China's Greatest Fear: Dead and Buried Like the Soviet Union (Closed)
- Thread starter AndrewS
- Start date
- Status
You missed the point with your point, however. It has actually NOT been the "same piece of land", has it? Though China's conquests are not far and distant like that of the West's, they somehow got from the size of Zhou to the size of the PRC, which is somewhere between 5 to 8 times larger than Zhou. How did they do it? Asking nicely for someone else's land? Where did all those minorities in China come from? Conquered non-Han peoples, where else.
Of course all of China's ethnicities "make the PRC as it is today". But once again you are missing the point. Ethnic strife is nearly non-existent because ethnic statistical diversity is nearly non-existent. But yet despite this Uyghurs and Tibetans already DO pose "minority problems" for China despite what you are claiming. You really think the majority of these people want to hug their Han 'brethren' and sing kumbaya with them around a campfire while roasting goat meat together? If they were a larger percentage of the Chinese population and also distributed throughout more of China itself you can bet there would be even more "minority problems" than there are now. The Chinese government knows this of course, and that is why it has been encouraging more and more Han migrants to go into Xinjiang and Tibet and settle there, and thereby create a demographic fait accompli within Xinjiang and Tibet. That's a long term generational game, but let's not kid ourselves that it's in fact being played and why it's being played.
Equation
Lieutenant General
No, the Han ethnicity is not preventing anyone from existing, but it has assimilated other ethnicities before and is assimilating other ethnicities now, not always or perhaps even usually harmoniously, might I add (though resistance was usually futile). The Han ethnicity itself is a conglomeration of multiple ethnicities which had all been subsumed into one some time in the distant past. Just look at Northern and Southern Han people and you can tell there are noticeable differences on a statistical level.
That's a typical imperialist kind of thinking. Did you ever ask if the Tibetan or Uyghur people themselves prefer to be under Han rule, regardless of the economic benefits? How many of them think of themselves as "Chinese" rather than "Tibetan" or "Uyghur"? If they were allowed to hold a referendum today, how many would vote for secession, in your honest opinion?
Last edited:
IMO this kind of hypotheses are meaningless without circumstance.
If there would be no external aid after the secession and everyone knew it, there probably wouldn't be many.
If outside intervention was allowed, even the Han ethnic strong region could fall apart. It was a close call in 1920s.
It's not hard to buy over enough Joe Blows.
Again, this is just another variation of the "I know what's best for you people so shut up and like it" attitude that characterizes many in China WRT Tibetans and Uyghurs.
Psychologist's fallacy?
Equation
Lieutenant General
Assimilation is a part of human history and life itself. It's not the Han's fault that they have a much larger group of people. Ethnic intermarriages are a part of life. There's nothing wrong with that. Your typical kind of thinking is border line racist because you don't want a certain smaller group of people to become extinct or impure in some kind of way. Sorry to tell you that human beings will continue to progress and married whomever they want to have children with. The world does NOT owe you and or any particular group of ethnicity existence for purity sake.
Have you ever been to China and ask these kind of NGO separatist question to any Uyghur or Tibetan people? No? I thought so. Your answer is a typical PRC hating kind, "do as I say, not what I do," mentality. China is NOT suppressing any of these groups of people, they're just tracking for any trouble maker or terrorist groups supported by outsiders like any responsible government should. You are losing hope therefore desperate to make any morality sense to justify for your deep inside prejudice against the Han ethnic for some reason.
solarz
Brigadier
First, the People's Republic of China was not founded on the rule of a particular ethnicity, therefore your premise of "Han rule" is completely invalid. The leadership of the PRC is the Communist Party of China, which is an organization based on ideology and not ethnicity.
Second, you forget that it was not the Han people who sculpted the territorial character of modern-day China. That is the work of the Manchu Qings, who willingly assimilated themselves into the Han culture, and brought their rule over the rest of the Qing Empire. The assimilation of the Manchu into Han culture is perhaps the closest example of a "harmonious assimilation" as we can get, unless you insist on using a fairytale definition of "harmony".
Third, the idea that certain ethnicities in China have an inherent right to certain Chinese territories is nonsense. It is an idea that originated from colonial powers to facilitate their conquests through divide-and-conquer. No particular ethnicity have a moral right to any territory in China. For example, both the Han and Tang dynasties had established settlements and commanderies in Xinjiang, while the Uighurs arrived from Mongolia in the 9th century. The history of China is one of migrations.
Finally, modern China is forged on the principle of nationalism. Nationalism means that all the territories that encompass the PRC belongs to ALL Chinese people. Any attempt to forment separatism, whatever the pretext (ethnicity, religion, democracy), will be resolutely opposed by both the government and the people of China.
Han become mayority through intermarriage not kill another. If you knew haplogroup and mt RNA , you will know the Han " diversivity ".
- Status