Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 2nd, 2012, 02:43 PM   #441
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 971

Quote:
Originally Posted by scholar View Post
I'm not sure how to take this. Most of those groups died out, being assimilated into the Han ethnic group, or other northern nomad groups, before the Yuan was established.

Either the entire historical record of China from the Spring and Autumn Annals to the Zizhi Tongjian and beyond can be thrown out and burned because its filled with Manchurian lies and propaganda designed to elevate the status of minorities or because even if it wasn't using it would be worthless in this argument.

You believe what the Manchus wrote, I believe what the Manchus did.

They explicitly say that they're not Chinese, yet you say that they are Chinese.

They explicitly discriminated and practiced racist apartheid against the Chinese, as in garrison cities, yet you think this is ok.

They were hated for being non-Chinese in both the White Lotus and Taiping Rebellions, do you know what they Chinese people were chanting? You're going to ignore all those people too.

I mean, at this point, you're just completely hopeless.

Can it be so difficult to understand?



The Manchus explicitly say that they're not Chinese, that the Daicing Gurun is to just to rule over the Chinese, and that they're masters of the Chinese, but not Chinese themselves.

Case closed. Unless you can provide me with real evidence, all the evidence is simply pointing to the fact that the Manchu Qing was not Chinese.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Remove Ads
Old August 2nd, 2012, 02:48 PM   #442
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: In the Western Hemisphere
Posts: 3,553

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
I've responded, but you just don't get it.

Answer me, can you read Manchu? Have you read Manchu primary-sources?
No, which is precisely the point. You've thrown out characters and their translations, which have been made suspect by scribe. Further responding to my points by bringing up additional points and combating those instead of responding to me.

For instance:

Quote:
If the a few diaries from the early and middle reign of the Qing (After the Europeans come in a significant fashion things started changing, so this is before the rebellions in Southern China) show discontent under Qing rule, then why then did most of the generals, most of the standing armies, most of the officials, and most of the Confucian-Gentry-Nobility classes supported the Qing rule and acknowledged the Qing claim to be an Emperor of China and holding the mandate of heaven? Further, how did these purported normal peasants learn to read and write? Most of the Chinese peasantry were illiterate for much of the Yuan, Ming, and Qing. Having the ability to read and write were normally markers of being from a merchant family, or a higher level artisan, if not an outright statement of wealth from the scholar class.
You never responded to the support for the Qing by defecting generals and armies, nor support from the Confucian gentry, nor anything else. You've flaunted the word coercion, but with no evidence or proof of it.

You listed a post of quotes showing Cixi and two emperors apparently saying they were not Chinese, to which I said was irrelevant to the point I was making. Further, these quotes were put into question by one of the more established members here, who I trust enough to at the very least treat them with doubt.

You posted a Manchurian Diary, which had nothing to do with chinese peasants resenting foreign rule.

How does this respond to my point? It doesn't.

I was also dying to ask how the peasants could complain about having a lower quality of life under the Qing when they weren't alive for the Ming, but there were other issues to work out and since you didn't respond to my main point there was no reason to bring it up.
scholar is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 02:50 PM   #443
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 971

Quote:
Originally Posted by scholar View Post
I'm not sure how to take this. Most of those groups died out, being assimilated into the Han ethnic group, or other northern nomad groups, before the Yuan was established.

Either the entire historical record of China from the Spring and Autumn Annals to the Zizhi Tongjian and beyond can be thrown out and burned because its filled with Manchurian lies and propaganda designed to elevate the status of minorities or because even if it wasn't using it would be worthless in this argument.

Well, all this was before China was unified during the Qin. During the Qin and the Han, China became unified, and ethnic Chinese identity emerged. Most of the minorities probably got wiped out, and their women got taken. Before Qin, there were many ethnic groups. After Qin and Han, Chinese ethnic identity became solidified.

And that's the problem, when the Mongols and Manchus invaded, Chinese ethnic identity had already been established for over 1,000 years. That's why the Mongols and the Manchus were detested so strongly as foreigners.

During the Japanese invasion, there were some collaborators, but the vast majority of the Chinese population hated the Japanese invasion. The same goes for the Mongols and Manchus. You can't find a few examples of collaborators and generalize to say that the Chinese population supported these foreign invaders, and welcomed them as Chinese. Because they certainly didn't.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 02:55 PM   #444
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: In the Western Hemisphere
Posts: 3,553

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
You believe what the Manchus wrote, I believe what the Manchus did.
Hard to do when I haven't read what they wrote, not from a primary source anyways. And hard for you to say what the Manchurians did if you believe what they wrote, after all you quoted a Manchurian diary and believed what they wrote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
They explicitly say that they're not Chinese, yet you say that they are Chinese.
No, I said the Qing was a Chinese Dynasty, referring to its culture and custom. I've never made the argument that they were ethnically Han. They were Chinese in this regard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
They explicitly discriminated and practiced racist apartheid against the Chinese, as in garrison cities, yet you think this is ok.
Who ever said I thought it was okay? Rather I pointed out similarities to other governments that you claimed that since they were natives they treated Chinese people better, which they didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
They were hated for being non-Chinese in both the White Lotus and Taiping Rebellions, do you know what they Chinese people were chanting? You're going to ignore all those people too.
Which occurred after the time period I was referring to, so yes I'm going to ignore them just as much as I'm going to ignore Chiang of the Koumingtang's statements on the Qing. I asked for contemporary data from the lower classes that conflicted with the apparent full scale support of the Ming military and bureaucracy, instead I get none of that. You say that peasants wrote diaries and the only thing you bothered showing me was a statement of a Manchurian diary, which showed nothing of the state of the Chinese peasant, only self entitled superiority of the father.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
I mean, at this point, you're just completely hopeless.
I would prefer a second opinion on this.
scholar is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 02:59 PM   #445
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: In the Western Hemisphere
Posts: 3,553

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
And that's the problem, when the Mongols and Manchus invaded, Chinese ethnic identity had already been established for over 1,000 years. That's why the Mongols and the Manchus were detested so strongly as foreigners.
Why not the Later Zhou? Why not the Liao? Why not the Jin? These were all strictly speaking not ethnically Han, and yet they received the full backing of the Chinese aristocracy. So much so that when the Yuan finally did come that the Northern Chinese were placed on an entirely different caste than the Southern ones, that the Northern Chinese were killed by the Japanese while the Southern ones were spared. This is not a sign of a Chinese ethnic identity that is unified, quite the contrary it wreaks of division.

Edit: Not the Later Zhou, the Northern Zhou.
scholar is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 03:02 PM   #446
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 971

Quote:
Originally Posted by scholar View Post
No, which is precisely the point. You've thrown out characters and their translations, which have been made suspect by scribe. Further responding to my points by bringing up additional points and combating those instead of responding to me.

For instance:



You never responded to the support for the Qing by defecting generals and armies, nor support from the Confucian gentry, nor anything else. You've flaunted the word coercion, but with no evidence or proof of it.

You listed a post of quotes showing Cixi and two emperors apparently saying they were not Chinese, to which I said was irrelevant to the point I was making. Further, these quotes were put into question by one of the more established members here, who I trust enough to at the very least treat them with doubt.

You posted a Manchurian Diary, which had nothing to do with chinese peasants resenting foreign rule.

How does this respond to my point? It doesn't.

I was also dying to ask how the peasants could complain about having a lower quality of life under the Qing when they weren't alive for the Ming, but there were other issues to work out and since you didn't respond to my main point there was no reason to bring it up.


Wow, you know so very little about Chinese history, I feel like I'm going to have to spoon feed you all the basics.

Ming fell because of the Little Ice Age, and a whole bunch of natural disasters all hitting at the same time. Mass famines gave the opportunity for Li Zicheng to lead a massive rebellion that overthrew the Ming. Li was a maniac, murder and rape everywhere. Li Zicheng managed to completely overthrow the Ming, but Li Zicheng was exhausted as well. Li Zicheng's atrocities made him very unpopular with the population, and When Wu Sangui heard about the atrocities that Li Zicheng was committing in Beijing, he decided to let the Manchus in. That's understandable that he would rather cooperate with a nice and reasonable Manchu force that would give him a good deal, rather than the maniac Li Zicheng, who would probably kill Wu Sangui, given the fact of how Li Zicheng was treating Wu's family, and the people in Beijing.

Wu held the last sizeable Chinese troops, and once he surrendered, it was all over. The Confucian gentries, did they have much of a choice? The Manchus were willing to kill entire families and villages for not cutting their hair a certain way. If the Manchus were willing to collectively murder entire villages over a hairstyle, you think they wouldn't kill the uncooperative gentries? The gentry class all cooperated because the ones who didn't cooperate were killed. Read about Yangzhou, Jiading, etc.

All in all, the Manchus more or less stepped into a power vacuum, they were just lucky as hell that Li had done all the work already overthrowing the Ming, and the fact that Li was such an animal. Compared to Li, the Manchus probably didn't appear that bad intially.

But more than that, the evidence is readily apparent with the Literary Inquisition and the Queue Order. Even if you don't cut your hair the right way, you, your family, and your entire village might be beheaded. If the Manchus were willing to kill over a hairstyle, you think they wouldn't kill you if you didn't support them? You had better join their side, or else you and your entire family might die.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 03:03 PM   #447
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 971

Quote:
Originally Posted by scholar View Post
Why not the Later Zhou? Why not the Liao? Why not the Jin? These were all strictly speaking not ethnically Han, and yet they received the full backing of the Chinese aristocracy. So much so that when the Yuan finally did come that the Northern Chinese were placed on an entirely different caste than the Southern ones, that the Northern Chinese were killed by the Japanese while the Southern ones were spared. This is not a sign of a Chinese ethnic identity that is unified, quite the contrary it wreaks of division.

Edit: Not the Later Zhou, the Northern Zhou.
They did not receive the full backing of the aristocracy, where do you get your sources?

You know so little that you keep asking me all these basic questions.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 03:09 PM   #448
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 971

Quote:
Originally Posted by scholar View Post
Why not the Later Zhou? Why not the Liao? Why not the Jin? These were all strictly speaking not ethnically Han, and yet they received the full backing of the Chinese aristocracy. So much so that when the Yuan finally did come that the Northern Chinese were placed on an entirely different caste than the Southern ones, that the Northern Chinese were killed by the Japanese while the Southern ones were spared. This is not a sign of a Chinese ethnic identity that is unified, quite the contrary it wreaks of division.

Edit: Not the Later Zhou, the Northern Zhou.
Once again, that information is written by the Manchus. The Chinese aristocracy full backing these savages is definitely not true, and written by the Manchus. The Japanese killing the northern Chinese is true, though. They respected the people of the Song, because they were ethnic Chinese.

The funny thing, all of this changed with the Ming restoration, as not only did 95% of the Mongols not manage to get out in time, most of the northern Chinese men were killed as Zhu Yuanzhang moved north. They divided the women among the soldiers. Zhu was obsessed with full cleaning the country of Mongol stench, and to some degree, that involved ethnic cleansing as well.

I have to admit, the quality of Chinese culture to some degree deteriorated with the Ming, as the Chinese became much more racist, and took a much more hardcore attitude with ethnic minorities.
Bo_Wong is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 03:16 PM   #449
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: In the Western Hemisphere
Posts: 3,553

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Wong View Post
Wow, you know so very little about Chinese history, I feel like I'm going to have to spoon feed you all the basics.
Thank you for proving my point in its entirety!

Not only are you not responding to my points, you insist on constructing elaborate arguments that ultimately serve to distract from them!

As for the merit of your new argument, it does hold some water. For instance the Little Ice Age did contribute to the fall of the Ming, but far from the only things. For that you should actually brush up on your history of the Ming government at the time. Other parts are more questionable.
scholar is offline  
Old August 2nd, 2012, 03:23 PM   #450
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 971

Quote:
Originally Posted by scholar View Post
Thank you for proving my point in its entirety!

Not only are you not responding to my points, you insist on constructing elaborate arguments that ultimately serve to distract from them!

As for the merit of your new argument, it does hold some water. For instance the Little Ice Age did contribute to the fall of the Ming, but far from the only things. For that you should actually brush up on your history of the Ming government at the time. Other parts are more questionable.

You can believe whatever you want, my arguments are more convincing because I have a deeper understanding of what happened. You only read Manchu-fabricated historical fiction.

I posted links to prove that ordinary peasants detested the early Qing, but you haven't read those links. Read those links that I posted earlier in the thread.

There was no full scale support of the Manchus, give me some evidence. That's just flat out not true.

You say things that are ridiculously not true, and expect me to respond to them? Hahaha, I politely ignored them because I thought that they were so ridiculous, but I guess you didn't get the hint, huh?

When I ignore your points, it's because I think that they're completely ridiculous. I just laugh and move on, and provide further evidence to prove that the Manchu Qing isn't a Chinese dynasty.

If you say something interesting and valid, I'll address your point, otherwise, I'll just politely ignore you, and move on. Do you understand what this means?
Bo_Wong is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
chinese, dynasties, qing, yuan



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who is your favorite Chinese leader after end of Qing Dynasty? DeliciousTomatoesYay Asian History 10 April 1st, 2011 04:49 AM
Why are Chinese Dynasties treated differently from European ones? Kiwi Asian History 31 November 2nd, 2010 09:19 AM
Most competent general of the Ming and Qing Dyansty FailWhale War and Military History 1 September 15th, 2010 07:36 PM
On dynasties... lokariototal General History 6 July 22nd, 2010 05:24 AM
Political Dynasties Dr Realism American History 10 March 22nd, 2009 06:27 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.