinese people, make chinese people realize we all live in harmony and must fight to preserve our powerful country. Forgive me brother, you are awsome
tacosvsburitos 7 months ago