Taiwanese are Not Chinese

Discussion in 'China' started by Ray, Apr 20, 2015.

  1. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Taiwan’s Mainlanders: A Diasporic Identity in Construction

    This article has been published in open access since 01 March 2009.
    The old is dying, and the new cannot be born;
    in this interregnum there arise a great
    diversity of morbid symptoms
    (Antonio Gramsci, cited in Crapanzano, 1986: 47).

    1Diaspora is a relatively new concept to the study of Taiwan; but is nonetheless a useful conceptual tool in understanding shifting ethnic relations during the island nation’s tumultuous and yet unfinished process of decolonization. Taiwanese political discourse of the past two decades has constructed Taiwanese society as comprised of four ethnic groups. These are the indigenous peoples of Austronesian descent (approximately 2% of the population), whose presence on Taiwan dates back over 6000 years; the Hoklo (72%), whose paternal ancestors started arriving from Fujian Province of China during Dutch occupation of part of Taiwan in the 1600s; the Hakka (13%) whose ancestors came from Guangdong Province mostly in the 18th and 19th centuries, and finally the Mainlanders (13%), who arrived with Chiang Kai-shek after the conclusion of the Second World War in 1945 (Corcuff, 2002: 163).

    2Mainlanders, the group under discussion in this article, are called waishengren in Chinese or goa-seng-lang in Taiwanese, both meaning “people from outside the province.” This ethnic identity, determined by an imaginary province of origin that some individuals had never even seen, was even a legal category on official documents until 1992. The process by which waishengren and their Other (benshengren or “people of the province”) became social categories of ethnicity demonstrate clearly how legal categories metamorphose into ethnic categories in ways unimagined by their creators (Corcuff, 2002: 171).

    3As Taiwanese nationalism gains ascendancy over Chinese nationalism in Taiwanese society, Mainlanders are increasingly adopting a diasporic identity as Chinese in Taiwan (Chang, 2005). The labels and boundaries between ethnic groups are clearly related to the construction of a national identity on Taiwan; and need to be interrogated for the lessons they can teach us about the relationship between migration, decolonization, diasporas, and nationalism. Although these processes of national fragmentation and ethnicisation are part of the global Zeitgeist of our times (Elbaz and Helly, 1995), the case of Taiwan is particularly interesting because the boundaries between diasporas and the nation have changed so rapidly.

    4In order to understand the relationship between diasporic imaginations and nationalism in this fascinating case study, it is important to ask the following questions: To what extent do Taiwan’s Mainlanders constitute a diasporic community? How do discourses of Chinese diaspora in Taiwan contrast with, or articulate with, co-existing discourses of colonialism and resistance, as well as discourses of republican or multicultural citizenship? What do these competing discourses say about how the larger meaning of diaspora?

    Diaspora as a form of ethnic identity
    In anthropology, constructionist approaches to ethnicity are based largely on the insights of Norwegian anthropologist Fredrik Barth who argued that ethnic groups are not objective entities, but are rather formed through boundaries they form with others in specific historical circumstances (Barth, 1969). Since diasporas constitute one particular variety of ethnic group, James Clifford similarly used the term diaspora as “a signifier, not simply of transnationality and movement, but of political struggles to define the local, as distinctive community, in historical contexts of displacement” (Clifford, 1994: 308). Diaspora, argues Clifford, exists largely in tension with nationalist and autochtonous identity formations in which different groups use different criteria to claim “native” status on the same territory.

    6Within this larger political context, diasporas often share a number of broad characteristics. Safran defined diasporas as “expatriate minority communities” characterized by an experience of dispersal from their homeland, collective memories of that homeland, a belief that they are not accepted in their new land, a desire for return, support of their homeland, and a collective identity constructed around their place of origin (Safran, 1991: 83-84). Diasporic identities are closely related to national identities, as they define who belongs to, but also whom is excluded from a given nation as “imagined community” (Anderson, 1991). Diasporas are non-native in relationship to ethnic nationalisms, but can be more easily absorbed into civic nationalisms. As with national borders, therefore, the boundaries between diaspora and nativist identities are often contested from both sides.

    7Diaspora studies have usually focused on immigrant communities. The Jews constitute the paradigmatic case of diaspora due to their dispersal throughout the world; strong collective identity; ritualized memories of the lost homeland; and a desire for spiritual, if not physical, return to Israel. Armenians, Africans throughout the North Atlantic, and immigrant Asians are also frequently studied as diasporas. Less commonly studied as diasporas are those peoples, such as Europeans in North America or Africa, who dispersed to other parts of the world as part of a colonizing project (Schnapper, 2001: 11).

    8In the process of decolonization, however, diaspora becomes relevant to those situations, especially for members of communities who have stayed behind rather than returning to their places of origin. Yet in order to avoid an overuse of the concept of diaspora, it is important to limit it to cases in which there is some institutionalized exchange between the home and diaspora communities, as well as at least an imaginary desire to “return” (Schapper, 2001: 31). Without those two elements, the English and the French of Canada do not constitute diaspora communities, but, as argued below, the Mainlanders of Taiwan do. In colonial and post-colonial situations, the formation of diaspora identity constitutes an unfinished process of struggle and negotiation in which past colonialism shapes contemporary struggles. The postcolonial construction of such diasporas is as important in the study of Taiwan’s Mainlanders as it is for whites in South Africa.

    Mainlander ethnic identity
    Although most of the anthropological literature on Taiwan since the 1970s has subsumed Mainlanders and Native Taiwanese under the general rubric of “Chinese culture,” the ethnic boundaries between them have also been recognized as salient, especially the boundary constructed between Mainlanders and “Native Taiwanese,” referring to both the Hoklo and the Hakka. Although the boundaries between these groups are also a product of Chinese Nationalist rule (see below), they have been increasing reinforced in public discourse since the gradual democratization and decolonization of Taiwan that began in the 1980s.

    10Group identities constructed around the four ethnicities of Mainlanders, Hakka, Hoklo and Aboriginal have been particularly prone to mobilization during political rallies and at election time. As the Native Taiwanese gained power in Taiwan, the Mainlanders have lost many of the privileges they enjoyed in the past. In this context, they fear being classified as members of an ethnic minority or political scapegoats. Many Mainlanders feel threatened by this shift in political power and by the ethnic discourse that has come with it; and thus believe rumours that Native Taiwanese have even shouted out “Mainland pigs go home!” at political rallies. Yet in a democratic country where alternative nationalisms can be freely expressed and contested, it is difficult to return to the old discourse that “we are all Chinese”– especially since in practice the groups have never been equal. Instead, Mainlanders seem to be reluctantly constructing a new diasporic identity to negotiate a new place a Taiwan that is going through a process of decolonization comparable to that of South Africa (Wu, 2002).

    11Mainlander dis-ease with Taiwanese nationalism is readily apparent in Taiwan. After the 2004 presidential elections, for example, when Native Taiwanese candidate Chen Shui-bian won the presidency for the second time, a heavily-accented Mainlander taxi driver explained to me that the results would surely be disastrous. He argued that Chen’s Taiwanese nationalism was dangerous and could easily lead to violence against “foreigners” like himself. When I argued that surely all people who carry Republic of China passports are Taiwanese, he referred to the Native Taiwanese saying, “They don’t recognize that. They think we Mainlanders are not Taiwanese. To them, we are Chinese. We are foreigners.” He broke into tears as he contemplated on the possibility that political change might bring about an official declaration of Taiwanese independence and thus the end of the Republic of China on Taiwan. Conversations such as this, which reflect Mainlander discomfort with political developments in Taiwan, provide a useful point of departure for the study of the Mainlander diaspora as a new form of ethnic identity in the country.

    The historical genesis of Mainlander identity on Taiwan
    Due to their phenotypical similarities, the differences between Mainlanders and Native Taiwanese seem small compared to those between “black” and “white” Africans unless one keeps in mind that all ethnicities are relationships of power rather than essentialized objects in themselves. Not unlike different ethnic groups in Africa, the boundary between Mainlanders and Native Taiwanese was formed out of conflict, violence and oppression. After Japan’s defeat at the conclusion of the Second World War, the Allied Forces under General MacArthur transferred the Japanese colony of Taiwan to the administration of the Republic of China without consulting the local people about their future.

    13Those people already living on Taiwan, the indigenous Austronesian tribes and the numerical majority of “Native Taiwanese”, were soon faced with the problem of accommodating newcomers from China. Due to historical circumstances, the social distance between the groups was large. The indigenous peoples spoke Japanese and a variety of Austronesian languages. Native Taiwanese spoke Japanese and Hakka or Hoklo, the latter known now as “Taiwanese”, while the Mainlanders spoke Mandarin Chinese with various degrees of proficiency and various Chinese dialects. Although it is often claimed that Hakka and Hoklo (Taiwanese) are merely dialects of Chinese, the difference between Taiwanese and Mandarin is as different as that between Dutch (or Afrikaaner) and English. The Austronesian languages are not related to Chinese at all; but are instead related to other Pacific islander languages such as Maori, Hawaiian and Chamorro.

    14Between 1945 and 1949, several waves of people started arriving from China to Taiwan, including members of the new military administration under Chen Yi, those sent by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to establish civil and military authority, and Chinese civilians looking for job opportunities. After the Chinese Revolution of 1949, the Chinese Nationalist Party was forced to retreat to Taiwan, bringing with them more military personnel and an unknown number of civilian refugees. They depended on the Nationalist government for housing and living; and initially expected that their return to China would be imminent. Not expecting to settle down permanently in Taiwan, they identified strongly with the Chinese Nationalist Party, with their places of origin in China, and felt a strong sense of cultural superiority over the Taiwanese (Corcuff, 2002: 172-174).

    15Relations between the two groups were particularly strained in the aftermath of the tragic events of the 1940s. After the Republic of China arrived on Taiwan in 1945, the new government began by confiscating property belonging to the Japanese colonial government, Taiwanese enterprises and even individuals. They appropriated large amounts of local commodities – including basic needs such as sugar, salt and rice – to be shipped to the mainland; a situation that led to critical shortages and inflation in Taiwan (Morris, 2004: 20). Chinese soldiers terrorized the local population by stealing, looting and raping. Resentment led to the Taiwanese making unfavorable comparisons with the Japanese, saying that the takeover was a situation of “the dogs leaving and the pigs coming.”

    16Disaster struck on the evening of February 27, 1947, when agents of the Taipei City Monopoly Board tried to confiscate the contraband cigarettes that a woman peddler was selling on the street. When she was injured in the ensuing scuffle, neighbors tried to defend her and a riot broke out, leading to the police shooting of a bystander. As news of the event spread throughout Taiwan, local leaders set up “February 28 Resolution Committees” to demand investigation of the incident, democratic and economic reforms, and limited self-rule. Governor Chen Yi promised to negotiate, but actually requested military reinforcement from China. When troops arrived, they first killed Taiwanese indiscriminately on the streets and then rounded up opposition leaders for execution. The exact casualty numbers are still unknown, but estimates range from a few hundred to more than 20 000. Martial law was imposed afterwards and would last forty years – the longest period of martial law in human history. Those years are now known as the time of “white terror.”

    17It was in this difficult transition from Japanese to ROC rule that the Mainlanders began to be perceived – and to perceive themselves – as a distinct ethnic group. As Corcuff wrote:

    The people associated with the geographical entity of Mainland China were also associated with a regime, an army, a police force, but more important still, an ideology, a project for winning back the lost continent… A new ethnic category was in the process of being born (Corcuff, 2002: 166).

    18In many ways, the Mainlanders of this generation already resembled diasporas as defined by Safran as expatriate minority communities characterized by memories of their homeland, a desire to return, and a collective identity constructed around it. The crucial difference between the first generation of Mainlanders on Taiwan and immigrant diasporas, however, was that the Mainlanders held the reins of power in Taiwan. Unable to return to China, at least in the short run, they committed themselves to the Chinese Nationalist Party and to reshaping Taiwan to their own image as the Republic of China. Rather than a relationship of immigrants to a host majority, it was a relationship of colonial domination.

    Colonizing Taiwan
    Colonialism, in the sense of postmodern anthropology, is many things at once: an ideological project and an institutional order, a process and an existential state-of-mind, but above all, a construction and negotiation of difference in situations of unequal power (Comaroff, 1998). In the 1960s, when decolonization was beginning in Africa and the memories of February 28, 1947, were still fresh in the memories of the Taiwanese, colonialism was clearly the existential state-of-mind of most Taiwanese:

    Today most of the 10,000,000 Formosans look upon the nearly 2 000 000 mainlanders who fled to Formosa with the collapse of Kuomintang rule as foreign overlords and describe the Chinese nationalist regime as a colonial tyranny far more oppressive than the former Japanese rule. That the overwhelming majority of Formosans favour the establishment of an independent Formosan state, without ties to mainland China and, preferably, without the presence of Mainlanders, is a fact that can no longer be ignored (Meisner, 1963: 91).

    20In the early decades of Chinese Nationalist rule, just as under Japanese administration, the government discriminated against Native Taiwanese in favor of the colonizers. This systematic discrimination fostered a sense of ethnic identity among both Mainlanders and Native Taiwanese (Gates, 1981: 261). In addition to political domination, the government owned or controlled most of the larger industries and commercial enterprises, the transportation system and public utilities. In employment, they systematically discriminated against Native Taiwanese employees, often blocking hiring or promotion with the excuse that the Taiwanese did not speak Mandarin well enough. In the school system and military, as well, Taiwanese were subordinated to Mainlanders. The Chinese Nationalist state, not to mention local officials and police, also used their political domination to extract taxes, fees and levies for political campaigns from Native Taiwanese farmers. All of these practices kept alive a feeling of antagonism towards Mainlanders (Meisner, 1963: 100-101). Anthropologist Hill Gates argued the construction of ethnic difference actually benefited both ethnic groups and the government. In the early decades of Chinese Nationalist rule, a separation of Mainlander soldiers and the Taiwanese lower class helped maintain political stability and control the population (Gates, 1981: 269).

    21The cultural domination of the Chinese Nationalists over Taiwan was firmly implanted by the 1960s in processes well known to scholars of the cultural dimensions of colonization (e.g. Comaroff, 1989, Comaroff and Comaroff, 1989, Cooper and Stoler, 1989, Dirks, 1992). Chinese Nationalist education and media denigrated Taiwanese local culture, including life-styles, cuisine, and religion as backwards and rural. Members of both groups internalized those values (Gates, 1981: 253). In order to force the Taiwanese to learn Mandarin Chinese, children were often beaten, humiliated, or fined for speaking Japanese, Taiwanese, or even aboriginal languages in school (Morris, 2004: 25). The Chinese Nationalist party-state took all possible measures to implant their symbolic rule over Taiwan, tearing down Shinto shrines and other Japanese monuments, renaming streets after place names in China, and erecting statues of both Sun Yat-sen and Chiang Kai-shek all over the island. Like colonial regimes in Africa, the Chinese Nationalists had to fabricate what Comaroff (1998: 329) called “an entire space-time world” with its logic insinuated into the most mundane practices of citizens now re-membered as Chinese.

    22The educational system taught children that China represents all that is modern and good, and that they should be proud to be Chinese rather than foreign, Japanese, or even locally Taiwanese (Simon, 2005: 35-36). Beginning in 1968, Chinese Nationalists with missionary zeal even brought adult women into “Mothers’ workshops” on Confucian ethics, emphasizing that Taiwanese women are traditional Chinese wives and mothers who should thus work for free in their husbands’ subcontracting workshops (Greenhalgh, 1994; Hsiung, 1996). Taiwanese who resisted sinicization, and especially those who advocated the independence of Taiwan from the Republic of China, faced imprisonment or worse. Some political prisoners were summarily executed (Arrigo, 1998).

    23As so often happens in colonial situations (Fanon, 1967), many Taiwanese internalized the idea that the language and cultural markers of the colonizers were more prestigious than those of the local people. Under the sway of colonial mentality, Peking opera was elevated to high culture, while local opera and puppet shows were denigrated as high class. The National Palace Museum in Taipei highlighted the pageantry of Chinese history, while younger generations of Taiwanese learned nothing about their island’s past. Socially, Native Taiwanese often worked as servants for Mainlanders, but even the poorest Mainlanders would not work as servants for the Native Taiwanese (Meisner, 1963: 101). The prestige of the Chinese was even reflected through hypergamy, as there was a trend for Native Taiwanese women to marry Mainlander men but not for Mainlander women to marry Taiwanese (Meisner, 1963: 103). A generation later, the children of such couples still tend to self-identify as Chinese Mainlanders rather than as Taiwanese. In the 1970s, however, the dialectic of history began to work in another direction as the experience of subordination led to counter-hegemonic movement.
     
  2.  
  3. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Taiwanese are not Chinese or Han.
     
  4. Zeratul

    Zeratul Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    Not Chinese? so who they are? They don't have the guts to separate.

    In Taiwan , few people want to independent or unify. Most of them want to keep this status.

    They want to live their lives with no change.

    You should at least consistent with India's official comments.

    vote to modi and let him build the establishment of diplomatic relations with Taiwan , try it .:laugh:
     
  5. Sambha ka Boss

    Sambha ka Boss Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2014
    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    365
    Location:
    Hyderabad Rangareddy
    98% Taiwanese are Han immigrants from mainland after Qing colonized Taiwan. Native Taiwanese are only 2% of the population.
     
  6. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    454
    Location:
    India
  7. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Learn to read and comment on the article and not spill your jingoist guts.
     
  8. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Read the article.

    Note also

    Also, Hoklo culture in Taiwan has deviated from that in mainland China due to Austronesian and Japanese influences. They have intermarried with the original Taiwanese and so hardly are Han.

    Similar to the fudge that Chinese Communists (Mainland) has done, where they classify the 'outer people' (wei ren) as 'inner people' (nei ren) or Han.

    Further, Siyi 四夷 was a derogatory Chinese name for various peoples bordering ancient China, namely, the Dongyi 東夷 "Eastern Barbarians", Nanman 南蠻 "Southern Barbarians", Xirong 西戎 "Western Barbarians", and Beidi 北狄 "Northern Barbarians".

    The Siyi construct, or a similar one, was a logical necessity for the ancient tianxia system. Liu Junping and Huang Deyuan (2006:532) describe the universal monarch with combined political, religious, and cultural authorities: "According to the Chinese in the old times, heaven and earth were matched with yin and yang, with the heaven (yang) superior and the earth (yin) inferior; and the Chinese as an entity was matched with the inferior ethnic groups surrounding it in its four directions so that the kings could be valued and the barbarians could be rejected." The authors (2006:535) propose that Chinese ideas about the "nation" and "state" of China evolved from the "casual use of such concepts as "tianxia", "hainei"( four corners within the sea) and "siyi" 四夷 (barbarians in four directions)."

    Chinese are master manipulators and fudges who can convert the impossible to suit their postulations.

    Imagine such a huge land mass (9,596,961 km²) as China has a single ethnicity, the Han Chinese, comprising a population at 91.59% classified as Han Chinese.

    Is there any other country with such huge land mass having just one incomparably huge single ethnicity?

    This is how the Han captured areas and made all follow the Han culture and declare themselves as Han just as they are trying to do now in Tibet and Xinjiang.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2015
    SANITY likes this.
  9. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,274
    Likes Received:
    11,287
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Fascinating read @Ray thanks for posting. Everyday one learns something new. Thanks to social media.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2015
    Ray likes this.
  10. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The Chinese postersx misunderstand me and think that I am anti Chinese.

    That is far from the truth.

    I like the truth but their disinformation rankles, more so, since I have some idea about China and the Chinese mould.

    Disinformation, as you are aware, is intentionally false or inaccurate information that is spread deliberately. It is an act of deception and false statements to convince someone of untruth. Disinformation should not be confused with misinformation, information that is unintentionally false.

    Unlike traditional propaganda techniques designed to engage emotional support, disinformation is designed to manipulate the audience at the rational level by either discrediting conflicting information or supporting false conclusions. A common disinformation tactic is to mix some truth and observation with false conclusions and lies, or to reveal part of the truth while presenting it as the whole.

    The concept that such a huge mass as China (9,596,961 km²) has a single massive ethnicity (Han) that is 92% of the population is totally bogus.

    The conveniently downplay or ignore the fact that they Sinicised the people of the areas they captured and forced them to 'become' Han by obliterating their original roots of the people in every way.

    They are doing it even now in Tibet and Xinjiang and are trying to state that Money is bringing happiness to the Tibetans and Uighurs. They totally ignore the effect of wiping out the culture, language and religion, apart from singular identity of these people as important.

    Likewise, if you look at Taiwan, note the manner in which Sinicisation has occurred.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2015
    SANITY likes this.
  11. sometimes_naive

    sometimes_naive New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2015
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    China
    The Taiwan is not the RPC,but it is the China,now the Taiwan is governed by the Republic of China("中華民國“),Republic of China,do you konw?:rofl:
     
  12. Zeratul

    Zeratul Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    You are not anti China ,Maybe ,but I see in your words full of pride and prejudice.

    Like our building ,all your and my pics are ture, right ? you don't belive what I said, you are in your perspective and your position.

    We also plan to rebuild the old Summer Palace and the DaMing palace. What say you?

    You just understand China in your view , like European understand China in their view, Did you really understand China?

    In Chinese view you can really understand China. And you shall predicte China's possible development direction.

    In your view, never. so whatever you say is not improtant at all.

    I can speak English , although it's not very good. What about you?

    Try to speak a little Chinese with me. Tell me more, tell me more about India.
     
  13. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    454
    Location:
    India
    The pretext to the above also need to define what is China and Chinese ... There is Taiwanese, Hong Kongese, Macauese, PRCians, ROCians, areas with people like North Koreans, areas with people like Spratly Islanders, areas with people like Singaporeans, people that speak Mandarin

    I still do not understand one china and chinese people and why there can be different constitutions and different leaders that are not accountable to a single leader under one administrative body. Would it be ironic when India gets on UNSC a categorization to try and deny it is because of unsettled and disputed areas !!
     
  14. Zeratul

    Zeratul Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2015
  15. Zeratul

    Zeratul Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    http://baidu.hz.letv.com/watch/04765078930084010151.html
    This is a video from Martin Jacques.
    I don't know whether you can use it because China's firewall ,try please, If it can not work ,tell me, I'll find another address in youtube.
     
  16. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    454
    Location:
    India
    Thanks for replying also please do not think i am being antagonist ... it would be good if you can get a youtube ... i like to learn new things. appreciate that!! good stuff
     
    Zeratul likes this.
  17. Zeratul

    Zeratul Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    It's nice as you like it!
     
  18. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    If you are going to restore your old heritage, it is remarkable and good. That is how it should be. Have pride in your OWN heritage.

    But tell me which country with an ancient civilisation replicates foreign buildings and towns? None to my knowledge.

    Even the US, which has no heritage to fall back on, designed their Govt buildings on the Grecian architectural style since they want to showcase that they were a democracy (Greece is taken by the Europeans as the seat of democracy), but they did not wholesale replicate the ancient Greek structure, buildings or towns.

    But China, which the world applauds their ancient civilisation, goes and starts replicating European towns, buildings, structures and even icons like Churchill. I thought the ‘100 years of National Shame’ includes the Opium War by which the British crippled China and even took away Hong Kong in perpetuity through the Treaty of Nanking (常遠) extending to the Kowloon peninsula in 1860 and then in 1898, the Second Convention of Peking further expanded the colony with the 99-year lease of the New Territories.

    And you erect the statue of Churchill, who was the most racist and imperialist of all Britons!

    Perplexing.

    If that is not insecurity, inferiority and kowtowing, then what is?

    I agree it is real difficult to know ‘real’ China or ‘real’ Chinese since they talk in ambiguous terms and never straight and upfront. They manufacture facts, truths in ambiguous terms with pleasant and comforting words, when the actual intent is very sinister.

    Take the case of Deng stating that Mao was ‘30% wrong and 70% right’ and which was parroted by the Chinese people mindless, without analysing it so.

    Likewise, after the Famine in china, then-Chairman of the People's Republic of China Liu Shaoqi concluded that the reason for the calamity was "30% natural disaster, 70% policy".

    How do you all get this ‘30% and 70%’ exact figures for every catastrophe and chaos? And then they become the gospel for Chinese to mindless to parrot as ‘true’.

    Now that exact figure is Disinformation and Falsehood. While everyone knows how policies caused the Great Chinese Famine, at that time, the famine was almost exclusively blamed on a conspiracy by "enemies of the people" and "unreformed kulak elements" among the peasant farmers, who starved at a rate nearly three times that of the urban Chinese population.

    When Mao was alive, he was the ‘Great Helmsman’ and he could do no wrong and when he died, he was ‘30% wrong and 70% right’

    So, how do you know what is the truth that China states and what the Chinese state. Always a huge fudge is at work.


    I am shown you the duplicitous manner of the Chinese authorities and of the Chinese. Therefore, you will understand China, just as the CPC directs you to understand.

    Fortunately, I am from a democracy and can think and analyse issues and event independently and also because the CPC cannot seize my mind and so my view is different from yours. It matters a sausage as to what you feel about it and whether it is important or not.

    So, why act so pricked?

    No, I am not good in English. I write and understand Esperanto or so some say.

    I know a smattering of Chinese, but it cannot sustain a conversation. I enjoy speaking it with mnemonics.

    Like 您好 (Ni Hao).

    I remember it by saying ‘Knee how’

    "Ni", in this case, I pronounce as a second/rising tone because it is located before another third tone word. "Hao" is a third tone word where I pitch of my voice to dip slightly and then rise to a higher pitch.
     
    SANITY likes this.
  19. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    454
    Location:
    India
    I am sure it would be. What is China and Chinese today ...

    Terms spring to the mind like Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, PRC, ROC, North Korea, Tibet, Xinjing areas like Spratly Islanders, areas like Singapore, people that speak Mandarin, people that speak Chinese, people that read Chinese, One China policy, Taiwan Relations Act, Constitution of Taiwan / Macau / Hong Kong / PRC / North Korea / Tibet / Xinjing / areas like Spratly islands, Flag of Taiwan / Macau / Hong Kong / PRC / North Korea / Tibet / Xinjing areas like Spratly islands, to even who is the actual leader of China and Chinese.

    I also always wondered if the UK and Portugal when discussing the Hong Kong and Macau question asked CCP and PRC where and why Taiwanese, KMT and ROC is not on the table why only PRC and CCP representatives.

    Might be a reason why PRC and CCP bestowed such (unruly) terms in the agreements and have such constitutions but it might be simplistic like maintain status quo. (e.g. Is there a provision in PRC constitution on what happens to Taiwan Constitution. Its better i say - there is a provision in PRC constitution on what happens and is happening in Taiwan but what does that mean - it is okay for areas to be like Taiwan but what about Hong Kong and Macau and Tibet, and Xinjing why all these different and what does Chinese person do in such areas are they treated the same like a person from PRC can go freely to such areas it is their country right??)

    Such questions comes to mind naturally to me with India going to get on UNSC and its discussion around that and try to deny the seat by saying India has disputed and unsettled areas to even saying India has no identity.

    Any chance on getting the Youtube link: wish the video is simple and conclusive on defining China and Chinese today ...

    do you also have a youtube on Taiwan and ROC and its rights and privileges on areas claimed by both PRC and ROC that include over Hong Kong and Macau that would be coool to see also. Like a question i have is why China and Chinese and CCP and KMT (is it banned from Hong kong and Macau elections) not participate in elections of Hong Kong and Macau they are Special regions and can act to bring China and Chinese and PRC and ROC and others even closer together. Always want to learn something new.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    ** Added later: Always wondered if those people in the images are Chinese

    Thanks for your help
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2015
  20. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    If Taiwan is not ROC, then what is?

    How is Taiwan, Chinese?
     
  21. Zeratul

    Zeratul Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    China
    You just see it outside. Replicates foreign buildings and towns Do Not mean we are not pride in our own heritage.
    You can't see on the Internet in China people criticize The Replica so much. We just feel it's interesting about European culture.

    In our education system ,classical Chinese literature rating is 30% of Chinese Class in elementary school.
    50%-70% in middle school or high middle school . China's leaders quote the classical poetry in every speech.
    We are pride of our history!

    But one thing you are right .Once we worship the West and Japan because their technology.
    It's not mean we want to become The west, it's mean we want to back to our Status .
    After 1894 ,we failed in Jiawu war with japan. After a few years Many overseas student went to Japan.
    We want to know why we fail ,why japan grow so powerful. We study from our enemy.
    Include a lot of CCP leaders and KMT leaders , Zhongshan-SUN, Enlai-Zhou, Dazhao-Li, Xing-Huang and so on.
    In our history , there are two times to import loan words on a large scale.
    First time is in Tang dynasty. Zang-Xuan bring India culture to China.
    Second time is After Jiawu war we learn west culture form Japan and UE.

    Now is still the western dominance of the international community. We inevitably received the impact of western values.
    The west media say Chinese copy everything all day.
    But it's not mean we will loss ourselves. We are very clear what we want.
    We have Replicates Taj Mahal and The Great Sphinx. Do you think we want bo become Indians and Egyptians?
     

Share This Page