sum won, my argument cont'd:
if you want to argue that there are lots of people left of indian descent (no matter how dilute their descent) as a result of intermarriage, remember, the whites hardly intermarried the indians, they killed them off. You should also see that "giving canton back to the cantonese" is just as impractical. But I will argue that issue next time as I have to go. this message is totally about your claim regarding the Indians. In conclusion, I find that you did not logically validify your claim and that you possess many flaws in your arguments two of these flaws being insufficient evidence and the manipulation of evidence to suit your claim, hence dismissing the rest of the picture.
A Separate Cantonese Republic???
-
HKB
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
Sum Won,
Well the Greek example was a bootleg one but I gave it just to let you know the idea. The idea is that the cantonese people of today probably have very diverse ancestry (yes! go head and replace the Greek woman with an Arab one) (and don't forget that people move around-even if not mass migration). All of my Hong Kong friends have different places of ancestry Some from Tai Shan, some Min Nan, some Fu Jian, some Chao Zhou, some Guang-xi, some Su Zhou, Hu Nan, Taiwan, etc. In turn the people from these places could have inherited a variety of ancestry as well, with no absolute way of knowing exactly what these ancestries were (some of them could have been neither Chinese nor Cantones). So, to the present Cantonese speaking people living in Canton, who probably have only little or even NO aboriginal "cantonese" ancestry, what you've been proposing this whole time is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to me definitely and all of my friends too. I'm Cantonese and I'm Chinese. I speak a Chinese language and I am every bit Chinese-cultured. I'm no aboriginal Nan Yue or do I care about any of that hocus pocus thousands of years ago, I care about China now. So do all my friends and probably all cantonese people, who are Chinese people living in a province named Canton. Your proposition is bogus. I totally agree with ppk that you need to consider the interest of the cantonese people themselves (once again they're just Chinese people living in Canton, just like Chinese people living in Beijing), not your own. Hell, I don't think any of them would even listen to you.
creating dual nationalities is impractical. And the example I gave was much more than a"dual" nationality. if my mom is an elf from middle earth and my dad Chinese, and middle earth was destroyed 5000 years ago, what good would my dual nationality do, huh?
Well the Greek example was a bootleg one but I gave it just to let you know the idea. The idea is that the cantonese people of today probably have very diverse ancestry (yes! go head and replace the Greek woman with an Arab one) (and don't forget that people move around-even if not mass migration). All of my Hong Kong friends have different places of ancestry Some from Tai Shan, some Min Nan, some Fu Jian, some Chao Zhou, some Guang-xi, some Su Zhou, Hu Nan, Taiwan, etc. In turn the people from these places could have inherited a variety of ancestry as well, with no absolute way of knowing exactly what these ancestries were (some of them could have been neither Chinese nor Cantones). So, to the present Cantonese speaking people living in Canton, who probably have only little or even NO aboriginal "cantonese" ancestry, what you've been proposing this whole time is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to me definitely and all of my friends too. I'm Cantonese and I'm Chinese. I speak a Chinese language and I am every bit Chinese-cultured. I'm no aboriginal Nan Yue or do I care about any of that hocus pocus thousands of years ago, I care about China now. So do all my friends and probably all cantonese people, who are Chinese people living in a province named Canton. Your proposition is bogus. I totally agree with ppk that you need to consider the interest of the cantonese people themselves (once again they're just Chinese people living in Canton, just like Chinese people living in Beijing), not your own. Hell, I don't think any of them would even listen to you.
creating dual nationalities is impractical. And the example I gave was much more than a"dual" nationality. if my mom is an elf from middle earth and my dad Chinese, and middle earth was destroyed 5000 years ago, what good would my dual nationality do, huh?
-
HKB
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
correction of my previous message first paragraph line six: the people from those places could have all Chinese ancestry.
To Memhaw Daigheil,
please don't attack other people's race, ethnicity, and religious beliefs in this forum, would you please? That was REALLY offensive.
To Memhaw Daigheil,
please don't attack other people's race, ethnicity, and religious beliefs in this forum, would you please? That was REALLY offensive.
-
HKB
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
To Hokkian (memhaw daigheil)person:
Darn, you sent a message to every thread? Look, if you really dislike this guy Campbell you should probably attack him in a gentlemenly and reasonable way so that you can efficiently elicit his whatever flaws to the public, hence, convincing it. What you wrote was not only not commendable but ultimately creates a counter effect, let alone the fact that I had no idea what you were talking about and that you've probably offended many people (me one of them).
Darn, you sent a message to every thread? Look, if you really dislike this guy Campbell you should probably attack him in a gentlemenly and reasonable way so that you can efficiently elicit his whatever flaws to the public, hence, convincing it. What you wrote was not only not commendable but ultimately creates a counter effect, let alone the fact that I had no idea what you were talking about and that you've probably offended many people (me one of them).
-
Sum Won
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
First of all, my use of "many", is no worse than the statistics you've given.
For one thing, I don't usually trust statistics that much, especially after taking Statistics class, because there are many ways you can twist the data, if not affect how people think, not just from the data, but also how the interviewer asks the questions.
"A few classmates"? I'll assume they're Native-American, and that you're not providing a vagueness to their ethnicity as some ploy to prove your point in any way... How many more do you know? Just because there are a few, they don't necessarily represent the whole population. If the Native Americans are doing well as a whole, why are they the only ethnicity with the highest alcoholic percentage? If they're doing so great, why do they have to try to grow hemp?*
As usual, I must clarify, when I mentioned that trial involving the TRIBE of Native-Americans, who only had 1/16th Native-American blood: IT WAS ONLY ONE TRIBE! Of course, many other tribes got slaughtered! In fact, the ones that didn't get slaughtered, were put in concentration camps (or "reservations" as people would prefer to call them)!
"manipulating evidence", you say? In a debate, you always bring out one side more than the other, in order to prove your point. Tell me: other than the sinocentric view that all of you have brought in, have you ever taken into account any evidence not based on the sinocentric view?
Of course the Native-Americans argue that they're "Americans", because the term "Native-American", means that they're the ones who are REALLY NATIVE to the land everyone recognizes as "America".
Scarcity of population might not necessarily matter... Since you and all other sinocentrics favor conquer and asssimilation, let me tell you this: There is evidence of minorities taking over a majority, and instituting their rules upon them.**
*Hemp is illegal to grow in the US. Even though the federal government recognizes the Native-American territories as seperate from that of the US, the US still has its FBI invade upon their lands, and arrest people for doing such things. You may research on this, if you like, because there are many other similar incidences happening.
**Look at the Taylor's hypothesis (from the book "The Birth of VietNam") on how the deep southern tribes became known as the Yue, and check out the example he takes his model theory from.
=====================================================
China doesn't have one dynasty, it has many. Hence, the people who've been through these changing times, have had a form of dual citizenship. They still have a connection to the past dynasty. Likewise, the Republic, is just another form of Dynasty (A period of change).
Your statements of not caring for the "hocus pokus", is exactly what I meant by hiding in a shell, and not wanting to face the past...
For one thing, I don't usually trust statistics that much, especially after taking Statistics class, because there are many ways you can twist the data, if not affect how people think, not just from the data, but also how the interviewer asks the questions.
"A few classmates"? I'll assume they're Native-American, and that you're not providing a vagueness to their ethnicity as some ploy to prove your point in any way... How many more do you know? Just because there are a few, they don't necessarily represent the whole population. If the Native Americans are doing well as a whole, why are they the only ethnicity with the highest alcoholic percentage? If they're doing so great, why do they have to try to grow hemp?*
As usual, I must clarify, when I mentioned that trial involving the TRIBE of Native-Americans, who only had 1/16th Native-American blood: IT WAS ONLY ONE TRIBE! Of course, many other tribes got slaughtered! In fact, the ones that didn't get slaughtered, were put in concentration camps (or "reservations" as people would prefer to call them)!
"manipulating evidence", you say? In a debate, you always bring out one side more than the other, in order to prove your point. Tell me: other than the sinocentric view that all of you have brought in, have you ever taken into account any evidence not based on the sinocentric view?
Of course the Native-Americans argue that they're "Americans", because the term "Native-American", means that they're the ones who are REALLY NATIVE to the land everyone recognizes as "America".
Scarcity of population might not necessarily matter... Since you and all other sinocentrics favor conquer and asssimilation, let me tell you this: There is evidence of minorities taking over a majority, and instituting their rules upon them.**
*Hemp is illegal to grow in the US. Even though the federal government recognizes the Native-American territories as seperate from that of the US, the US still has its FBI invade upon their lands, and arrest people for doing such things. You may research on this, if you like, because there are many other similar incidences happening.
**Look at the Taylor's hypothesis (from the book "The Birth of VietNam") on how the deep southern tribes became known as the Yue, and check out the example he takes his model theory from.
=====================================================
China doesn't have one dynasty, it has many. Hence, the people who've been through these changing times, have had a form of dual citizenship. They still have a connection to the past dynasty. Likewise, the Republic, is just another form of Dynasty (A period of change).
Your statements of not caring for the "hocus pokus", is exactly what I meant by hiding in a shell, and not wanting to face the past...
-
HKB
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
I'm not "hiding" in a shell, like many of us have said, this "past" of yours is way too far back that it's irrelevant to care about it. And who knows what my great x 10 to the 20th grand father was? Han? Yue? or whatever else? That fact remains that those aboriginal canton people, whether or not there are still any of their alleles and genotypes left drifting around, have subsumed to the Chinese culture generation after generation, for many generations, for thousands of years. They ARE the Chinese, are PART of it, have melded with them (the CHinese people "Han/Hua" as a whole arose from the mixing of different races anyways) all that was then, this is now.
Your American proposition is atill ultimately impractical and unreasonable. America's position is too important now to be replaced with a fading race (it has always been important), and China's position now is also too important to care about an already faded race. Just like natural selection, extinct species don't need to come back like they do in Jurassic Park.
of course I'm sino-centric, I'm Chinese. And so are you, I assume. Don't give me that cantonese hard wash, your ancestors could possibly be of complete Han descent anyways, cos as you guys have said, the Chinese conquered the area and established their homes there and people from other provinces have moved there continuously for thousands of years. And white people are white-centric, blacks, black-centric, jews, jew-centric, and we're all earthling-centric, hopefully, if aliens come and attack earth.
Your American proposition is atill ultimately impractical and unreasonable. America's position is too important now to be replaced with a fading race (it has always been important), and China's position now is also too important to care about an already faded race. Just like natural selection, extinct species don't need to come back like they do in Jurassic Park.
of course I'm sino-centric, I'm Chinese. And so are you, I assume. Don't give me that cantonese hard wash, your ancestors could possibly be of complete Han descent anyways, cos as you guys have said, the Chinese conquered the area and established their homes there and people from other provinces have moved there continuously for thousands of years. And white people are white-centric, blacks, black-centric, jews, jew-centric, and we're all earthling-centric, hopefully, if aliens come and attack earth.
-
HKB
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
The native americans are real americans, yes, but they are also americans in the sense that they are part of the modern america now. I mean, what if some of these people have forefathers who fought and died for the United States in previous wars, huh? if you REALLY want to seek the roots of things, the natives of america were from asia, so they're asians. lets have them returned to asia and create a country for them. better yet, all humans evolved out of Africa, so why don't we all go back there and establish an all human country or we can all get African citizenship.
-
ppk
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
c'mon sum, u never changed.
u dont trust stats? how are u going to convince others? tell them its all about ur personal feelings? and u are still circling around the 'good and bad moral issues'. but the things u are about to promote is not merely a moral issue. just to fulfill ur self righteous feelings u are asking everyone else to bent over? thats a bit too much.
u dont trust stats? how are u going to convince others? tell them its all about ur personal feelings? and u are still circling around the 'good and bad moral issues'. but the things u are about to promote is not merely a moral issue. just to fulfill ur self righteous feelings u are asking everyone else to bent over? thats a bit too much.
-
Sum Won
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
ppk:
Likewise, you've never changed, always gearing yourself towards double standards, to fit the position of the Chinese, and support them even if they murdered a culture. Of course I don't trust statistics, for reasons stated in my last post.
HKB:
People in the US join the military for different reasons, not necessarily for some sense of patriotism. The Japanese Ni-Sei in WWII, had two different kinds of American soldiers: (1) Ones that wanted to prove they were as American as the other Americans. (2) Ones that just had to get [themselves and/or their relatives and loved ones] out of the concentration camp by any means. Whichever one anyone chooses, is up to the individual...
You can also replace "Concentration Camp" with "reservation", for the Native-Americans, because their conditions were just about the same (if not worse). Since WWII, many of the people who join the US Armed Forces, join for different reasons: retirement pensions, Montgomery GI Bill (paying off for college), job stability, debt help, etc... Everyone joins the military willingly in America (unless they were drafted, as in the VietNam War), however, of these people who willingly sign away their lives, it's not necessarily for patriotism.
The African citizenship idea, I believe would be pretty similar to the "World-Nation" I've also suggested in earlier posts, please scroll up for reference...
"...when aliens attack earth..." you hope for us to be "earthling-centric"? Once again, you set up a double-standard, in not even advocating the expansionist views of the Aliens. If they have enough technology to travel all this way to Earth, they most likely would possess enough power to wipe us all away, so I guess this means that we should all kneel on our knees, and welcome our new lords, right?
Not to misconstrue however --as many of you do-- I'm not saying we shouldn't go down without a fight, just not out of "earthling centrism": It's out of the hatred for "expansionism and assimilation" of any sort.
Likewise, you've never changed, always gearing yourself towards double standards, to fit the position of the Chinese, and support them even if they murdered a culture. Of course I don't trust statistics, for reasons stated in my last post.
HKB:
People in the US join the military for different reasons, not necessarily for some sense of patriotism. The Japanese Ni-Sei in WWII, had two different kinds of American soldiers: (1) Ones that wanted to prove they were as American as the other Americans. (2) Ones that just had to get [themselves and/or their relatives and loved ones] out of the concentration camp by any means. Whichever one anyone chooses, is up to the individual...
You can also replace "Concentration Camp" with "reservation", for the Native-Americans, because their conditions were just about the same (if not worse). Since WWII, many of the people who join the US Armed Forces, join for different reasons: retirement pensions, Montgomery GI Bill (paying off for college), job stability, debt help, etc... Everyone joins the military willingly in America (unless they were drafted, as in the VietNam War), however, of these people who willingly sign away their lives, it's not necessarily for patriotism.
The African citizenship idea, I believe would be pretty similar to the "World-Nation" I've also suggested in earlier posts, please scroll up for reference...
"...when aliens attack earth..." you hope for us to be "earthling-centric"? Once again, you set up a double-standard, in not even advocating the expansionist views of the Aliens. If they have enough technology to travel all this way to Earth, they most likely would possess enough power to wipe us all away, so I guess this means that we should all kneel on our knees, and welcome our new lords, right?
Not to misconstrue however --as many of you do-- I'm not saying we shouldn't go down without a fight, just not out of "earthling centrism": It's out of the hatred for "expansionism and assimilation" of any sort.
-
ppk
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
murder of a culture? wadever. dun tell me the bach viets had not assimilated or destroyed other cultures around them. if it applies to all ancient cultures and races, dun simply bring out the chinese or americans as target boards and whin over it.