...........

Ugh, pseudo-nationalist wankery applied to an era when there was no such thing.

I'll just make one comment. If you are a Korean interested in Korea-wanking historical revisionism, the assorted achievements of the Jurchens are not your best bet. The eagerness and ease of their sinicization says nothing good about the strength or attractiveness of the hypothetical Korean culture they must have had before they embraced a new identity as Chinese.

............................

So does the King Arther levitate Chinese heelstones too?

So, are we to assume Manchuria should now be part of "Greater Korea", according to at least some Koreans?

So, are we to assume Manchuria should now be part of "Greater Korea", according to at least some Koreans?
Pfft. They already claimed that thanks to the Goguryeo!

In other news, it's recently been discovered that the Belgians conquered 3/4s of the planet in the 19th century.

Genetic analysis of Koreans and Manchus
According to genetic analysis using Y-chromosome, Manchus are closest to Koreans than any other ethnics in comparisons [5 ].

That doesn't necessarily mean that the Manchus are descendants of Koreans - only that they are genetically closest related. Following this relation it is not surprising that many names should appear both in Manchuria and Korea; again, this hardly proves that Manchurians are descendants form Koreans - by your reasoning the opposite might even be true.

At any rate, I hardly consider this in accordance with historical facts; in general, one should be very careful not to conclude to much from linguistic coincidence to ethnic relations - languages change, as do the pople that speak them.

by your reasoning the opposite might even be true.
Koreans? Descended from Tungusic peoples in the area of the Armur River/Lake Baikhal Region? Nonsense, pure nonsense!

B-but I thought that Genghis Khan was a Russian (or Etruscan, which is the same thing) ruler of the great empire of Russia-Mongolia-Megalion??? :eek: :confused:

B-but I thought that Genghis Khan was a Russian (or Etruscan, which is the same thing) ruler of the great empire of Russia-Mongolia-Megalion??? :eek: :confused:
No, but his Reincarnation was!

In related news, African descendants created every empire in human history.

You see, I can be foolish too.

Oh, and weren't the first few kingdoms in Korea created by, ahem, Chinese petty kings? Why, yes, I believe they were. ;)

In related news, African descendants created every empire in human history.

You see, I can be foolish too.

Oh, and weren't the first few kingdoms in Korea created by, ahem, Chinese petty kings? Why, yes, I believe they were. ;)
...Actually I'm not so sure about that. From what I understand they were amalgamations of pre-existing clan/tribal groups.

...Actually I'm not so sure about that. From what I understand they were amalgamations of pre-existing clan/tribal groups.
A look in my books reveals that we're both somewhat correct. The early Chinese settlements had a strong influence, but weren't really kingdoms.

The Documented history of Korea begins in the 12th cent. B.C., when a Chinese scolar, Ki-tze (Kija), founded a colony at Pyongyang. After 100 B.C. the Chinese colony of Lolang, established near Pyongyang, exerted a strong cultural influence on the Korean tribes settled in the peninsula. The kingdom of Koguryo, the first native Korean state, arose in the north near the Yalu River in the 1st cent. A.D., and by the 4th cent. it had conquered Lolang.

Korean Descendants might have conquered China but it was Zheng He who all the Koreans descend from!

Zheng He: the man who transcended being a eunuch to father the Korean Nation. :lmao:

..........................

I always considered the Manchu and Jurchens quite separate from the Koreans culturally. But we all know it was Zheng He that conquered the world.

Ugh, pseudo-nationalist wankery applied to an era when there was no such thing.

I'd replace "pseudo-" with "thinly-disguised"... but you're still on the money.

After Silla destroyed Goguryeo and expanded territory further north, some people of Silla moved to north which was old Goguryeo's area. After the collapse of Silla, some people of Silla escaped to Balhae. But, Balhae was collaped at Liao invasion again. They unified Jurchen tribes establishing Jin dynasty.

The originator of Jin dynasty was a Silla person. His name was Hambo. The emperor of Jin dynasty was called a Silla person by Song Chinese who visited Jin in 1120s. Some history books say that the Jurchen King was a Silla person, others say that the originator of Jin was first from Goryeo[7]. It is because Silla was replaced by Goryeo. However, Chinese, Mongol, Korean, and Manchu history records are consistent impling that Jurchen kings are originally from Silla.

The name of the originator of Jin(金) is Hambo(函普). When he came first from Goryeo(高麗), his age was 60
金之始祖諱函普，初從高麗來，年已六十餘矣 (in 1st chapter of the history of Jin(金史) [3])

Not only the originator of Jin, but also Agolta (阿骨打), the founder of Jin dynasty, was called originally a person from Silla

Agolta (阿骨打) of the Jurchens declared to be the Emperor, ... He was originally a person of Silla (新羅人)
女真阿骨打稱帝，姓王名做旻，本新羅人，號完顏氏 (in 3 宣和遺事 (大宋宣和遺事)) [2]
Jurchen Agolta named the state Great Jin (大金) (... He is originally a person of Silla).
女真阿骨打稱帝國號大金(...本新羅人) (in《佛祖歷代通載》卷19)

There are lots of history records showing that the originator of Jin dynasty was a Silla person (or from Goryeo)

The originator of Wonan family (Jin's royal family) is a person of Silla
完顏之始祖指蒲者，新羅人 (in 大宋遗民)
The name of the originator of Jin is Hambo. He came first from Goryeo (髙丽)
金之始祖諱函普初從高麗來 ( in 大金國誌 written by Song Chinese)
The originator of Jin, Hambo was first from Goyreo.
金之始祖諱哈富(舊作函普)初從髙麗來 (in 三朝北盟會編 written by Song Chinese)

Mongol and Korean records are consistent showing that the originator and the king of Jin dynasty are Silla persons. Goryeo claimed that Jin dyansty was originally inside Goryeo and they were people of Goryeo, and Goryeo was the mother country of Jin dynasty

People of Jin was originally Pyungjoo people in our country Goyreo. Goryeo was a mother country of Jin.
金則本我國平州之人, 稱我爲父母之國, 尹灌築九城之地, 以先春嶺爲界, 終金之世, 兵不相加。(高麗史 written by Korean dynasty)
The king of Jurchens is originally a Silla person
其初酋長本新羅人 (in 金志 written by Mongols in Yuan dynasty)

Until when did the royal family of Jin dynasty know that they were from Silla? When Jurchens visited Goryeo, they said their country was originated from Goryeo.
My ancestors (我祖宗) originated from the High country (大邦: Goryeo).
我祖宗出自大邦 (from 高麗史13卷-世家13-睿宗1109, written by Korean in Goryeo)

When Jin dynasty invaded Song China, two Chinese emperors were captured as hostages in 1127. Song Chinese visited Jin dynasty to negotiate with Jin to find a way to get their emperors back in 1129. They recorded that the king of Jin dynasty (the second empeor of Jin) was a person of Silla . It shows that the royal family of Jurchen was called Silla people even after Jin dynasty was founded.

The king of the Jurchens is a person of Silla.
女真酋長乃新羅人 (in 松漠記聞 (洪皓, 宋), 1129, written by Song Chinese) [10 ]

Manchu Qing dynasty(1636-1912) is the successor of Jurchen's Jin dynasty (1115-1234) . Jurchens rebuilt Later Jin dynasty in 1616. They changed the country name to Qing (1636), and conquered China (1644), Mongolia (1697), Taiwan (1683), Tibet(1750), and Uyguru(1759). The royal family of Qing believed that they were descendents of Jin's royal family. Manchu people in Qing dynasty also knew that the originator of Jin dynasty was from Goryeo (or Silla). Qing government published their own history book, "The origin of Manchu (滿洲源流考)" in 1777. They worte that the originator of Jin dynasty was first from Goryeo in the book. Also, they wrote that the origin of the country name Jin (金) was from the surname of kings of Silla(新羅).

The name of the originator of Jin is Hambo. He came first from Goryeo (髙丽)
金之始祖讳哈富(旧作函普)初从髙丽来 (in Chapter 7, The Origin of Manchu (滿洲源流考) [1] )
The name of Jin(金) was originated from the surname of Kings of Silla(新羅)
新罗王金姓则金之逺派 (in The Origin of Manchu [1])

Silla came to Wannan family. Silla kings' surname 金(Kim in Korean) inherited ten generations. So, Jin(金) came from Silla. There is no doubt that it became the country name.
"本自新羅來姓完顔氏 新羅王金姓 相傳數十世則金之自新羅來 無疑建國之名 "(in The Origin of Manchu [1])................[10] 洪皓(Song Chinese), "The king of Jurchens is a person of Silla (女真酋長乃新羅)"', in '松漠記聞', 1129, http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/松漠紀聞
[11] http://altaic-wiki.wikispaces.com/Korean+connection+to+Manchus


Hi, altaicmania, always good to see another fellow Korean around. Whereas I understand what you are trying show Korea in a different light, it really doesnt change the fact that after the Manchus took over China, it didnt stop the Qing from considering Joseon as a 'lesser brother' in diplomatic relations; in other words, we never conquered them. I understand that when I say such things to another Koreans, they would usually gasp in horror and exclaim that had never found such an unpatriotic person in their lives ( I actually heard this from a Korean history professor because I rejected his claims about Korea stretching all the way to the Ural Mountains); but the fact that is that if we want to be patriotic, we should stop escaping from army conscription and learn from the Israelis - they are a nation who fight for their own country, whereas we expand our ego by bluffing about the nation's history.
Yes, Korean blood was probably a factor in the Aisin Goro line, but viewing history like that is the same as suggesting that Turkey has the right to rule over all the Turkic peoples of Central Asia, Mongolia has the right to rule over Eurasia because they had conquered it before, and that Atilla the Hun was actually Chinese and that the Chinese nation should incoporate Hungary, Russia should include all the Slavic peoples in the Balkans, etc. In fact, the European royal families during the last two centuries were all connected to each other as a big family, but that didnt stop Bulgaria declaring war at Greece,Britain declaring war at Germany, etc.

If eoc sees this thread, he will jump on this thread and attack it....:mischief:

Hi, altaicmania, always good to see another fellow Korean around. Whereas I understand what you are trying show Korea in a different light, it really doesnt change the fact that after the Manchus took over China, it didnt stop the Qing from considering Joseon as a 'lesser brother' in diplomatic relations; in other words, we never conquered them. I understand that when I say such things to another Koreans, they would usually gasp in horror and exclaim that had never found such an unpatriotic person in their lives ( I actually heard this from a Korean history professor because I rejected his claims about Korea stretching all the way to the Ural Mountains); but the fact that is that if we want to be patriotic, we should stop escaping from army conscription and learn from the Israelis - they are a nation who fight for their own country, whereas we expand our ego by bluffing about the nation's history.
Yes, Korean blood was probably a factor in the Aisin Goro line, but viewing history like that is the same as suggesting that Turkey has the right to rule over all the Turkic peoples of Central Asia, Mongolia has the right to rule over Eurasia because they had conquered it before, and that Atilla the Hun was actually Chinese and that the Chinese nation should incoporate Hungary, Russia should include all the Slavic peoples in the Balkans, etc. In fact, the European royal families during the last two centuries were all connected to each other as a big family, but that didnt stop Bulgaria declaring war at Greece,Britain declaring war at Germany, etc.

If eoc sees this thread, he will jump on this thread and attack it....:mischief:

Very well written. I think even eoc will have to admit that he agree with you.:goodjob:
To be fair, this kind of weird-patriotic-history-study thing is also prevalent in China, only difference (if any) being that we often have more to bluffing about.

In other news, it's recently been discovered that the Belgians conquered 3/4s of the planet in the 19th century.

This is true.

The rise of the Netherlands was based on the intellect and wealth of Flemish who fled North to escape the Spanish Inquisition. Later during the Glorious revolution the Dutch stadhouder became English King. This basically makes the British Empire the Flemish Empire.

Also the Franks first had their capital at Doornik (located in Belgium). They then moved southwards to Paris and conquered a large Frankish kingdom which later split up into France, Burgundy and the Holy Roman Empire->Germany. The Burgundian ruler Charles V (born in Ghent, Belgium) later also became King of Spain.

When you add the British, French, German and Spanish colonial empires, it easily adds up to 3/4 of the worlds.

So yes, the world belongs to Belgium! ;)

Very well written. I think even eoc will have to admit that he agree with you.:goodjob:
To be fair, this kind of weird-patriotic-history-study thing is also prevalent in China, only difference (if any) being that we often have more to bluffing about.

Yeah; China has the Greater China Ideology, which is potentially capable of incoporating almost every Asian country. And China has outstanding (if not controversial) leaders to be proud of, personally am an admirer of Wen Jiao Bao, Lu Xun, Sun Yat-sen and Lin Yu tang.

I have read too many masturbations written by those compressed-nose and short-legs Koreans. And I have lost interstings to read, to argue the crap any more.
Oh, I have also heard another story from Koreans. They said, they originated from GuangXi(int the south-west of China, it is very very very long way to the peninsula), they took civilizations and culture to the people who lived in the Yellow river and Long river areas. But Koreans were not accepted by those, so they have to move to the peninsula. Wow, Koreans ancestors really have amazing feet!

Yeah; China has the Greater China Ideology, which is potentially capable of incoporating almost every Asian country. And China has outstanding (if not controversial) leaders to be proud of, personally am an admirer of Wen Jiao Bao, Lu Xun, Sun Yat-sen and Lin Yu tang.

In my opinion, those who you admired are not worth admiring enough to me.

WenJiaBao, he is a good old man, that is all.

LuXun, a writer wrote with Chinese characters and Japanese grammar, his articles is so hard to understand to comman Chinese, not beatiful and easily to make one fall into sleeping. Just because he was closed to the Communist Party, he has got a high reputation in the literature area. As to his contribution, what else except for those hard understanding articles?

Sun Yat-sen, yeah, he was outstanding, but a half-great man. He was a failed man too. That made me feel sorry to his undertakings.

Lin Yu tang, I really can't tell why he is so famous to foreigners?! He did nothing to improve people lives, he was just a critic, he criticized labors, government, officers, situations, institutions, customs, poor and rich...only he thought he was a perfect man, he was god. He just talk, he did nothing special to the society or to the people or the nation. he was a gossip girl.

In my opinion, those who you admired are not worth admiring enough to me.

WenJiaBao, he is a good old man, that is all.

LuXun, a writer wrote with Chinese characters and Japanese grammar, his articles is so hard to understand to comman Chinese, not beatiful and easily to make one fall into sleeping. Just because he was closed to the Communist Party, he has got a high reputation in the literature area. As to his contribution, what else except for those hard understanding articles?

Sun Yat-sen, yeah, he was outstanding, but a half-great man. He was a failed man too. That made me feel sorry to his undertakings.

Lin Yu tang, I really can't tell why he is so famous to foreigners?! He did nothing to improve people lives, he was just a critic, he criticized labors, government, officers, situations, institutions, customs, poor and rich...only he thought he was a perfect man, he was god. He just talk, he did nothing special to the society or to the people or the nation. he was a gossip girl.
Apparently you arent familiar with their historical background and their contributions.

Wen Jia Bao is respected not only for his populist image as a caring politician, who is completely different from the Old Communist autocrats, but also due to my suspiscions that he is probably an admirer of Anglo-American Democracy; this man could potentially bring about the fact that China can be compatible with democracy (also respect him for his knowledge in the Chinese Classics).
As for Lu Xun, I cant believe you said you DONT respect the man. Both Lin Yu Tang and Lu Xun were major figures in modern Chinese literature, which China hasnt been able to produce anything close to them for the last 70 years. To not understand their impact upon China shows a lack of knowledge of literature on your part, eoc, for it is these people that help shape a nation's consciousness and cultural indentity; which China is lacking critically at the present due to the repressions of the Communist Red Guards during the Cultrual Revolution at tecahers, professors, etc.


Well for Sun Yat-sen, the guy was holding ideas of political freedom that I guess was a bit early for Asia back then; if he only had a power base (i.e army) of his own command, China today might well have been a parliamentary democracy today (As well as being substantially larger, for we all know how much land the KMT used to claim as theirs).

This is true.

The rise of the Netherlands was based on the intellect and wealth of Flemish who fled North to escape the Spanish Inquisition. Later during the Glorious revolution the Dutch stadhouder became English King. This basically makes the British Empire the Flemish Empire.

Also the Franks first had their capital at Doornik (located in Belgium). They then moved southwards to Paris and conquered a large Frankish kingdom which later split up into France, Burgundy and the Holy Roman Empire->Germany. The Burgundian ruler Charles V (born in Ghent, Belgium) later also became King of Spain.

When you add the British, French, German and Spanish colonial empires, it easily adds up to 3/4 of the worlds.

So yes, the world belongs to Belgium! ;)

Tiny detail: Belgium didn't exist prior to 1830. The "Belgians" of antiquity - despite any such references in Astérix - are hardly the Belgians of today. So there's a connection with the "Koreans" in the OP alright: both definitions of these peoples are way off...

Apparently you arent familiar with their historical background and their contributions.

Wen Jia Bao is respected not only for his populist image as a caring politician, who is completely different from the Old Communist autocrats, but also due to my suspiscions that he is probably an admirer of Anglo-American Democracy; this man could potentially bring about the fact that China can be compatible with democracy (also respect him for his knowledge in the Chinese Classics).
As for Lu Xun, I cant believe you said you DONT respect the man. Both Lin Yu Tang and Lu Xun were major figures in modern Chinese literature, which China hasnt been able to produce anything close to them for the last 70 years. To not understand their impact upon China shows a lack of knowledge of literature on your part, eoc, for it is these people that help shape a nation's consciousness and cultural indentity; which China is lacking critically at the present due to the repressions of the Communist Red Guards during the Cultrual Revolution at tecahers, professors, etc.


Well for Sun Yat-sen, the guy was holding ideas of political freedom that I guess was a bit early for Asia back then; if he only had a power base (i.e army) of his own command, China today might well have been a parliamentary democracy today (As well as being substantially larger, for we all know how much land the KMT used to claim as theirs).

Nope, it is you lack of real understanding of how Chinese thinking of questions. whatever Luxun or LinYuTang, desen't effect Chinese young generation that much as you said, even in the 20's last century, they don't effect many. But maybe they effect you who filled in totally opened western minds. They are also not outstanding represent of Chinese literature, they just 2 green leefs on the big tree. They are not the represents who represent mordern time literature. You should heard that, China don't have any good writer in morder time. This is not worth amazing, because most of writers in mordern time has not accepted by more common people. If you will, you can ask any one young in the street, "Do you know LinYuTan?" or "Why Luxun is a highly reputation writer?" You will have other opinion.
As a China premier, his first work not to make the foreigners feel happy, but most of Chinese feel happy. He did show his catholicity in many ways, but he has not solved common society problems in China. He leveled off China GDP, but he hasn't improved common people's life into a higher level. And the fact is, with the highly increasing estate value, more common Chinese are becoming poor. Of couse, not only the real estate, also many other problems.Chinese need more a national premier than an international premier. This is what you can't understand or misunderstand.
Sun Yat-sen is an outstanding man, I agree with you. But I can't bear that you always lecture me with your pseudo-democracy and pseudo-freedom that fill in full of your mouth everyday.
You maybe have lived in China for many years, but that desn't mean you have totally understanding Chinese minds. Even, at this board, you can't understand my opinion on many debates.
You should also make clear one thing, it is not the time for Half-Western-Korean to make others to understand what democracy is and what freedom is, it is your time to learn how to improve your democracy and freedom. You korean are enjoying only about 7 decades new regime, that doesn't mean you can be a good teacher. You don't have any superiority to Chinese or to the westers, it is just you yourself think you are at a queen position. What's more, you should learn how to 求同存异(means: though there are differences, find commons to live through them), not to propagandize right only by yourself.

eoc, you're the one propagandising, not Eretz. I don't agree with him on everything he said - I am very unimpressed with Sun Yet-sen, for example - but at least he's attempting to offer a sincere, thought-out opinion, and backing it up. You're just shouting that he's wrong, and not supporting your arguments at all. if you disagree with him, point out how he's wrong, don't just attack him.

If you will, you can ask any one young in the street, "Do you know LinYuTan?" or "Why Luxun is a highly reputation writer?" You will have other opinion.
He says he personally admires these two, not he thinks most Chinese admire them, so I don't understand what are you arguing. You keep lecturing that he knows nothing about Chinese culture just because he admire two writers whom I personally happen to like too. And it's also my perception that most Chinese do respect Lu Xun, but don't worry I won't call you "un-Chinese" just because you think otherwise.

China premier
About the Chinese premier, I don't like him at all and I think Eretz Yisrael has too much wishful thinking about him, but again you seem to assume a position that you represent the whole Chinese people and anyone who does not agree with you has no clue of Chinese reality. You're the one here need to learn about 求同存异. Heck, if your point stands, I don't qualify to be a Chinese too.:mischief:

You should also make clear one thing, it is not the time for Half-Western-Korean to make others to understand what democracy is and what freedom is, it is your time to learn how to improve your democracy and freedom. You korean are enjoying only about 7 decades new regime, that doesn't mean you can be a good teacher. You don't have any superiority to Chinese or to the westers, it is just you yourself think you are at a queen position. What's more, you should learn how to 求同存异(means: though there are differences, find commons to live through them), not to propagandize right only by yourself.
Where're all these his supposedly arrogant remarks about democracy and freedom?:crazyeye:
And I think it's kinda low to keep attacking his nationality, rather than his views.

Nope, it is you lack of real understanding of how Chinese thinking of questions. whatever Luxun or LinYuTang, desen't effect Chinese young generation that much as you said, even in the 20's last century, they don't effect many. But maybe they effect you who filled in totally opened western minds. They are also not outstanding represent of Chinese literature, they just 2 green leefs on the big tree. They are not the represents who represent mordern time literature........................................ ....... What's more, you should learn how to 求同存异(means: though there are differences, find commons to live through them), not to propagandize right only by yourself.

eoc, you are my favourite poster.:D:D
If we had debates in Chinese, then I konw you would be more moderate in tone, but I guess the language problem does show itself to be a problem.

Anyway, the way I view it, China was in the midst of a most important renaissance during the days in the 20's; the nation, if not for the terribly annoying warlords and Sinosentric leaders such as Chiang Kai-shek (I do find Chiang Kai-shek to be more agreeable than Mao Zedong in many ways), might have seen its way to democracy, as there were students and KMT senators that DID have a wish for geniune democracy; but alas, the Communist - KMT friction became too great, and severly hampered China's chance. As for for literature, it is precisely because of thoughts like yours that Chinese hold that hampers internal cultural progress. If you disagree, dont vent your anger, but give me some names so I can do some mor reading.

As to your statements about your dislike of Western-influenced democracy, I admit that I am a great admirer of the Anglo-American tradition of politics and a Protestant Christian, which by Asian standards would be quite Westernized. But you have to see why I would prefer constitutional liberalism (I abhor pure democracy); a balance of power, between the many classes of people, the rule of Law ,an effective Constitution where Wars can be prevented, welfare, high standards of education(not the education model of Asis where we only generate test-takers, but not true academics), and an openess to serious thought, which is severly hampered in East Asia due to cultural reasons. (Doesnt mean I dont like East Asia; I feel most at home in Korea and China)
But if one is to resist western political ideals for purely being Western, or that the Western mind cannot understand China/Korea/Japan, it is actually quite the opposite; the Westernmind is completely capable of understanding most of us, for it has been a while since East Asia has been(at least the last century, besides Japan) leveled by wars and Cold War hysteria to produce culture of international magnitude, for most of us back then, i was the basic problem of survival, we needed and clothes; surely the Western mind can comprehend that much.

eoc, you're the one propagandising, not Eretz. I don't agree with him on everything he said - I am very unimpressed with Sun Yet-sen, for example - but at least he's attempting to offer a sincere, thought-out opinion, and backing it up. You're just shouting that he's wrong, and not supporting your arguments at all. if you disagree with him, point out how he's wrong, don't just attack him.

Also,eoc states that I dont understand the Chinese mentality. Well, cant say I completely do, but based what I felt I had a perception that the Chinese mentality has a grudge (a very reasonable one) against the West, and those who have opposed them on policy in the last century - somewhat pararells the Arab mentality, albeit much less in pain than the Arab, for obvious reasons.

eoc, you're the one propagandising, not Eretz. I don't agree with him on everything he said - I am very unimpressed with Sun Yet-sen, for example - but at least he's attempting to offer a sincere, thought-out opinion, and backing it up. You're just shouting that he's wrong, and not supporting your arguments at all. if you disagree with him, point out how he's wrong, don't just attack him.

OK, I quit shouting.
There are 3 I don't agree with you.
1) I propagandised what?
2) Didn't I attempt to offer a sincere thought-out-opion?
3) I have offered my sincere thought-out opinion to those mentioned.

attack him...hmm...I didn't, I just shouted.

Now, let me explain something that you maybe misunderstand me or you were not awared of.
1) Eretz and I have different estimate on those people. My 1st response on his opinion is just to tell him, I don't think they all worth admiring. I didn't say he shouldn't admire them. I just offer my own opinion.
But whether you or Eretz or somebody else have thought I lectured him not to admire those.
2) You and Eretz have a closer culture understanding, when you propagandise democracy or freedom, you can't be aware of it. Just like I has not realized what the hell I had propagandised.
3) Eretz, in his reply, he thought that I don't admire those because I don't know their background. After that, he propagandised those why should be admired because of freedom speech blah blah...
So, Since I am a nationalist(you take me as this, though I don't think so), have you had realized, Eretz response would lead me to thought: What the hell dude, again and again, you just implied that I was ignorance at understanding what the freedom is, huh?
So, let's all calm down to argue, to debate. I think you should do some explaining when I has misunderstand you, all right?

As to Vesley's question, maybe his English is more good than his Chinese. He has already lost his Chinese thinking mind. He just read those typed on the paper, but he cant read more.

OK, I quit shouting.
There are 3 I don't agree with you.
1) I propagandised what?
2) Didn't I attempt to offer a sincere thought-out-opion?
3) I have offered my sincere thought-out opinion to those mentioned.

attack him...hmm...I didn't, I just shouted.

Now, let me explain something that you maybe misunderstand me or you were not awared of.
1) Eretz and I have different estimate on those people. My 1st response on his opinion is just to tell him, I don't think they all worth admiring. I didn't say he shouldn't admire them. I just offer my own opinion.
But whether you or Eretz or somebody else have thought I lectured him not to admire those.
2) You and Eretz have a closer culture understanding, when you propagandise democracy or freedom, you can't be aware of it. Just like I has not realized what the hell I had propagandised.
3) Eretz, in his reply, he thought that I don't admire those because I don't know their background. After that, he propagandised those why should be admired because of freedom speech blah blah...
So, Since I am a nationalist(you take me as this, though I don't think so), have you had realized, Eretz response would lead me to thought: What the hell dude, again and again, you just implied that I was ignorance at understanding what the freedom is, huh?
So, let's all calm down to argue, to debate. I think you should do some explaining when I has misunderstand you, all right?

As to Vesley's question, maybe his English is more good than his Chinese. He has already lost his Chinese thinking mind. He just read those typed on the paper, but he cant read more.

If I made you think I was lecturing you, then sincere apologies.:)
Also freedom without restraint (aka pure democracy) benefits oneself at the sake of others; this is why I dont quite like nationalists. But if I offended you again, then sincere apologies.

As to Vesley's question, maybe his English is more good than his Chinese. He has already lost his Chinese thinking mind. He just read those typed on the paper, but he cant read more.

Does this mean I'm officially disqualified as a Chinese?:eek:
Anyway I'll take this as a compliment, cause usually I think my English is quite poor and I post here mainly to improve it.

Does this mean I'm officially disqualified as a Chinese?:eek:
Anyway I'll take this as a compliment, cause usually I think my English is quite poor and I post here mainly to improve it.

Actually your English is not bad at all.

Also,eoc states that I dont understand the Chinese mentality. Well, cant say I completely do, but based what I felt I had a perception that the Chinese mentality has a grudge (a very reasonable one) against the West, and those who have opposed them on policy in the last century - somewhat pararells the Arab mentality, albeit much less in pain than the Arab, for obvious reasons.

ok, let me try to explain my understanding of you said.

1) your perception of that the Chinese mentality has a grudge against the West.
I agree(but I can't represent other Chinese)
2) I'm against the West not because of those who opposed China's policy.
3) I'm against the West(include you) take it as for granted that your blamed or opposed are all right.

off-toppic:
1)You mixed the government policy into that Chinese should always follow with.
2)You always think Chinese don't know democracy.
3)You think your regime is superior than now China's. But you lost sight of that how big China is and what population is and why should Chinese start another unrest after only less than 30 years peaceful life? Is it worth to reverlution again to win a sounded democracy?
4)You always ask me what is my Great Chinese Ideology. I can't tell you other Chinese thinking, I wish a strong nation lead a good life like USA. So, your S-Korean are not my target, you don't need to feel afraid.
5)I also don't mean China should not make another revolution again. But it is not the proper time now, I maybe the generation who are sacrificing myself to the now China's regime, but desendants will change all of these one day.
Have you read the book 三国演义(legend of 3 kingdoms)? There is famouse sentence: 话说天下大势，分久必合，合久必分.(I can't translate it into English, do me a favor, OK?) So, I think those fill in full of your mouth democracy or freedom is just a joke to me, I can't change the reality, I leave it to my desendants.
6) And this is what I really mean 求同存异 in the now days.

Tiny detail: Belgium didn't exist prior to 1830. The "Belgians" of antiquity - despite any such references in Astérix - are hardly the Belgians of today. So there's a connection with the "Koreans" in the OP alright: both definitions of these peoples are way off...
Huh, I guess Josef II was getting all worked up over nothing. :mischief:

There is famouse sentence: 话说天下大势，分久必合，合久必分.(I can't translate it into English, do me a favor, OK?
Moss Roberts translated it to:"Here begins our tale. The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide."
I don't particularly like this translation though.

Does this mean I'm officially disqualified as a Chinese?:eek:
Anyway I'll take this as a compliment, cause usually I think my English is quite poor and I post here mainly to improve it.

Stop asking naive questions ok?
If I say: you are not Chinese, then you are not?
I feel weary of communicating with those West. But I have to, because they and I have different culture understanding. You also want me wasting time on you?

ok, let me try to explain my understanding of you said.

1) your perception of that the Chinese mentality has a grudge against the West.
I agree(but I can't represent other Chinese)
2) I'm against the West not because of those who opposed China's policy.
3) I'm against the West(include you) take it as for granted that your blamed or opposed are all right.

We have a right to do so, for democractic nations who are geniune paid a heavy price for it by shedding a lot of blood and suffering many times in order to get to where we are today. And we are proud of it.
I never said Chinese people dont know democracy; I said Chinese dont accept (you for instance) Constitutional Liberalism and Republicanism on the grounds of it being Western. If that is so, then abandon Communism and go back to neo-Confucianism
based Monarchism, neo-Confucianism based Monarchism has been the only thing East Asia has been able to produce (there are obvious exceptions to this, such as Taiping Tianguo of China, the Donghak Rebellion of Korea, and the whole Meiji Restoration, etc).
A revolution can be peacfully aquired, as long as the people show the government that, without popular support, the government has no legitimacy (not neccesarily power though). Also never said China should accept democracy now; on the contrary, I think the current Communist Government is doing very well.

The concept of the Greater China Ideology is potentially dangerous, for it has the capability to engulf other nations, as long as they claim cultural linkage to the targeted nation ( does not mean that China is evil; im saying it is potentially dangerous in the hands of another).
I have read 三国演义before, and I have to say that it makes sense, and has truth in it; but if ignorance persists, there will be no fundamental change ; just aother one of those regime changes. And that is why I advocate about speaking it out.

Moss Roberts translated it to:"Here begins our tale. The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide."
I don't particularly like this translation though.

huh...! Thus it is the translation!:nuke:

by the way, your grammar is better than me. I always make wrong tense and not proper words.

We have a right to do so, for democractic nations who are geniune paid a heavy price for it by shedding a lot of blood and suffering many times in order to get to where we are today. And we are proud of it.
............I have read 三国演义before, and I have to say that it makes sense, and has truth in it; but if ignorance persists, there will be no fundamental change ; just aother one of those regime changes. And that is why I advocate about speaking it out.


I know what you mean. I know what right I should have. I also know what is a fundamental change(thousands of years history, many many dynasty alternated, I don't know what else nation has so many changes in the past).

But you don't know:
1) why I'd rather give in some of my rights ---- it is just like a bargaining with government, government help us to become richer in a very short time, I give in some right to let them dictators to become a better actor in the world.
That doesn't mean, I have given up those rights, It is not the proper time to take it back. Just like TaiWan, China give in, doesn't mean China give up. I wish you have a wiser head to understand this.

2) to make a fundamental regime change will certainly make the society unrest(due to still not unified, some splittism outside of China and so on). How long it will last? Is it worth to do so in the now days? If it make the country splitted into pieces, is that worth? I think most of Chinese can't bear that.

3) Chinese know that a democracy society is good, but what kind of democracy is good to China, this is a question. Due to China's history and sufferred in recent 200 years, I can't expected you can understand. You will amazing: what? Another kind of democracy!

4) To treat the world in a long term. Maybe as Chinese, I am lazy at watching what happening in front of my nose, that doen't mean I don't have senses. If something is not the most urgent to solve, let it be. I do my best at the moment, I leave those I can't solve to descendants.

OK, I have said too much. And, you will not understand all of those. Only when your Korean is as big as China and continuous cultures, you will totally understand.
Another Chinese saying: 不要杞人忧天. I am sick of translate sayings, but you know the meaning. And do me the favor to translate it.

I know what you mean. I know what right I should have. I also know what is a fundamental change(thousands of years history, many many dynasty alternated, I don't know what else nation has so many changes in the past).

But you don't know:
1) why I'd rather give in some of my rights ---- it is just like a bargaining with government, government help us to become richer in a very short time, I give in some right to let them dictators to become a better actor in the world.
That doesn't mean, I have given up those rights, It is not the proper time to take it back. Just like TaiWan, China give in, doesn't mean China give up. I wish you have a wiser head to understand this.

2) to make a fundamental regime change will certainly make the society unrest(due to still not unified, some splittism outside of China and so on). How long it will last? Is it worth to do so in the now days? If it make the country splitted into pieces, is that worth? I think most of Chinese can't bear that.

3) Chinese know that a democracy society is good, but what kind of democracy is good to China, this is a question. Due to China's history and sufferred in recent 200 years, I can't expected you can understand. You will amazing: what? Another kind of democracy!

4) To treat the world in a long term. Maybe as Chinese, I am lazy at watching what happening in front of my nose, that doen't mean I don't have senses. If something is not the most urgent to solve, let it be. I do my best at the moment, I leave those I can't solve to descendants.

OK, I have said too much. And, you will not understand all of those. Only when your Korean is as big as China and continuous cultures, you will totally understand.
Another Chinese saying: 不要杞人忧天. I am sick of translate sayings, but you know the meaning. And do me the favor to translate it.

I never said when there should be a democractic revolution in China. In fact, I think I made the impression on my last threads that China is not ready for Constitutional Liberalism (remember, I'm saying Constitutional Liberalism, not Representative Democracy or Direct Democracy) yet.
And it is a VERY GOOD thing (I am not being sarcastic here) that Chinese want a good life; it is a natural occurence, and an occurence that helped spur capitalism and democracy in the West centuries ago.
And historywise, I am pretty confident on East Asian History, and just because I am Korean doesnt mean that I cannot understand the Chinese logic; in fact, most Chinese dont understand each other due to the generation gap between people. And I dont think you lived through 200 years of Chinese history; at best you were reading through 200 years of it, just like I am. So no reason to be arrogant there. Also, this is a forum where we DO TALK about these things, such as politics; its a CIV forum for God's sake...so 杞人忧天 doesnt apply here. This is a place where we think what we say and debate, whereas if you had met me in everyday, you would never had guessed I would say such things.
Also, to claim that Koreans cannot understand Chinese mentality is absurd; at it roots, there is no justification to not be able to understand a matter whose roots can be traced, its just the fact the Chinese mentality (well, at least yours) doesnt want the problem to be inspected, analysed, etc. You want privacy, infabillity on Chinese matters, which I persume you can lay claim to due to the fact that you ARE Chinese, whereas I am not.

:lol::lol: I knew it! I just knew that a thread started by a Korean nationalist :):):):):):) will see the arrival of his Chinese equivalent, and then eventually a derail and faceoff between the two sides.

:lol::lol: I knew it! I just knew that a thread started by a Korean nationalist :):):):):):) will see the arrival of his Chinese equivalent, and then eventually a derail and faceoff between the two sides.

We would like to call it a merry -go-around; just that it isnt that merry at all.:D:D:D
Actually it started with me rebuking altaicmaniac (i rebuked him for doing a thinly-disguised nationalistic thread), but then things spiraled after eoc and I got to a standoff; actually enjoyed the conversation so much Ive been sitting in front of the computer for at least 5 hours now.:):):):):)

Really, I'm not the average Korean nationalist, and I am hardly a despiser of China ( I live in the country right now; its a good place), but guess eoc thinks otherwise.

Eretz Yisrael, It is not weird of my logic. It is yours. Now I realized, even I do more explainations, you will always speak out something to sting me. Just like other S-Koreans, you have an outstanding trait ---- you are ready to piss me off, and you seems very enjoying that.
But you also have some good traits those Real-F>ucking-Korean don't have. You have knowledges, you know the world's history widely, your English are so good, and your Chinese should be pretty good too, I think. You live in China, and some of your opinins on China society is also right. You are not only a West thinker but also have self-styled eastern ideology. As to you are a christian with well educated western ideology, it dooms that you can't be a pure observation.
While it doesn't matter, I have not expected you can be a accommodationist, because you have inherited from the Yanks hegemonism. And you know what the outstanding trait of hegemonism? To set up a system rule/ideology to force others to abey, but the constitutor won't follow it, and says: I do this is for you to have a more good human rights, blah blah. the CCP is a dictator, while the Yanks' hegemonism is totally a hooligan. And as a hegemonism(maybe you have not be awared of this, Eretz), you of course don't admit that fact, and keep rebuking China's regime, and keep blame me---- a been confered nationalist----dangerous or bad-behaved.

Eretz Yisrael, It is not weird of my logic. It is yours. Now I realized, even I do more explainations, you will always speak out something to sting me. Just like other S-Koreans, you have an outstanding trait ---- you are ready to piss me off, and you seems very enjoying that.
But you also have some good traits those Real-F>ucking-Korean don't have. You have knowledges, you know the world's history widely, your English are so good, and your Chinese should be pretty good too, I think. You live in China, and some of your opinins on China society is also right. You are not only a West thinker but also have self-styled eastern ideology. As to you are a christian with well educated western ideology, it dooms that you can't be a pure observation.
While it doesn't matter, I have not expected you can be a accommodationist, because you have inherited from the Yanks hegemonism. And you know what the outstanding trait of hegemonism? To set up a system rule/ideology to force others to abey, but the constitutor won't follow it, and says: I do this is for you to have a more good human rights, blah blah. the CCP is a dictator, while the Yanks' hegemonism is totally a hooligan. And as a hegemonism(maybe you have not be awared of this, Eretz), you of course don't admit that fact, and keep rebuking China's regime, and keep blame me---- a been confered nationalist----dangerous or bad-behaved.

;)
Nice to see that you've realized what I have been doing.:lol: (I was going to stop posting though; your post changed my mind).
I have a bad habit of debating non-stop with others on certain that I tend to be interested in - while playing with words.
Well, as I said before on another thread, the West are viewed as hypocrits by Third World Countries, which is a view shared by me too, but it doesnt mean that the whole system of democratic principles are wrong. I'm sure that Benjamin Franklin and Washington would have been jumping mad seeing today's America (which pretty much is the incarnation of the Old British Empire).
I think that the Constitutional Liberalism is a natural product of the previous failed political systems, and while it is not perfect, it seems that many nations have come across the path from the rule of few to the rule of many, and that is why I think China will definitely become a democratic nation with probably a parliamentary system ( but it will not become an ally of the United States, sure of that one). If there comes such a day, then I think Asian nations would be more or less willing to go under Chinese Leadership.

What is this discusion doing in World History? It's as Off Topic as can be.

Huh, I guess Josef II was getting all worked up over nothing. :mischief:

:confused: Josef who?

:confused: Josef who?
oh, some unimportant guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_Belgium)

:lol::lol: I knew it! I just knew that a thread started by a Korean nationalist :):):):):):) will see the arrival of his Chinese equivalent, and then eventually a derail and faceoff between the two sides.
All we need are Japanese, Russian, and Taiwanese posters to join, and we can be a regular East Asian forum.

All we need are Japanese, Russian, and Taiwanese posters to join, and we can be a regular East Asian forum.

I once started one - but there not enough nationalists, and it petered out. Should we go for another one? I do kinda want to know how many nationalists are in this forum.

I can do a good Indonesian nationalist - just get me started about Srivijaya and Majapahit!

I can do a good Indonesian nationalist - just get me started about Srivijaya and Majapahit!

I wonder where my East Asian Thread is - I should dig it up.

While it doesn't matter, I have not expected you can be a accommodationist, because you have inherited from the Yanks hegemonism. And you know what the outstanding trait of hegemonism? To set up a system rule/ideology to force others to abey, but the constitutor won't follow it, and says: I do this is for you to have a more good human rights, blah blah. the CCP is a dictator, while the Yanks' hegemonism is totally a hooligan.

It strikes me as interesting how certain terms have become obsolete in the English language in a political context outside of English language communist propaganda. For example, I've never heard of hooliganism outside of sports or communist works. And then there is my favorite, running dog, which I've never been able to make any sense of. I wonder what all these terms are supposed to imply in the native tongues the communist propaganda was written in, but then campus communists born and bred in the U.S. use the terms too.

All we need are Japanese, Russian, and Taiwanese posters to join, and we can be a regular East Asian forum.

We can always role-play right?;) I can do a pretty convincing Chinese nationalist thanks to a summer spent with a cousin who kept on trying to convince me not to be a race traitor, though that role is already filled here.

It strikes me as interesting how certain terms have become obsolete in the English language in a political context outside of English language communist propaganda. For example, I've never heard of hooliganism outside of sports or communist works. And then there is my favorite, running dog, which I've never been able to make any sense of. I wonder what all these terms are supposed to imply in the native tongues the communist propaganda was written in, but then campus communists born and bred in the U.S. use the terms too.

I don't know how to understand your logic, You really made me can't help laughing at your funny,stupid and weird logic.
I wonder what made you think of that it was CCP's propagand since I used those English words.
My English is not good. Everybody known me at the board can sense that. When I thought of an Chinese word that how I can translate it into English, I have to look up in a dictionary to find a approximate word. It maybe not accurate, but it is because the mechanical English language sucks.:lol:
As to accommodationist, I even don't know it is a political word, I just know that it means to give in. But to give in is not proper to Chinese word "没完没了", so I just picked the word.
As to hegemonism, my Chinese word is "野蛮思维", but there are not a corresponding English word to translate it. So, picked hegemonism originated from French.
As to hooligan, my Chinese word is "流氓". Though I know several English words approximate to hooligan, I don't know what the exact difference between them. So I picked that one.

You always take it for granted that a Chinese must be brainwashed by CCP if the Chinese is pro-CCP or pro-China-regime. It seems that you have lost intelligences to think. It is a neural reflex for you to think about a common Chinese.

I wonder whom the hell was brainwashed? :lol:


We can always role-play right?;) I can do a pretty convincing Chinese nationalist thanks to a summer spent with a cousin who kept on trying to convince me not to be a race traitor, though that role is already filled here.

No, you even don't know what is race. You just blindness and shollow and simple headed Primates mammal.

I don't know how to understand your logic, You really made me can't help laughing at your funny,stupid and weird logic.
I wonder what made you think of that it was CCP's propagand since I used those English words.
My English is not good. Everybody known me at the board can sense that. When I thought of an Chinese word that how I can translate it into English, I have to look up in a dictionary to find a approximate word. It maybe not accurate, but it is because the mechanical English language sucks.:lol:
As to accommodationist, I even don't know it is a political word, I just know that it means to give in. But to give in is not proper to Chinese word "没完没了", so I just picked the word.
As to hegemonism, my Chinese word is "野蛮思维", but there are not a corresponding English word to translate it. So, picked hegemonism originated from French.
As to hooligan, my Chinese word is "流氓". Though I know several English words approximate to hooligan, I don't know what the exact difference between them. So I picked that one.

You always take it for granted that a Chinese must be brainwashed by CCP if the Chinese is pro-CCP or pro-China-regime. It seems that you have lost intelligences to think. It is a neural reflex for you to think about a common Chinese.

I wonder whom the hell was brainwashed? :lol:



No, you even don't know what is race. You just blindness and shollow and simple headed Primates mammal.

Let's all carry this conversation to the East Asian thread, shall we?

I don't know how to understand your logic, You really made me can't help laughing at your funny,stupid and weird logic.
I wonder what made you think of that it was CCP's propagand since I used those English words.


I know you admit that English isn't your strongpoint, but if you read my post more carefully, I was expressing curiosity at how even English speaking communists use otherwise obsolete terms. For some reason, all and only communists use the terms whether they are a native speaker or someone that uses a dictionary to translate what should be completely unrelated terms from their own language.

You just blindness and shollow and simple headed Primates mammal.

:lol:, how do I sig this? I know it's not so funny once you realize that it's just poor english, but once taken out of context in a sig, it'll be hilarious.

"Running dogs" is perhaps my favourate "so bad that it's good" translation:lol:,
seriouly when I first read this word in English years ago, it took me hours to realise what the original Chinese phrase is.

Don't forget about Poland. It had a colony in China.

"Running dogs" is perhaps my favourate "so bad that it's good" translation:lol:,
seriouly when I first read this word in English years ago, it took me hours to realise what the original Chinese phrase is.
What is it?

@xchen08: Copy-paste it to the sig option in your My Account menu.

What is it?


It's 走狗, which translates as walking/moving/traveling dog. It's definitely not running dog, and in any case, insults involving dogs or feet simply don't work well in the West. Which makes it all the more amusing when a pasty white student communist calls me a Capitalist running dog.

Copy-paste it to the sig option in your My Account menu.

Yeah, I figured that out, but it won't accept BBS code, leading me to suspect I'm not supposed to mock fellow board members through my sig, just like I'm not supposed to flame obvious trolls. (got an infraction for that one)

It's 走狗, which translates as walking/moving/traveling dog. It's definitely not running dog, and in any case, insults involving dogs or feet simply don't work well in the West. Which makes it all the more amusing when a pasty white student communist calls me a Capitalist running dog.



Yeah, I figured that out, but it won't accept BBS code, leading me to suspect I'm not supposed to mock fellow board members through my sig, just like I'm not supposed to flame obvious trolls. (got an infraction for that one)
Running dog is one of my favourite insults. Damn.

I just did that to create my sig. :confused:

It has been said (*by the Koreans) that Jesus was a Korean and he died in Korea. Now enough with fictional history, let's talk about the real thing.

Its always nice to know what other people from other countries are thinking, shame that we don't have many Koreans in this forum. I have heard similar views by China about other countries, Korea amongst them. It would be amusing to see what came out if both were to start arguing about each others precedence.