Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
Are India and China's effects overrated?
- Thread starter notgivenaway
- Start date
Not necessary China is or is not a turtle, but the fact that surviving isn't necessary the best indication of greatness.
Preservation and persistence doesn't necessary imply worthiness.
As I said before, various empire has lost various territories. Your argument only make sense if ALL Chinese dynasties maintain the territory of Tang/Han.
And we know Chinese expansion wasn't limited because the Mongol Empire spread further. I don't know how you make the argument that China has expanded as far as possible when we know the Mongols conquered almost everything China had conquered, except part of Vietnam, and then they went into Europe and the Middle East. So the Chinese expansion didn't hit the limit of expansion.
Some minor states in Europe around France and Spain has been there for quite a while. They outlasted the Romans. Are they greater than Rome?
You put emphasis on the survival in such emphasis we almost forgot exactly what your argument was, that China was the best survivor, or the greatest conqueror. (Your argument, not necessary this thread's argument.)
Which I can equally argue that the Chinese identity is an identity of Confucianism, a belief in the classics that is founded in the basis of Zhou Li. When you abandon the idea that Li is the foundation of a culture, the proper rites which brings peace and harmony, then are you really still 'Chinese'?
As Mencius harshly critiques that even the savages knows the proper rites of the wise-man and eager to emulate, what kind of man then are those who were born under the wise-man yet seeks to abandon him?
The Hua-Yi argument was the central argument to the Chinese of the old. They don't give half a rat's ... about 'survival' but rather the idea of Ren, Yi, and Li (not in order) and that they were willing to die for such ideas.
To me then, arguing that the Chinese 'identity' changed because of whatever is a silly argument. Because the Chinese identity is founded on certain principles, and these principles are what is the foundation of the culture and identity of what is Huaxia. So if you are arguing for change, then you are 'yi' are you not?
To put it in other words, modern day Chinese are a political construct base on the nation-state of PRC, where as the Chinese of the old were a cultural construct base on the idea of who were the Xia, and who were the Yi. These two MAY be the same, but are not necessary the same, as there are indications that some we would accept as Xia will not be accepted as Chinese today, see the Vietnamese Confucians who pass the CSE and serve the Ming court, and those who are Chinese today will not be accepted as Chinese of the old, anyone who fully rejects not just the idea of Li and Ren and Yi, but reject the entire Confucian traditions and culture.
To harp on the concept that Chinese identity merely evolved is a faulty argument. The Chinese was a cultural powerhouse not because they can beat the **** out of everyone, but they rejected the common concept of bloodlines (though not completely) and rather use the criteria of cultural superiority. It is not a sign of weakness, but supreme confidence. That anyone can be the superior been, so long as they follow the proper path.
To harp on the concept that Chinese identity merely evolved is a faulty argument. The Chinese was a cultural powerhouse not because they can beat the **** out of everyone, but they rejected the common concept of bloodlines (though not completely) and rather use the criteria of cultural superiority. It is not a sign of weakness, but supreme confidence. That anyone can be the superior been, so long as they follow the proper path.
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
Last edited:
"Doesn't necessarily imply", because you know it's true in the case of China. You mentioned examples that aren't necessarily the case (in your perspective), in their case, perhaps not necessarily.
China is far, far too embedded to go anywhere, with a population of 1.4 billion Chinese around the world (1,400,000,000) with a Chinese identity. I should mention that humans are more complex than holding to simple, ancient views that you assert China's culture to be upon. The difference between Shanghai and Beijing is obvious, the cultural difference between a former fishing city with heavy-handed foreign influence and the capital, still, the identity is clear.
Confucianism has many forms and variations, people do cherry pick (nothing wrong with cherry picking), in this context, hard work and growth, growth in that no matter how little the growth, it is still growth as long as there is growth (hence, hard work). This cultural aspect is what you see commonly when a Chinese elderly only ever rests on Chinese New Year (not too old of course, that would be too much).
The only way that China would disappear if it was MAD. Even if then, it might not be so clear. I should note that China's extensive underground has an effect of sheltering in these times. And it's definitely clear on the CPC's minds due to the Cold War (tourist attraction-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_City_(Beijing))
“The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones.”
I live by that statement when starting a very heavy maths book, eventually, you get to 40% completion (indicated by Kindle) with perfect comprehension and you look back. Before you know it...
It's not always the case, but in China, it is the case that it implies worthiness.
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
Last edited:
You know that's not true, where did you think those government officials came from? They came from a civilization-state mentality, why did the CPC or the KMT tried to unify China? Why do you think Sun Yat-sen is so popular in "communist China" even though he's of the KMT?
You're just making up weird sophistry on the spot. Any Chinese who've grown up with Chinese culture will learn of many cultural aspects of Chinese history and the Chinese identity, you learn many, many phrases, including:
一山还有一山高 (there will always be a taller mountain - there will always be someone better than you)
They are 四字成语 (four character saying) and 五字成语 and so on, for example:
https://chengyu.911cha.com/zishu_3.html
Every Chinese growing up in Chinese culture will have heard of the most popular ones. To every is a story attached, well, the most popular ones at the very least.
You're just a weird foreigner who doesn't understand what a civilization-state feels like because you've never grown up in one, superimposing your ideologies on China with unwarranted authority, and let me tell you, this is awkward.
.
For history, the culture of China has always been glorified by foreigners (e.g. Marco Polo etc.). Notice how taken Kublai Khan is with Chinese culture, its language, poetry. Though since the rise of European colonialism, they started this anti-China sentiment that has lasted for over a century:
e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Peril etc.
Unlike many other powers (e.g. The Ottoman Empire etc.), China continued, this only serves to drastically reinforce the civilization-state mentality in many Chinese's minds. You know how an advanced alien civilization is supposed to force humans to unify? Same thing here. Look at the depiction of historical China in Fearless (2006), it's a popular Chinese film, you will notice that in the end, there is a message (among many other), the civilization state continues. The movie stars Jet Li, a Hong Konger for awhile (drew in by Hong Kong's cinematic culture). BBC will hate to admits this, but the majority of Hong Kongers also has a Chinese civilization continuty mindset. The majority of Hong Kongers came from China not long ago (look at the demographics).
Last edited:
In terms of the world system, I see an accurate sentiment that the Han's opponents haven't been focused on as much as Rome's being confused with Han's opponents being greater. Egypt and Mesopotamia are two of the four cradles of civilization, China is one. Egypt and Mesopotamian empires are not part of the same world system the way the Han and Xionghu might be, it's false equivalency, just because impressive empires fought doesn't mean they are part of the same "system", and hence the Han are equal, there were sub groups in these systems too. In terms of the four main centres of civilization, Rome took over two of these regions(neither of which are in Europe), the Persians possessed three, and the Greeks almost got three as well. The critique of China is she did not dominate her own neighborhood never mind go into these different ones.
By the logic in which has been used to make China look like they conquered great empires could be used by many notable empires to make the peoples that encompassed their empire look like empires. In terms of the Xionghu they are impressive but they are not even the most impressive group of raiders to attack China. Europe dealt with the Huns and Steppe invaders as well.
I agree with you about China being more of an economic power than a military one. However having a good economy isn't power but rather something that tends to correlate with it. This doesn't mean when it doesn't correlate that wealth without power should be confused for power. Wealthy weak countries are a thing, the world is full of them today. I apply this standard to wealthy but weak European states as well like Portugal and the Netherlands.
I was talking more about the 1400s and 1500s in regards to Europe and don't ever think China was ever much greater than Middle East if at all, though in periods like the Tang there's a good case(Han are the most impressive IMO but the world was unusually full of impressive civilizations at that time). The 18th century is when industrialization in Europe began so that isn't what's in dispute, I'm saying Europe was greater than the Far East before industrialization post centralization and the Middle East I'm talking almost generally in earlier eras.
Okay they could be seen as culturally greater for much of history(though Middle East gives them a run for their money). Pretty sure the premise of this thread is largely based on "beat the **** out of everyone".
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
Last edited:
@Emperor of Wurttemburg 43
It depends on what the definition of power and wealth is, which is completely void in this thread. If we take absolute GDP expenditures to correlate with the military, Netherlands is nowhere near the top. And if you're talking about the 1400s and 1500s, then you're severely underestimating China.
"Its sheer scope and size made it the world's largest paper-based general encyclopedia.[1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongle_Encyclopedia
"British scientist, historian and The size and dimensions of the treasures are heavily debated. According to British scientist, historian and sinologist Joseph Needham, the purported dimensions of the largest of these ships were 137 m (450 ft) by 55 m (180 ft),[1] which would make them at least twice as long as the largest European ships at the end of the sixteenth century."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_treasure_ship
"The scholar Gu Yanwu of the early Qing dynasty (1644–1912) estimated that the previous Ming dynasty had to employ 47,004 full-time laborers recruited by the lijia corvée system in order to maintain the entire canal system.[31] It is known that 121,500 soldiers and officers were needed simply to operate the 11,775 government grain barges in the mid-15th century.[31]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canal_(China)#Ming_dynasty_restoration
"The tower was octagonal with a base of about 97 feet (30 m) in diameter. When it was built, the tower was one of the largest buildings in China, rising up to a height of 260 feet (79 m) with nine stories and a staircase in the middle of the pagoda, which spiraled upwards for 184 steps. The top of the roof was marked by a golden pineapple. There were original plans to add more stories, according to an American missionary who in 1852 visited Nanjing. There are only a few Chinese pagodas that surpass its height, such as the still existent 275-foot-tall (84 m) 11th-century Liaodi Pagoda in Hebei or the no longer existent 330-foot-tall (100 m) 7th-century wooden pagoda of Chang'an. The tower was built with white porcelain bricks that were said to reflect the sun's rays during the day, and at night as many as 140 lamps were hung from the building to illuminate the tower. Glazes and stoneware were worked into the porcelain and created a mixture of green, yellow, brown and white designs on the sides of the tower, including animals, flowers and landscapes. The tower was also decorated with numerous Buddhist images."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porcelain_Tower_of_Nanjing#Description
"The Huolongjing (traditional Chinese: 火龍經; simplified Chinese: 火龙经; pinyin: Huǒ Lóng Jīng; Wade-Giles: Huo Lung Ching; rendered in English as Fire Drake Manual or Fire Dragon Manual), also known as Huoqitu (“Firearm Illustrations”), is a 14th-century military treatise compiled and edited by Jiao Yu and Liu Bowen of the early Ming dynasty (1368–1683). The Huolongjing is primarily based on the text known as Huolong Shenqi Tufa (Illustrations of Divine Fire Dragon Engines), which is no longer extant and has since been lost.[1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huolongjing
.
City wall:
It depends on what the definition of power and wealth is, which is completely void in this thread. If we take absolute GDP expenditures to correlate with the military, Netherlands is nowhere near the top. And if you're talking about the 1400s and 1500s, then you're severely underestimating China.
"Its sheer scope and size made it the world's largest paper-based general encyclopedia.[1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongle_Encyclopedia
"British scientist, historian and The size and dimensions of the treasures are heavily debated. According to British scientist, historian and sinologist Joseph Needham, the purported dimensions of the largest of these ships were 137 m (450 ft) by 55 m (180 ft),[1] which would make them at least twice as long as the largest European ships at the end of the sixteenth century."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_treasure_ship
"The scholar Gu Yanwu of the early Qing dynasty (1644–1912) estimated that the previous Ming dynasty had to employ 47,004 full-time laborers recruited by the lijia corvée system in order to maintain the entire canal system.[31] It is known that 121,500 soldiers and officers were needed simply to operate the 11,775 government grain barges in the mid-15th century.[31]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canal_(China)#Ming_dynasty_restoration
"The tower was octagonal with a base of about 97 feet (30 m) in diameter. When it was built, the tower was one of the largest buildings in China, rising up to a height of 260 feet (79 m) with nine stories and a staircase in the middle of the pagoda, which spiraled upwards for 184 steps. The top of the roof was marked by a golden pineapple. There were original plans to add more stories, according to an American missionary who in 1852 visited Nanjing. There are only a few Chinese pagodas that surpass its height, such as the still existent 275-foot-tall (84 m) 11th-century Liaodi Pagoda in Hebei or the no longer existent 330-foot-tall (100 m) 7th-century wooden pagoda of Chang'an. The tower was built with white porcelain bricks that were said to reflect the sun's rays during the day, and at night as many as 140 lamps were hung from the building to illuminate the tower. Glazes and stoneware were worked into the porcelain and created a mixture of green, yellow, brown and white designs on the sides of the tower, including animals, flowers and landscapes. The tower was also decorated with numerous Buddhist images."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porcelain_Tower_of_Nanjing#Description
"The Huolongjing (traditional Chinese: 火龍經; simplified Chinese: 火龙经; pinyin: Huǒ Lóng Jīng; Wade-Giles: Huo Lung Ching; rendered in English as Fire Drake Manual or Fire Dragon Manual), also known as Huoqitu (“Firearm Illustrations”), is a 14th-century military treatise compiled and edited by Jiao Yu and Liu Bowen of the early Ming dynasty (1368–1683). The Huolongjing is primarily based on the text known as Huolong Shenqi Tufa (Illustrations of Divine Fire Dragon Engines), which is no longer extant and has since been lost.[1]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huolongjing
.
City wall:
Nope, this is wrong. The KMT and CCP were in a NATION-STATE mentality, rather than a civilization state mentality.
This is basic Chinese history 101. Not that they are wrong or bad or right or good, but the flow in which the Chinese after the First Sino-Japanese War was to remodel the Chinese society from the old and traditional value and model them after Prussia and Japan.
You obviously didn't study much of Confucianism or Chinese history. The Chinese identity, which allowed the Chinese to survive the 5 Hus after Jin and various other occupations and conquest, is founded on the basic concept of Yi-Xia Zhi Bian, 夷夏之辩.
That is the foundation which allowed the Chinese to say, we are Xia, you are Yi, therefore we are not the same, and we will retake our home back.
So this Chinese History 101 is the concept allowed the Chinese to rise up against the brutal nomads and restore the old empires.
Then we ask what is Yi and what is Xia?
Mencius was very clear on what is Yi and what is Xia, as were Confucius and etc etc.
Yah, utterly meaningless.
You know what is awkward, I am discussing what is Chinese based on the Chinese Classics, the Confucian ideologies which the Chinese for centuries took for orthodoxy, and you a Chinese who apparently don't understand the Classics.
That is awkward.
And? What is the purpose of this?
Which is kind of my point. The Chinese today can certainly say things like we are the same Chinese blah blah blah. At the same time, the Greeks can say we are the same Hellens, blah blah blah.
NEITHER GETS TO **** ON THE OTHER.
On the other hand, it seems very clear that Sun Yat-Sen and Mao Zedong wanted a NATION-STATE, rather the continuation of the civilization state.
When you think Mao said '同胞们，中华人民共和国中央人民政府今天成立了' he was saying a new dynasty was founded?
No, he was saying a new nation-state where the sovereign was the people is now established.
WTF is this?
I wasn't aware the 'effect' is based on beating the **** out of everyone.
Because then the Mongols are pretty great.
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
@mariusj
The fact that you would scream in capital letters, swear and try so desperately to forcefully assert statements you know is wrong is telling, and this is not something I could waste my time on I'm afraid. You look like you're scared - I'm not your therapist.
All cultures evolve, get over it, or maybe you would enjoy more Yellow Peril propaganda.
The fact that you would scream in capital letters, swear and try so desperately to forcefully assert statements you know is wrong is telling, and this is not something I could waste my time on I'm afraid. You look like you're scared - I'm not your therapist.
All cultures evolve, get over it, or maybe you would enjoy more Yellow Peril propaganda.
False. China dominated her neighbors as much as Rome dominated hers. Why don't you actually look up the Chinese dominance in Asia before talking about how China failed? The difference been the distance between Asia Minor and the Near East and the China and the Near East.
Like any kind of pretense that Rome did a really awesome job because they went SO FAR TO PARTHIA and China couldn't reach Parthia is pretty laughable.
LOL. Have you compare the actual steppe with the steppe in Europe which Attila launched his attack?
Wealth is power.
This is geopolitics 101.
There are almost no difference between paying someone 1 billion dollars to do your bidding, or using that 1 billion dollar to buy bunch of tanks and use these tanks to make someone do your bidding.
In fact, when people say hard power, they meant money and arms.
You base this on your learn and expert opinion how?
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
Sorry, you don't know who or what I am.
But just put it this way, when I discuss the Classics with you, and you avoid discussing that with me, it is really an awkward position you put yourself in.
So why don't you brush up on your classics and we can talk about what is Chinese to the ancient people.
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
Last edited:
@mariusj
We're not talking about ancient people, they're all dead. We're talking about a cultural identity that has evolved as cherry picked, I for one also cherry picked.
Modern Chinese (including me and all family and extended family members and Chinese friends I know with the exception of my weird little brother - you're both a bit alike, capital letters and swearing) would consciously carry the civilization-state identity. I don't know why you had such a vigorous reaction, almost as if your head exploded. To the guilty, the civilization state is threatening because it means unity against hostile foreign pressures. To the diplomatic and friendly, it is not.
We're not talking about ancient people, they're all dead. We're talking about a cultural identity that has evolved as cherry picked, I for one also cherry picked.
Modern Chinese (including me and all family and extended family members and Chinese friends I know with the exception of my weird little brother - you're both a bit alike, capital letters and swearing) would consciously carry the civilization-state identity. I don't know why you had such a vigorous reaction, almost as if your head exploded. To the guilty, the civilization state is threatening because it means unity against hostile foreign pressures. To the diplomatic and friendly, it is not.
Since apparently you didn't learn about this, here, I will help you out.
吾聞用夏變夷者，未聞變於夷者也。陳良，楚產也；悅周公、仲尼之道，北學於中國，北方之學者，未能或之先也。彼所謂豪傑之士也。子之兄弟事之數十年，師死而遂倍之。昔者孔子沒，三年之外，門人治任將歸，入揖於子貢，相向而哭，皆失聲，然後歸。子貢反，筑室於場，獨居三年，然後歸。他日子夏、子張、子游以有若似聖人，欲以所事孔子事之，強曾子。曾子曰：『不可，江漢以濯之，秋陽以暴之，皜皜乎不可尚已。』今也南蠻鴃舌之人，非先王之道，子倍子之師而學之，亦異於曾子矣。吾聞出於幽谷、遷于喬木者，未聞下喬木而入於幽谷者。魯頌曰：『戎狄是膺，荊舒是懲。』周公方且膺之，子是之學，亦為不善變矣。」「從許子之道，則市賈不貳，國中無偽；雖使五尺之童適市，莫之或欺。布帛長短同，則賈相若；麻縷絲絮輕重同，則賈相若；五穀多寡同，則賈相若；屨大小同，則賈相若。」曰：「夫物之不齊，物之情也。或相倍蓰，或相什百，或相千萬；子比而同之，是亂天下也。巨屨小屨同賈，人豈為之哉？從許子之道，相率而為偽者也，惡能治國家？
I have heard the wisdom of using the culture of the central
states to transform the Yi tribes; I have never heard the wisdom of
transforming into the Yi. Your teacher, Chen Liang, came from
Chu. He took pleasure in the Dao of the Duke of Zhou and
Confucius, so he traveled north to the central states. Even among
the scholars of the north, there were none who could surpass him.
We call men like him heroic gentlemen. You and your brother
studied under him for dozens of years, but now that he’s dead, you
turn your backs on him.
When Confucius died, after they had observed the threeyear
mourning period, the disciples packed their bags to go to their
homes. They all went to see Zigong, and facing one another, they
all wailed until their voices gave out, only then did they depart.
Zigong returned to the gravesite, where he built a hut and lived
alone for three years more, only then departing for home. At
another point, Zixia, Zizhang, and Ziyou felt that their comrade
You Ruo resembled their sage master, and they wished to serve
him as they had Confucius. They pressed Zengzi to join them, but
Zengzi said, ‘It is not right. As though washed by the Yangzi and
Han Rivers, bleached by the autumn sun: so gleaming white – the
Master cannot be surpassed!’
How different from Zengzi you are! A shrike-tongued
barbarian comes from the south opposing the Dao of the former
kings, and you turn your back on your teacher to study with him.
I’ve heard people speak of climbing out of a dark ravine up to the
top of a tall tree, but never of descending from the treetops to be in
a dark ravine. In the Poetry, the ‘Odes of Lu’ say:
He struck at the Rong and the Di tribes north,
Then south, to punish the Jing and the Shu.
The Duke of Zhou punished these people, now you want to learn
from them – that’s a change for the worse, indeed!”
Chen Xiang said, “If we follow Xu Xing’s dao, market
prices will be fixed and there will be no fraud in the state. Though
you sent a mere boy to the market, no one would cheat him. When
bolts of woven cloth and silk are sold in standard lengths, when
raw hemp, flax, and silk are sold at standard weights, when the five
grains are sold in standard measures, then prices will be unified.
The same will be true for sandals, too.”
Mencius said, “That all are not identical is in the nature of
things. Some are half a dozen times more valuable than others,some a thousand times, and some a million. If you insist that they
all be treated as equal, you will bring chaos to the world. If a
sandal coarsely woven costs the same as one crafted with fine
weave, who will ever make fine sandals again? To follow Master
Xu’s dao is to lead one another into fraud. How could one bring
order to a state in this way?”
As translated by Robert Eno.
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
You aren't just talking about modern people.
If you are, I couldn't care less about your opinion. Your argument is that you are the same as the ancient Chinese because you share the identity of Chinese.
To which I reject, as the ancient Chinese identity is based on the classics. Modern Chinese identity is base on a passport.
And please, please, please get out of my mind. You not only know nothing about Chinese history and the Classics, you also know nothing of psychology.
Joined Jan 2018
1,609 Posts | 6+
China (Hong Kong SAR)
@mariusj
I was talking about modern China and its civilization state mentality dimwit, read back. You successfully scared me off this thread. Modern Chinese is Chinese, something that you're extremely triggered of, and I don't why, possibly Tawainese? I said in the Hong Kong thread that Cantonese is irrelevant, and it triggered a reply out of you.
Something wrong with you.
I was talking about modern China and its civilization state mentality dimwit, read back. You successfully scared me off this thread. Modern Chinese is Chinese, something that you're extremely triggered of, and I don't why, possibly Tawainese? I said in the Hong Kong thread that Cantonese is irrelevant, and it triggered a reply out of you.
Something wrong with you.
Are you telling me that Hua-Xia is not the central concept of been Chinese in the ancient time?
Let me rephrase this so you can comprehend.
The argument you and some other used was that the Chinese were awesome so awesome they are the best because they lasted forever. And that the Chinese were a thoroughly continuous thing.
However, you then must answer, since your claim is that the Chinese in the ancient time and modern time must also be the same in identity, what is Hua-Xia to the ancient Chinese. Otherwise, how can you proclaim the modern day nation-state of PRC is the same as the people form Qin Han etc?
I am a bit shocked at this idea that the study of Chinese history, as it isn't even controversial in China, is the basis of study of Confucianism.
But I guess anything is possible these days.
And btw, I am not even claiming to be an expert in Confucianism, but the very shallow bits I do know, as quoted, seems very very clear on what the Chinese view as 'us' vs 'them.' Mencius couldn't be more clear on that.
More History Discussions
Trending History Discussions
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 7- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 861
-
-
The Great Captains of History - How Many Battles? - Version 5
- Started by DiocletianIsBetterThanYou
- Replies: 3K
-
The Diversity Of Early African Architecture/Ruins Thread- Started by Kilwa Sultanate
- Replies: 2K
-