|
|
Post by nanman on Apr 12, 2008 0:45:45 GMT 3
It is very typical of Han people to claim the achievements of others to make up for their lacking. Much of modern Han land is attributed to the conquest of China by Manchuria in the first place. Incredible that Manchus are now completely outnumbered and assimilated nowadays, 'but they are Chinese!' they say, 'So are Mongolians, they also Chinese!' This is very true. If Mongolians and Manchurians did not invade us, we cared little about what was beyond the wall. If Manchurians did not invade us we would not be in ET at all. Somehow you guys invaded us and then melted into our pot. We have been melted in from all directions, so there is no pure Chinese by blood since a long time ago. Mongolians from Republic of Mongolia are not Chinese. Only Mongol ethnic group living in China are Chinese. This is a common confusion in terminology made by some Chinese. Although there are some nationalistic nutters who seem to think China should still be the Qing Empire's lands. They even think Outer Manchuria now occupied by Russia is theirs. |
|
|
|
Post by Verinen Paroni on Apr 12, 2008 1:43:29 GMT 3
And even China is not united. There is People's Republic and Republic of Chinas.
|
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Apr 12, 2008 12:11:56 GMT 3
Nanman is very right indeed, because the Chinese rarely got outside China proper, and these were during the Hàn (Han) 漢, Suí (Sui) 隋, Táng (T'ang) 唐, Míng (Ming) 明 and Qíng (Ch'ing) 清 dynasties, as actions to encircle and cut off supplies to their nomadic enemies. In fact, China, as throughout most of it's history, did not care about the world outside China proper. It was the wars between the Oirats and Qíng 清 which caused the Qíng 清 to invade Eastern Turkistan, Tibet and eventually Mongolia to counter the Oirats and encircle them. After the fall of Qíng 清 dynasty, the Republic of China should have withdrawn from the region, but it did not, which is the cause of all the problems today. So basicly, it was again nomads vs nomads (Manchus vs Oirats) which caused modern problems  |
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Apr 12, 2008 13:07:27 GMT 3
Yes, land by inheritance, not by worthy conquest. Pity really, but hopefully things will change in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Apr 12, 2008 15:49:22 GMT 3
Nanman is very right indeed, because the Chinese rarely got outside China proper, and these were during the Hàn (Han) 漢, Suí (Sui) 隋, Táng (T'ang) 唐, Míng (Ming) 明 and Qíng (Ch'ing) 清 dynasties, as actions to encircle and cut off supplies to their nomadic enemies. In fact, China, as throughout most of it's history, did not care about the world outside China proper. It was the wars between the Oirats and Qíng 清 which caused the Qíng 清 to invade Eastern Turkistan, Tibet and eventually Mongolia to counter the Oirats and encircle them. After the fall of Qíng 清 dynasty, the Republic of China should have withdrawn from the region, but it did not, which is the cause of all the problems today. So basicly, it was again nomads vs nomads (Manchus vs Oirats) which caused modern problems Apart from Yuan and Qing periods. All China was interested outside the wall was trade. The Tang periods there was a lot of dealings with tribes outside the wall because of trade and our emperor was Xian Bei, Han mix. Assimilation happened over centuries and tend to have been nomadic tribes being absorbed into the Chinese population. The Han are really a mongrel mix of different Mongoloidal tribes. Chinese do have a very strong tendency to regard their existence as both nomadic and sedentary in their history. |
|
|
|
Post by nanman on Apr 12, 2008 15:58:58 GMT 3
Yes, land by inheritance, not by worthy conquest. Pity really, but hopefully things will change in the future. True, but I feel because Mongolian and Manchurian blood has got into us so much. It has made Chinese very like the idea of holding onto these conquests that were made by these ancestors of ours. Weird but it could make you feel a little better if you look at it from this angle. "My lost cousins are still cherishing our forefather's conquest, their history is also some of our lost cousin's history. " |
|
|
|
Post by greathun on May 26, 2008 7:29:56 GMT 3
Nanman,
You f**king chink! Get the hell out of our turkic forum. We turkish people will never fooled by you chink! Look at the last two posts of yours. You have been trying to justify your occupation of our land.
|
|
|
|
Post by Verinen Paroni on May 26, 2008 12:09:32 GMT 3
Nanman, You f**king chink! Get the hell out of our turkic forum. We turkish people will never fooled by you chink! Look at the last two posts of yours. You have been trying to justify your occupation of our land. Anda, I feel same way as you, and I also hate foreign occupation-powers, but this forum is not right place to talk things like "f**king chink". That is history-forum and non-political and non-ideological one. Qaqhan will tell am I right. |
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on May 26, 2008 21:29:44 GMT 3
also this is not exclusively Turkic forum...  |
|
|
|
Post by greathun on May 27, 2008 6:16:09 GMT 3
Come on, there have been plenty of "chink" mentioned in this thread. Some how from reading all the threads I had the impression that this forum is all about turkic people. Ok, I am not going to refer to this forum as turkic again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on May 27, 2008 12:20:08 GMT 3
Nanman,
Those lands are the lands of the Altai, sure it can be bound to you by official treaties, but you do your ching chong thing, and we do our nomadic thing. However if you push your ching chong thing to our people - expect no peace.
|
|
|
|
Post by nanman on May 27, 2008 13:05:09 GMT 3
Nanman, You f**king chink! Get the hell out of our turkic forum. We turkish people will never fooled by you chink! Look at the last two posts of yours. You have been trying to justify your occupation of our land. Actually, I have not fooled anyone. What I have said was nothing but the truth at least from one angle. It did not justify any occupation. They are indeed. What ching chong thing was I pushing? I respect nomadic cultures, I was trying to explain we (ching chongs) have a nomadic trait too because of our history. |
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on May 27, 2008 13:49:44 GMT 3
Are you so blinded by your Mao-propaganda that you simply do not know? Nomadic trait? And what's that - either then trying to cook Mongolian beef?
|
|
|
|
Post by nanman on May 27, 2008 14:00:50 GMT 3
Subu'atai,
I am surprised by your response. None of this is Mao-propaganda at all. It is purely historical. A lot of our ancestors have a nomadic past. Although the Han-centric sedantiary culture dominates.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on May 27, 2008 14:54:37 GMT 3
Either you are ignorant, or in denial - you have not seen what your government is trying to do to south Mongols or Uyghur turks or Tibetans. If the Manchus didn't invade - you would not have the lands that you have now. If you lose these lands, there's no way you'll gain them again.
However, you have made signs that you may not be one of the so called "chinks" we despise. I do appreciate that you made it known the term Chinese can be mistaken as an ethnic term, showed respect, and admitted your comments does not justify any occupation.
You do not speak for the rest of your people however, btw who are you? Manchu or Han?
|
|
