Miscellaneous News

Randomuser

Captain
Registered Member
My own comments on the current state of anti-chinese propaganda:

I've recently noticed that (especially on reddit) there is now a rising trend of anti-china people that are now trying to propagate their anti-chinese agenda via a different way, at least a much different way from the traditional route. And this is slightly harder for some people to detect, think of this as similar to the ever-evolving ways of social engineering used for scamming.

That is, by trying to completely revision Chinese history by pretending to be a subject expert or historian, but they are in fact bad faith actors. These people are active on history related subreddits and sometimes are even moderators of said subreddits. But in actual fact what they said have absolutely no substance or factual backing if one were to scrutinise their words closely and do a basic level of research. Despite them trying really hard to phrase their comments in a scholarly way, the bad faith component of their comments are quite obvious to see.

One such example of this is the blatant denial that the Manchus were Chinese people, the denial of sinicization, the claim of the existence of "Manchuria" in Chinese history, the intentional interchangeable use of the terms "Chinese" and "Han" (which are a complete erroneous use of semantics, similar to how pro-green frogs love to conflate the semantics between "China" and "PRC" to get their nonsensical points across) and claiming that Han people are the ones that colonised their conquerors. Their intentions of making these points are to explain why Manchus, and by extension "Manchuria", should be fighting for "freedom" just like what they think the other autonomous regions are doing. And then to make up a cover story to explain why the Manchus are currently not doing so (to their disappointment). And in their view, the separation of Qing from China as a whole, while nonsensical, is also helpful for them to reinforce their argument about the separatism of the other Chinese ethnics as well.
Please note that none of their claims were backed by facts and they always like to selectively quote writings from academics (with omission of context that is unhelpful to them) to make themselves seem legitimate, and they always reference to a western author/ historian without fail. And ironically, it is always from the same few western historian that is known in the circle to be very biased and full of shit too.

These kinds of comments are really easy to spot if you read enough. The moderator of r/chinesehistory is one such example, and he is not even trying to hide his very strong anti-china bias in some of the comments where he accidently let his true colours slipped. The amount of bad faith arguments made by these people, from seemly small details such as purposely using the wrong semantics, to outright spreading misinformation and lying by omission is quite immense. And the sad thing is there are always a number of people out there with zero critical thinking skills that are buying their shit up without much thought, and a lot of it is owed to their pretense of authority on the subject matter. I actually think the effort they spend doing this kind of despicable things are quite commendable to be honest, if only they spend it on actual jobs or doing something positive for society.

Just my personal thoughts based on the things I came across.
This isn't new though. They've always been trying to say stuff like Manchus weren't Chinese. Manchuria is a Japanese term after all.

The best way is to call them out and ask them to cite the terms in Chinese. Watch them squirm since they don't know Chinese. The original HQ of the Manchus was in Liaoning which last time I checked was part of the Yan state back in the warring states. So somehow the main part of Manchuria is owned by China. Also Nurhaci somehow was raised and taught by a Chinese general too. Why were they under Chinese rule again in the first place?

Also another trend I noticed is despite people insistence that Manchus and Mongols were not ethnically Han, people are realizing many rulers of countries in general like UK, Russia, Germany, France etc are not native either. Japan so called god emperor has Korean blood so I guess Korea has claim to Japan now. Yet no one doubts the legitimacy of them. They wanna try doing this with China, they will open a can of worms they suddenly don't want to apply to their own countries.

Recently I found out George Michael was never native British but is actually Greek. Oasis the most popular "Britpop" band are actually Irish when it comes to their original members and most notably the brothers. The Gallagher brothers literally state it every time they are asked on it. There's a lot more where that came from.
 
Last edited:

montyp165

Senior Member
Many of them are getting paid for it by Western govs or can leverage this into securing future payouts from Western govs. Gaslighting and rewriting history is soft power bullshit. At the end of the day though, if you dominate hard power, you can force your own changes through in this sphere. Keep your eye on the ball (hard power) and the soft power will eventually come. Just like we're seeing with extremely popular influencers visiting China from Taiwan, Europe, US, etc. instantly undoing the impact from many hundreds of billions of dollars worth of Western propaganda funding.
Indeed, this point really mirrors my own assessments on US media influence/manipulation/propaganda that one YT commentator (Shahid Bolsen) also alludes to in one of his assessments:
 

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is yet another proof that any dreams of Trump pulling a reverse-Nixon on Russia, is pure fantasy. Putin had been cheated too many times to be played by Trump of all people. He had been cheated from "not one inch to the East", all the way to the Minsk agreements. Trump had promised that he'll stop the war as soon as he is president elect. And now this.

Yet people had dared to call him the "peace president". Clearly they had learned nothing from his first term. The late John Pilger described him most accurately as yet another standard American president. Just one without the good guy mask.
 
Last edited:
Also another trend I noticed is despite people insistence that Manchus and Mongols were not ethnically Han
Also a lot of Westerners think the Tungusic peoples and Mongolic people are the same. They dont understand the cultures, ancestry, beliefs and traditions of the two peoples are vastly different. Tungusic people of Manchuria share more in common with the Chinese than Mongols. Neither the Manchus or even their ancestors the Jurchens were ever steppe nomads nor practiced pastoralism. The Jurchens didn't even domesticate horses until they were conquered by the Khitans. They lived in forests, practiced agriculture supplemented by hunting and fishing, and literally rode reindeer instead of horses.
 

CMP

Senior Member
Registered Member
Also a lot of Westerners think the Tungusic peoples and Mongolic people are the same. They dont understand the cultures, ancestry, beliefs and traditions of the two peoples are vastly different. Tungusic people of Manchuria share more in common with the Chinese than Mongols.
They don't know and don't care. They are always either virtue signaling or playing divide and conquer.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
This isn't new though. They've always been trying to say stuff like Manchus weren't Chinese. Manchuria is a Japanese term after all.

The best way is to call them out and ask them to cite the terms in Chinese. Watch them squirm since they don't know Chinese. The original HQ of the Manchus was in Liaoning which last time I checked was part of the Yan state back in the warring states. So somehow the main part of Manchuria is owned by China. Also Nurhaci somehow was raised and taught by a Chinese general too. Why were they under Chinese rule again in the first place?

Also another trend I noticed is despite people insistence that Manchus and Mongols were not ethnically Han, people are realizing many rulers of countries in general like UK, Russia, Germany, France etc are not native either. Japan so called god emperor has Korean blood so I guess Korea has claim to Japan now. Yet no one doubts the legitimacy of them. They wanna try doing this with China, they will open a can of worms they suddenly don't want to apply to their own countries.

Recently I found out George Michael was never native British but is actually Greek. Oasis the most popular "Britpop" band are actually Irish when it comes to their original members and most notably the brothers. There's a lot more where that came from.
The difference between China and UK is that the UK never overthrew their French, Scandinavian and German masters while China overthrew Mongolians and Manchus. I wonder why 50% of English is derived from French but 1% of Chinese is Mongolian or Manchu. I guess the English must have really loved France, so much that they fought them in multiple wars including one that lasted 100 years.

Imagine if Manchus and Mongolians today still had hereditary wealth from medieval times.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Randomuser

Captain
Registered Member
Also a lot of Westerners think the Tungusic peoples and Mongolic people are the same. They dont understand the cultures, ancestry, beliefs and traditions of the two peoples are vastly different. Tungusic people of Manchuria share more in common with the Chinese than Mongols. Neither the Manchus or even their ancestors the Jurchens were ever steppe nomads nor practiced pastoralism. The Jurchens didn't even domesticate horses until they were conquered by the Khitans. They lived in forests, practiced agriculture supplemented by hunting and fishing, and literally rode reindeer instead of horses.
They believe that nonsense because Nurhaci said some crap about Mongols and Manchus being brothers. Keep in mind though this was just a way to get Mongols to join them in fighting rather than any real shared cultural thing. The best they got is using Mongolian language but guess what language the Yuan/Qing courts used then? According to Nurhaci, Chinese Han Soldiers who joined the 8 banners early enough could be called Manchus too so what does that tell you? It is estimated than the vast majority of the early 8 banner "Manchu" army that conquered China were actually just Han Chinese pretending to be someone else. The reason is coz they had knowledge in stuff like cannons, firearms and the fact there were not many actual manuchus.

Also if those westeners actually bothered to study Qing history apart from the invasion bit, they would know the biggest enemy from Kangxi to Qianlong period were actually Mongols. A lot of Mongols were considered uppity and didn't listen, so those emperors focused on crushing them above everything else. This ended with the famous massacre Qianlong carried out against the Dzungar which ironically many of the participants were not Han Chinese but other ethnic groups including Urghyrs who had a historical grudge against Mongols. The Qing were far bigger haters of Mongols compared to Han Chinese and personally in my opinion one of the biggest positives is Qing solved the nomad problem once and for all where modern China can reap the dividends from it.
 
Last edited:

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
This isn't new though. They've always been trying to say stuff like Manchus weren't Chinese. Manchuria is a Japanese term after all.

The best way is to call them out and ask them to cite the terms in Chinese. Watch them squirm since they don't know Chinese. The original HQ of the Manchus was in Liaoning which last time I checked was part of the Yan state back in the warring states. So somehow the main part of Manchuria is owned by China. Also Nurhaci somehow was raised and taught by a Chinese general too. Why were they under Chinese rule again in the first place?

Also another trend I noticed is despite people insistence that Manchus and Mongols were not ethnically Han, people are realizing many rulers of countries in general like UK, Russia, Germany, France etc are not native either. Japan so called god emperor has Korean blood so I guess Korea has claim to Japan now. Yet no one doubts the legitimacy of them. They wanna try doing this with China, they will open a can of worms they suddenly don't want to apply to their own countries.

Recently I found out George Michael was never native British but is actually Greek. Oasis the most popular "Britpop" band are actually Irish when it comes to their original members and most notably the brothers. There's a lot more where that came from.
Agreed. I have heard about the arguments by those China haters that the Yuan and Qing dynasties were "proof" that China had not been a continuous civilization. That it had been "conquered" by foreigners.

This is one of those crap arguments by those British pseudo historians, as well as HK and Taiwan separatists. It's one of their arguments as to why China had no historical claims over HK, Taiwan, and Tibet.

Wrong. The Mongolians and Manchus were part of Chinese civilization. They may have started out as foreigners to Han-ruled imperial China, but their dynasties have added Mongolia and Manchuria into the greater Chinese civilization state. Today, ethnic Mongolians or Manchus are full Chinese citizens. Many had been proud citizens of China.
 
Last edited:

Randomuser

Captain
Registered Member
Agreed. I have heard about the arguments by those China haters that the Yuan and Qing dynasties were "proof" that China had not been a continuous civilization. That it had been "conquered" by foreigners.

Wrong. The Mongolians and Manchus were part of Chinese civilization. They may have started out as foreigners to Han-ruled imperial China, but their dynasties have added Mongolia and Manchuria into the greater Chinese civilization state. Today, ethnic Mongolians or Manchus are full Chinese citizens. Many had been proud citizens of China.
Again if they want to go that way, what does that make of other countries? A lot of Europe already lost their native v-card when the Romans came in. I already mentioned the UK which has almost never had a native Brit monarch since 1066. Spain was conquered and under rule by Moor Muslims for 700 years. The original rulers of the modern entity of France were Germanic from Belgium and Napoleon is ethnically Italian. Those were much longer periods and older too where they had much greater effect. Why are they not seen as conquered people?

China has two recent dynasties with about 350 years of "foreign" rule where one of them was under Ming rule. Technically the Mongols were under the Jin dynasty rule too. There's a reason Genghis Khan was in Chinese jail. Both also didn't try to change Chinese culture or language much. So if you are anything worse than that benchmark, you have no right to talk.
 
Last edited:
The Qing were far bigger haters of Mongols compared to Han Chinese and personally in my opinion one of the biggest positives is Qing solved the nomad problem once and for all where modern China can reap the dividends from it.
Well, the Mongols under Genghis nearly exterminated the ancestors of the Manchus and toppled the first empire they ever founded. Interestingly, even though they lost the war, the Jin armies were the first to have won battles against the Mongols (although the victories came too late to change the course of the war).
 
Top