Forum Policy | Howto | Asiawind Homepage | China the Beautiful | CTB forum | Forumites' comments | Feedback
Forums : | World2 | ZhengHe | ChineseCulture | Hakka | Overseas | SciTech | Life! | HealthMed | Foods | OurWorld[ReadyOnly]

Google
 
Web asiawind.com

zOur World Forum at Asiawind [READ ONLY]
 Forum List  |  New Topic  |  Go to Top  |  Go to Topic  |  Threaded View  |  Search  |  Log In   Newer Topic  |  Older Topic 
 The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-28-05 09:33

The Jurchens (Chinese: 女真, pinyin: nǚzhēn) were a Tungus people who inhabited parts of Manchuria and northern Korea until the seventeenth century, when they became the Manchus. They established the Jin Dynasty (aisin gurun in Jurchen/Manchu) between 1115 and 1122; it lasted until 1234.

Jin Dynasty
The name Jurchen dates back to at least the beginning of the tenth century. It comes from the Jurchen word jusen, the original meaning of which is unclear. The Jurchen tribes of northern Manchuria were originally vassals of the Khitans (see also Liao Dynasty). They rose to power after an outstanding leader unified them in 1115, declared himself emperor, and quickly seized the Supreme Capital of Liao. The Jurchens overran most of North China and captured the Song capital of Kaifeng in 1126. Their armies pushed all the way south to the Yangtze but the boundary with the Southern Song was eventually stabilised roughly along the Huai River.

The Jurchen named their dynasty the Jin ("Golden") after a river in their homeland — For more detailed treatment of dynastic history and administration, see Jin Dynasty. At first, the Jurchen tribesmen were kept in readiness for warfare but decades of settled lifestyle eroded their pastoral identity. Eventually intermarriage with Chinese was permitted and peace with the Southern Song confirmed. The Jin rulers themselves came to follow Confucian norms. After 1189, the Jin became involved on two fronts in exhausting wars with the Mongols and the Southern song. By 1215, under Mongol pressure, they were forced to move their capital south from Beijing to Kaifeng, where the Mongols extinguished the Jin dynasty in 1234.

Culture, language and society
The Jurchens generally lived by traditions that reflected the pastoral culture of early steppe peoples. Like the Khitans and Mongols, they took pride in feats of strength, horsemanship, archery and hunting. They engaged in shamanic cults and believed in a supreme sky god (abka-i enduri, abka-i han).

The early Jurchen script was based on the Khitan script, which in turn was inspired by Chinese characters. However, because Chinese is an isolating language and the Jurchen and Khitan languages are agglutinative, the script proved to be cumbersome. The written Jurchen language died out soon after the fall of the Jin Dynasty though its spoken form survived. Until the end of the sixteenth century, when Manchu became the new literary language, the Jurchens used a combination of Mongolian and Chinese.

The cultural conceptualisation of Jurchen society owes a great deal to the Mongols. Both Mongols and Jurchens used the title han for the leaders of a political entity, whether "emperor" or "chief". A particularly powerful chief was called beile ("prince, nobleman"), corresponding with the Mongolian beki and Turkish beg or bey. Also like the Mongols and the Turks, the Jurchens did not observe a law of primogeniture. According to tradition, any capable son or nephew could be chosen to become leader.

During Ming times the Jurchen people lived in social units that were sub-clans (mukun or hala mukun) of ancient clans (hala). Members of Jurchen clans shared a consciousness of a common ancestor and were led by a head man (mukunda). Not all clan members were blood related and division and integration of different clans was common. Jurchen households (boo) lived as families (booigon), consisting of five to seven blood-related family members and a number of slaves. Households formed squads (tatan) to engage in tasks related to hunting and food gathering; and formed companies (niru) for larger activities, such as war.

Jurchens during the Ming
Chinese chroniclers of the Ming Dynasty distinguished three groups of Jurchens: the Wild Jurchens of northernmost Manchuria, the Haixi Jurchens of modern Heilongjiang and the Jianzhou Jurchens of modern Jilin province. They led a pastoral-agrarian lifestyle, hunting, fishing and engaging in limited agriculture. In 1388, the Hongwu Emperor dispatched a mission to establish contact with the tribes of Odoli, Huligai and T'owen, beginning the sinicisation of the Jurchen people.

The Yongle Emperor found allies among the various Jurchen tribes against the Mongols. He bestowed titles and surnames to various Jurchen chiefs and expected them to send periodic tribute. Chinese commanderies were established over tribal military units under their own hereditary tribal leaders. In the Yongle period alone 178 commanderies were set up in Manchuria, an index of the Chinese divide-and-rule tactics. Later on, horse markets were also established in the northern border towns of Liaodong for trade. The increasing sinification of the Jurchens ultimately gave them the organisation structures to extend their power beyond the steppe. Later, a Korean army led by Yi-Il,and Yi Sun-sin would expell them from Korea.

Over a period of thirty years from 1586, Nurhaci, a chieftain of the Jianzhou Jurchens, united the three Jurchen tribes, and renamed the united tribe Manchu. He created a formidable synthesis of nomadic institutions, providing the basis of the Manchu state and later the conquest of China by the Qing dynasty.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-28-05 23:11

tom,

I use that part of Jurchen history to defend my position on Wu Sanqui.
Most of Southern Chinese and Ming supporters saw him as a traitor,if we put ourselves in the shoes of WSQ, at Shanghaiguan Wu had to make a quick decision,a strategic alliance had to be decided,I am not sure Li-Zicheng could make a good ally.
Both Li Zicheng and WSQ are opportunists,both of them wanted to be emperor,in the end it was Li who caused the Ming emperor to hang himself.
The word Chinese is a modern term,the connotation of China and Middle Kingdom is different.
China is the land of Ch'n --Wade and Gile or
Sina --the land of silk.
Whereas Middle Kingdom is the land of the people within that kingdom is what the Han people calls their country,the Middle Kingdom had had not a fixed demarcation of territories as compared to modern time China.
Therefore when WSQ opened Shanghaiguan,he opened the gate to an army consisted of banners of Mongols,Jurchens and Hans.
I am not trying to challenge the Chinese historians,but what you present here help to have a discussion on that subject.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: wankee1 
Date:   11-28-05 23:28

WSG as a traitor is already part of Chinese language and culture and our Makee wants to change that......

WSG as a traitor is not a scientifc experiment where one can proof or disprove ....it has already become a dictionary meaning...but Makee wants to revise that as part of a cultural reeducation to fit his masters???

Reply To This Message
 
 The relatives of the Last Emperor changed their surname
Author: CHUNG Yoon Ngan 
Date:   11-29-05 00:16

077. The relatives of the Last Emperor changed their surname

During the early period of the Song Dynasty (宋朝 960AD to 1279AD) there
lived a tribe called Ruzhen (女真族 Nuzhen clan) in the regions around the
river basins of the rivers of Song Hua Jiang (松花江) and Ya Lu Jiang (鴨
綠江) in the present day provinces of Heilongjiang (黑龍江省), Jilin (吉
林省) and Liaoning (遼寧省).

Gradually the Ru Zhen tribe grew stronger and stronger. It became very powerful.
In 1125AD Ru Zhen tribe subjugated the Kingdom of Liao (遼王國 in the present
day region north of the Great Wall). In 1126AD the Ru Zhen tribe captured
the newly crowned Song Emperor Qin Zong Zhao Huan (欽宗皇帝趙桓) and his
father Zhao Ji (趙吉), the ex-Emperor. That was the end of the Song Dynasty.


However, in 1127AD the relatives of the Song Emperor established another
Song Dynasty called Southern Song Dynasty (南宋朝) in the south and installed
Zhao Gou (趙構) the nineth son of Zhao Ji as the new Emperor Gao Zong (高
宗). The capital of the new Dynasty was in Lin An Fu (臨安府 present Hang
Zhou city 杭州市 in Zhejiang province 浙江省).

The Ru Zhen tribe eastablished the Jin Dynasty (金朝 1115AD to 1234AD) with
its capital in present day Beijing city (北京市). Jin Dynasty was conquered
by the Mongolians in 1234AD.

More than four hundred years later in 1644AD the offspring of the Ru Zhen
tribe established the Qing Dynasty (清朝 1644AD to 1911AD). The surname
of all the rulers of the Qing Dynasty was Ai-Xin-Jiao-Luo (愛-新-覺-羅).
In 1911AD Dr Sun Yat-Sen (孫中山) overthrew the Qing Dynasty and the last
Emperor of the Qing Dynasty was Ai-Xin-Jiao-Luo Pu Yi (愛-新-覺-羅溥儀).

In order to hide themselves from publicity many relatives of Pu Yi (溥儀
), changed their surname from Ai-Xin-Jiao-Luo (愛新覺羅) to Jin (金 or gold),
the name of the Jin Dynasty (金朝) that their ancestors founded several
hundred years ago.

The last Emperor's fourth younger brother was called Ai-Xin-Jiao-Luo Pu
Ren (愛新覺羅溥任) who also changed his surname to Jin (gold) and he gave
himself a new name, You Zhi (友之). His full name is Jin You Zhi (金友之
) and he is the only surviving member of the last Emperor's generation.
Jin You Zhi surnamed his children JIN.

The eldest son of Jin You Zhi, is called Jin Yu Zhang (金毓嶂). He was born
in 1943 in Beijing. After he was graduated as a geologist from Beijing University
in 1968 Jin Yu Zhang was sent to work in the Geological Department in the
province of Qing Hai (青海省). Jin Yu Zhang was then transfered back to
Beijing in 1985 and worked in the district of Sui Wen (祟文區). In 1999
Jin Yu Zhang was appointed the deputy Distrct Officer of the district of
Sui Wen.

Jin You Zhi said that they are no more members of the royal family but just
the ordinary citizens.

I wonder how many members of the Qing Royal family are still keeping their
surname Ai-Xin-Jiao-Luo.

CHUNG Yoon-Ngan (鄭永元)
All rights reserved
[From my upcoming book "101 Chinese Stories]

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: laobawang 
Date:   11-29-05 03:54

Could the Jin speakers of Northern Shanxi and other areas close to inner Mongolia have been infused with Jurchen racial strains and cultural elements in the past due to the proximity of their native homeland to the ethnic Tunguisic regions?

From the perspective of physiognomy, there certainly is a Tunguisic and Ural-Altaic strain in Jin people but language-wise, they are closer to speakers of Southern dialects as can be seen from many linguistic similarities such as the final glottal stop. Many Hakka can in fact pass as Jin, again attesting to the Northern but non Han origin of the Kejiaren, and there are linguistic similarities between Jin and Hakka as well.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: laobawang 
Date:   11-29-05 04:05

The Middle Kingdom of Old China extended further and wider than what you see today on the map of the People's Republic of China. The peripherial Asian peoples who today have their own independent states thanks to Western colonialism and continued patronage from the West deny this historical truth of course for the sake of their national interests.

Take the example of the historical textbook dispute between China and some Koreans about the status of Koguryo which had always been a Chinese kingdom and part of China which has always been a mutiethnic state. Some Koreans deny Koguryo was Chinese while insisting that it had never been part of China whereas look-up historical sources to validate the fact that the Korean peninsula was part of China for many centuries.

True, the Manchus are Chinese too. However those usurpers who Wu Sangui lent a hand to open the gates of Shanhaiguan for his selfish interests to gain power did not consider themselves to be part of the multiethnic Chinese national entity. That is why WSG is considered a traitor, he sold himself to the interests of those who did not act in the interests of all the Chinese ethnic groups.

The Han are today the vast majority of Chinese, but until 1911, the Han ethnic group was not such an absolute majority the ancestors of 1/3 of the people who are today classified as hanzu were not considered Han at all. They were referred to as Manzi, Yue, Nanmanren etc. But it does not matter because since the days of EmperorsYan and Huang, even the Yellow River Valley where the Han Chinese civilisation was born, was already a melting pot of different races and cultures. Are the Han descendants of the people of Xia and Shang who fused together to become one thousands of years ago?

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The relatives of the Last Emperor changed their surname
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-29-05 04:10

The Jurchen language, related to Manchurian, is officially declared extinct by the United Nations.
China.
http://www.language-museum.com/j/jurchen.htm
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=juc This homepage has all the ethnologues of the world.

Many Manchurians have adopted Han surnames and claim themselves as Han. Most Manchurians are now indistinguishable from Han.

爱新觉罗氏(肇、金、罗、德、洪、依、海);   伊尔根觉罗氏(赵);

佟佳氏(佟);    瓜尔佳氏(关、白、汪、鲍);  马佳氏(马);   

索绰罗氏(索);   齐佳氏(齐);      纽枯禄氏(郎、纽);

舒穆禄氏(徐、舒、万、宋);  富察氏(富);   他塔喇氏(唐);

纳喇氏(那、南、姚);  董鄂氏(董、何);  兀扎喇氏(吴、乌); 

李佳氏(李):  赫舍里氏(张、康、卢);    完颜氏(王,汪);

喜塔喇氏(祖、图);  果尔勒斯氏(高);   宁古塔氏(刘、宁);

戴佳氏(戴);尼玛察氏(杨); 赫叶勒氏(赫);   田佳氏(田);

良佳氏(梁);郑佳氏(郑);啯噜噜氏(高)。

除此之外还有: 郝、丛、葆、范、苏、陶、龙、郭、白、叶、谢、陈、辛、门、曾、益、常、千、梁、阎、倪、韩、孟、恒、秀、黄、鄂、朱、胡、林、耿、申、熊、乔、尹、周、尚、夏、哈、曹、曲、皇、于、项、代、蔡、卜、梅、钱、冮、魏、敖、安、聂、贾、葛、仲、袁、邰、信、巴、邢、杜、艾、孙、龚、单、石、罗、费、奚、毛、冯、俞
、包、顾、穆、吕、程、祥、荣、广、章、闻、任、塔、丁、邓、房、产、彦、兆、谭、祁、贺、礼、英、公、崔、年、翁、业、商、车、韻、窦、庄、果、边、史、廉、邱、查、佘、宛、姜、冠、沈、尤、解、兰、苍、钟、满、井、苏、刑、孔、汤、柳、向、詹、霍、许、蒋、武、温、鞠、庞、阿、岳、官、毋、双、党、潘、兴、里、巴、衡、明、秦、西、樊、邬、侯、供、苑、敦、邹、鲍、柏、戚、喜、老等。

The leading calligraphy artist Qi Gong who just died recently is a Manchurian. He was a descendant of Emperor YongZheng but he never used his originally imperial surname Aixinjuero.

China is trying to preserve as much as possible of the Manchurian heritage. Please see the following site:

http://www.qiren.cn/ An official site on "Qiren" (Manchurians)
This is a rich resource for looking up information about the Manchurian culture.
--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The relatives of the Last Emperor changed their surname
Author: laobawang 
Date:   11-29-05 04:13

Well, they have lived among the Han majority for many generations, acculturated and intermarried with the latter so much that their ancestor's blood has been diluted and this is why they are now known as Han. Likewise for the Hui many of whose forefathers came from Arabia or Persia but they are today Chinese.

Reply To This Message
 
 I am the Hakka Dialect
Author: CHUNG Yoon Ngan 
Date:   11-29-05 07:07


I am the Hakka Dialect

I am the Hakka Dialect and people called me Hakka Dialect. I am the mother tongue of the Hakka People (客家人 Kejiaren). People say I was the official language of the Zhou Dynasty (周朝 c1134BC to 256BC). Some people say I was formed during the Periods of Spring and Autumn, and Warring States (春秋與戰國 722BC to 221BC). There are also people say that I am the deceased language of the Dynasties of Tang (唐朝 618AD to 907AD) and Song (宋朝 960AD to 1279AD).

Actually I don't know about myself. I only know that after there were Hakka People then I became myself, the Hakka Dialect.

I had an inseparable relationship with the Hakka People. Long, long time
ago, when Hakka People were homeless wandering about in desperate plight and misery, they not only did not abandon me but considered me like a pearl in the palm, taking me to the north and south of Yangtze River (長江). Thus my power of influence gradually expanded, especially during the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom (天平天國1851AD to 1864AD) when the Hakka People were the main principal part of the Kingdom. I became extremely popular within the domain of this Kingdom.

After the collapse of the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, gradually I began to
decline as the Hakka People were fleeing from persecutions by the Qing Government (清朝). Many of them even refrained from calling themselves Hakka People and changed their names. Thousands of them migrated to Nanyang ( 南洋 Southeast Asia) or inveigled by the boat-load to become indentured labourers on railways and canals in Southeast Asia, the United States and as far as Panama, Brazil and Africa. Gradually, the Hakka People began to forget about me. In market places or in businesses people ignored me. I eventually became a language only spoken in the homes of the Hakka People. Currently, other than pockets of places in China, Taiwan and Malaysia are still using me as a means of communication I am being neglected by people and even the Hakka People. One day, I might suffer the same fate as the Manchurian Dialect which was officially declared extinct recently. If the people, especially the Hakka People, are not doing anything to rejuvenate me and continuing to neglect me I would disappear from the globe. Who will be the losers? The Hakka People, because they will be the people without a mother tongue. Another ancient language is lost. It will be a disgrace to the Hakka People who should be ashamed to call themselves the Hakka People.

CHUNG Yoon-Ngan (鄭永元)

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-29-05 09:32

Originally I tried to show that piece of information was important to explain how the "Han Dynasty" and legacy had left an influencial and deep imprint in the mind of the so called barbarians more than any other Chinese dynastic period.
[Both Mongols and Jurchens used the title 'han' for the leaders of a political entity, whether "emperor" or "chief". ] --that further proves my point that the Hun(my Hungarian friend says the right pronounciation is "Hoon") named their people after the Han Dynasty.

The text further attests that the so called barbarians were actually very literate people who also had their own language and writing systems, they were proud people who greatly valued friendship and loyalty, they have fought against and allied with the Han(dynastic and her people) many times for many centuries.

History is not as simple as one might think without examining all angles. many chinese view WSG as traitor/opportunist because he betrayed to both Ming and Qing. That would be too simple and maybe best to left as the way it is.
But the truth is that he had saved the life of millions and millions of Chinese people by avoiding major confrontation with the mighty Jurchen and Mongols ppl, wsg was no more a traitor then the communism regime or the chinese christians Taiping regime who murdered 100 million of own chinese at a drop of hand.
Confrontation and war, WSG realized, lead to nowhere but suffering to people in general.
The Jin changed their dynastic name to Qing(meaning washed clean) because they have killed so many chinese they have to cleanse their bloody hands clean, they themself felt ashame of the war with chinese.
WSG remained respected and feared by the Qing regime until his natural death, his death marks the end of Ming because that's when all hells broke lose, chinese princes started to ally with the Qing, the Liu fleet in Taiwan was defeated and Zheng Chengong's family was wiped out by those Chinese allied with Qing.
So history shows the truth, not all blame should be on wsg, he was a complex and bright strategian who knew when to attack, when to retreat, and when to call it a draw. He treated his own people(even enemy) with faireness and dignity, well except for Li zicheng and his rebels. One might expect that 100s of millions of chinese will be killed when the Qing and Mongols would fight with Chinese if indeed Li had succeded the throne. So one might say that WSG was trying to achieve some peace on the land, that peaceful period were very valuable for the Chinese citizens to recover. Many indeed had allied with Qing when the Qing Emperor started to employ Chinese literates in their government to appease the South. A relatively peaceful period for the Chinese people during the Qing reign until Western foreign powers and their religion invaded and destroyed China.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: suen.kuen 
Date:   11-29-05 10:19

Are you and John Mak having private conversations on WSQ to come up with this drivel?
You know the Bush team need people like you two shortly to write things of the same nature that killing innocent Iraqis substantiated with lies....da da-dah da-dah on looking back is not all that bad....Saddam the tyrant is in the docks....people liberated.....democracy is put in place.....wmd finally proven non exisiting.....Babylonians artefacts now safely smuggled out and put in private collectors' hands.....Iraqi oil is assured flowing at resonable price....the world is now a lot safer!!
And since you two don't read Chinese the 'han' translated by Chinese on the Jurchens means 'sweat' and the rest of the world name it as Khan.
The 'han' for Chinese is another word altogether derived from the Han Dynasty that initially united China hence all Chinese are also known as Han Ren.
Give the petty WSQ theories from you two a rest.
Its getting ridiculous and offensive to read.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: I am the Hakka Dialect
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-29-05 11:11

Dear Yoon Ngan,

Thanks for the Personification of Hakka language.
And the care shows to the language of a branch of Chinese cultures.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-29-05 11:30

Well suenkuen, I 've learned that characters and writings are less reliable than the phonetic pronounciation itself, whether Yue or yue, have 2 characters but one sounding, who is to say that the Ba-Yue(one hundred yue,) yue of vietnam, and Wu-Yue kingdom were not all originally the same people? people were not statics they moved around. As 'yue' is pertainted to the 'South' or southerner region or people, so 'Han' pertains to anything related to Han(Dynasty and her people)'s northern influence. In chinese writing the han(sweat) is different than the popular han just to distinguish different tittles, but I have just showed in previous post that the Han(dynastic and people) had so great influence on the barbarians that they would call any thing great as "Han," including their leaders' tittle , emperor appellation and even a nation like the Hun were named after "Han," and of course the han-quor of korea, though spelled differently, is related phonetically and more so psychologically to the chinese Han Dynasty. the han river or city is ofcourse spelled out literally as the chinese Han.
Your argument is like telling me the barbarians in the North didn't know who and what was " Han ," or like telling me the Southerners who don't know who are the Yue? ofcourse the northern barbarians knew who were the Han and knew exactly what they should call themself after. the "Han"(and anything that sounds like han) they keep refering to throughtout history is no other than the greatness of Han dynasty(more dynastic than people.) Why they don't refer themself as 'Tang' or 'yue' is a mystery.

So maybe are you a yue who doesn't know who or what is a han?

The truth is that Norther 'barbarians' lived side by side with the han, dealt with Han court, they knew, understood, and respected the Han as well as their own members and finger tips. WSG understood well the enemy, he knew how much the barbarians had sinicised that he could trust the Jurchen more than the rebels, general wsg decided to have a draw, and that was the case, a draw between barbarians and chinese that lasted for a very long time until the Foreign nations came to destroy China.
that piece of history ought to tell you how well and how long the Northern barbarians had mingled with the Han culture/people and how much they wanted to associate everything with the Han(Dynasty and people) throughtout history. That all they know is Han, they didn't care less about Tang, Song or Ming or Yue.
The fact is that Northern barbarians(xiongnu etc..) had more desire to revive the Han Dynasty more than the Chinese themself. that is the irony... that chinese don't understand the barbarians more than themself. Northern barbarians understood more thing Chinese( Han) than you can imagine. Mr. Suen Kuen.
Don't you think civil war would eventually break out between Wu-Li if they had become allies? 100s million chinese would die. wsg forsaw that.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re:Casting pearls to swines
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-29-05 11:35

suenee,

>>Are you and John Mak having private conversations on WSQ to come up with this drivel?<<

No,we did not have any private conversation. I am an individual.
It is stupid on your part to think this way,especially when there are only a few forumites that are really active,you are not one of them with your two liners.

It is difficult for swines to appreciate pearls.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re:Casting pearls to swines
Author: suen.kuen 
Date:   11-29-05 11:43

Swine in Chinese is jeu..so is pearl phonetically =jeu. So according to you two swine has something to do with pearl and therfore swine=pearl.
You two are just amazing......

Reply To This Message
 
 Re:Casting pearls to swines
Author: suen.kuen 
Date:   11-29-05 11:50

Its getting stressful to read your posts,Makee.
And you should know stress will induce cancer.
Why are you killing us slowly?

Reply To This Message
 
 swine
Author: platypus 
Date:   11-29-05 12:04

"Why are you killing us slowly?"

Suen, just skip the unduly stressful activities, especially when they add absolutely nothing to your life, or your knowledge for that matter.

Put another way, it is the business of old farts to @!#$, but you don't have to hang around to bear the consequences. :-) Just leave the swines to frolic in the mud.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: swine
Author: platypus 
Date:   11-29-05 12:06

The censorware has forced me to say this again: it is the business for old farts to farrt. :-)

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: swine
Author: suen.kuen 
Date:   11-29-05 12:10

Advice well taken. .......

chorus .....
with a oink oink here and a oink oink there
here's a mak there's a lo.......everyone of 'em is a mak lo!!

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: swine
Author: suen.kuen 
Date:   11-29-05 12:17

As I said even gasing by them two can be stressful!

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: swine
Author: platypus 
Date:   11-29-05 12:26

OK, I ought to clarify myself. I'm not sure if I would put Tom and John in the same camp. I haven't read Tom thoroughly enough, but at least he tries to put together a semi-coherent argument. And if he would try to write with greater balance and more supportive references more of the time, he has a shot of making an argument with his WSG thesis that could hold some ground. Not so with John, though. The same tired, shallow, evasive stuff that gets you nowhere.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: swine
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-29-05 14:05

platy,

It is one thing to @!#$,it is another thing to smell it,that includes you,platy.
That tells me,my @!#$ interests you and revives you.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-29-05 14:55

tom,

>>History is not as simple as one might think without examining all angles. many chinese view WSG as traitor/opportunist because he betrayed to both Ming and Qing. That would be too simple and maybe best to left as the way it is.<<

You statement above covers a lot of ground, "without examining all angles" is important to look at WSQ.
For better or worse,his act was even quoted recently by Lee Teng-Hui against the two Taiwanese leaders who went to visit China.
Your leading post on Jurchens and the susequent event at Shanghaiguan,give us a new perspective on the personality of WSQ.
It is part and parcel of the evolution of the Chinese people,I believe there is a "DIVIDE" between the Northern and the Southern Chinese,their thinkings must be different,I spent two weeks in Beijing last years,I saw the display of Manchu officials in one of the department store,to me it appears as Chinese pride,why was the display if one was ashamed.
It is unfortunate the Southern Chinese cannot see the Manchu conquest in a similar light as the Norman conquest of Britain,Both brought vigour to the lands they conquered,the Southern Chinese seem to interest only on the trailing end of the dynasty,instead of the entire spread of the dynasty,
There is much praise of Tang dynasty,a fellow in this forum called Guo Zhongli wrote quite a numbers of posts about Tang dynasty,it gave me the impression the Tang dynastic family was more inclined to central Asia than South China,as the empress was turkic,Tang looked more towards West than South,I may be wrong,I only peruse Zhongli's post.

If one does not know one's past,one will not know one's future.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: Zhao Yun (---.otl.co.nz)
Date:   11-29-05 15:00

((But the truth is that he had saved the life of millions and millions of Chinese people by avoiding major confrontation with the mighty Jurchen and Mongols ppl, wsg was no more a traitor then the communism regime or the chinese christians Taiping regime who murdered 100 million of own chinese at a drop of hand.))

What kind of logic is that? If all the countries had not fought against the MIGHTY Nazis or the Japanese then millions of people would not have died fighting in WW2. All these countries could have just opened their borders and let the Nazis take over their lands.

Tom, what are you saying? Are we to always yield to the big bully in order to protect the weak?

[%sig%]

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: swine
Author: Zhao Yun (---.otl.co.nz)
Date:   11-29-05 15:10

If only pigs could fly then Makky and Tom will make a great matching pair.... but alas, what do you expect pigs to do other than to wallow in their own sh*t.....dreaming of that day when they will be turned into bacon! LOL

[%sig%]

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-29-05 16:19

By all measures, the Manchu can not be compared with the Nazis or the Japanese or the Normans that John refer to, they were Confusian(ized )and sinicised and were allied with the Hans for many centuries, the common enemy were more likely the Mongols, the Khanates conquered China but refused to be sinicised and integrate with China, thus were alienated by the Chinese people, the Jurchens on the other hand lost their language and writing system to the Han Chinese, they have done their part of sacrifice.
I would also tell John please not to proselitize any "conquest", that's not the Confusian way. Otherwise the invasion of Iraq would be valid. China is a continent, not a peninsula like Europe where William could conquer England with a few thousands men, not China, no fortress or iron suit could defend any part in China. Any wrong manoeuvre would be deadly in the Mainland continent, meaning any full fledge war between Chinese and northern sinicesed minorities could cost 100s million men in both side, the chinese and the manchu all know each other's strength and weakness too well, it was a waiting game until some party makes a faulty move, the chinese made a wrong move first caused by internal rebellion and they paid for it, still both side had managed to massacre each other because they were all Confusians remember? they were one people, or at the least that's what they were trying to accomplish, that is the common goal that any other Europeans or world wars were lacking.
Chinese were trying to make all Nothern and Western barbarians Han Chinese sine the time of Han Dynasty. That's what history shows. To general WSG, relative peace, buying time, and finally unification is better deal than a full out war and anarchy.
Chaos , killings in peace time etc was favored by revolutionary forces, that's why they are called anarchists, such as Marxists and Maoism and Taiping rebels, thinking that chaos will bring changes, and changes will bring new order, but it doesn't have to be that way , as general wsg has shown, there is some middle ground that all parties can achieve over a very long period of time, so that the general population would not be affected.
As you have witnessed, only Foreign powers and their religion had succeeded in destroying China, not the Manchu, who were more like the Chinese allies from the very begining since Han time as the Han had sinecised them. A mutual understanding had been working out for thousand of year on the Chinese continent between different minorities people. To the Chinese they were not foreign devils or foreign conquerors from the other side of the sea or Europe to take over China as colonies, they were China's neighbors. They have been trying to live as a single family for a very long time.
Confucius' whole life were dedicated in spreading the teaching that neighboring states and nation should work as one and mutually integrated as one and not killing each others. his teaching is that simple.
So hold your horse, there are things that foreigners will never understand. as history has shown they were not as humanitarian as the Confucians in general.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-29-05 16:22

correction: [had managed to massacre ] changes to [had not massacre each other]

Reply To This Message
 
 crow
Author: platypus 
Date:   11-29-05 19:30

You see that's why you're the old farrt that nobody could take seriously. You spent a couple hundred posts repeating the same old farrt that WSG wasn't a traitor on the false premise that his action was not traitorous simply beause it brought unintended positive consequences. Even Tom saw through the stupidity of such illogic, and he brought up a new argument (or spin as the case may be) that's at least not glaringly internally inconsistent--that WSG was motivated by a desire to avoid greater bloodshed. So, John, eat crow and farrt some more.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: Zhao Yun (---.otl.co.nz)
Date:   11-29-05 19:41

((It is unfortunate the Southern Chinese cannot see the Manchu conquest in a similar light as the Norman conquest of Britain,Both brought vigour to the lands they conquered,the Southern Chinese seem to interest only on the trailing end of the dynasty,instead of the entire spread of the dynasty))

And in the same breath bemoans China closing her doors to foreigners and the opium war. So please enlighten all of us here as to how great the Qing dynasty is? Remember before you start, bigger is not always better!

[%sig%]

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: Zhao Yun (---.otl.co.nz)
Date:   11-29-05 20:00

You have clearly lost the plot. Firstly, a traitor is a traitor, irrespective of race or tribe. So your discourse about how close the Manchus really were to being considered Chinese is totally irrelevant.

WSG was a MING general and he had therefore pledged his allegiance to the Ming emperor. The emperor had placed alot of trust and belief in him when he was appointed to that position of responsibility. Ming and the Manchus were at war. WSG was fighting under the Ming banner. Therefore, his very act of opening the gate was a treacherous act. This made him a traitor! What unfolded after this act is not relevant in our assessment of whether WSG is a traitor or not. His very act confirms it. End of discussion!

[%sig%]

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: Paul Yih (---.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com)
Date:   11-29-05 20:04

Wow, it is amazing -- and I sure hope the Manchurian or Qin language can find its way to be retained --- it will be of great interest for the chinese cutlural anthropological studies --- How about that ? Hakka with traces of the Jurchens, the Qing or the Manchus :)

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: wankee1 
Date:   11-29-05 20:18

to say WSG is a man of peace is misrepresentation of history....He is just another warlord who gives @!#$ to the commoners. His later wars/rebellions against the Qing caused so much sufferings it led directly to the Taiping which is in fact a bigger tragedy....alll these wars weaken China so much, the West/ Japan just has a walkover in China.....Only the arrival of Mao can undo the damages cause by WSG ...................that is why WSG is the biggest villian in Chinese language and there is no dispute about that except in this Forum...started by John and now Tom.......two devils..

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-29-05 22:58

wankee,

That grey matter in your head does not seem to work properly.
Human progress has been achieved thru wars,Mao came to power thru struggles,Mao did not sit down with Jiang Kai-Shek over a cup of tea.Can you remember :"Power came out of a barrel of a gun",Mao repudiated the Confucianism with their long nails,if the Confucianists had spent more time studying Sun Tze instead the analects of Confucius in Ming time,and did not mothball the great Chinese navy,they would not be humiliated by a dozen of ships from the West later in Qing time,the failure of Qing was their confucianization,Mao studied the weakness of China,and devised the Human Wave and Fish-in-Water strategies to counter both internal and external enemies..
It was the "one hand on the plough,the other hand on the gun"that saved China from her enemies,the Confucianists with their long nails and long beards could hold neither ploughs nor guns.

I better stop here,it is too difficult for to appreciate.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: The use of "han" by the Jurchens.
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-29-05 23:07

I don't think I had ever said wsg was not a traitor/opportunist, he was.
So were the thousands chinese officials who joined the Qing after wu died, Taiwan felt as Chinese themself destroyed Taiwan's naval fleet, when the western foreigners' navals came, China couldn't defend herself at the chinese sea!
Open or not open the gate is certainly the question for wu, it was a very tough call, first he trusted Li but later some action caused him to change his mind. Were Li zhicheng trying to cooperate with Wu ? do anyone know?
Lets say If the Nazis, Japanese or Communists were at the gate I don't think wsg would have opened the gate because he would know that there won't be any future for him and the Chinese people.
China only recently succeeded economically because ccp vowed to follow western economic model and practices-- ie. embracing capitalism.
The text i posted previously also said that the Qing were not interested in conquering the whole China, ie. the South of China were not under the Qing's juridiction , not until the death of Wu did the South made another mistake by revolting against Wu's army, hastening the breakdown of Chinese forces.
Bottom line is so many things had gone wrong mainly committed by the Chinese themself, they fought among themself internally. In many respect, Chinese felt behind the Jin people in self confidence, cooperation and organization, also morale were very low among the people during the later part of Ming.
One can say that WSG was among a few bright leaders who understood what anarchy could bring to a country. The rest is history.
Ironically, CCP is ever vigilant against any potential anarchy in the interior of China. US. certainly did not like 9/11.
Note that Jin were not trying to conquer China until that day that somebody like wsg opened the gate to ask them in for help.
one has to also note that it was not unprecedented that China asked neighboring minorities for help, hint: the Tang period- Barbarians had helped restore Tang back to power .
So you can blame Jin some, blame wsg some, blame the rebels some, blame the Ming some, I mean heck , blame the Chinese themself too for that matter for helping the Qing.
But blame game were most serious with dire conquences came under the Communism and Taiping's rules, 300s million Chinese had to die. That is more than the casualties of the Russian wars, Nazi, Napoleon etc combined. Mostly killing own Chinese people. In general, it only took one or two lunatics to make anarchy to its worst level.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: crow
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-29-05 23:11

platy,

I find it stupid on your part,you seem to be obcessed on my personality,
tom brought up a new perspective on WSQ,he did not need to agree with my presentation ,his assesment did not contradict my position.
I am starting to doubt whether you have the capability to challenge my position,you have spent all your time in denigrating my personality.
platy,platy,you need a lot to learn on interpretive writings.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 dud
Author: platypus 
Date:   11-29-05 23:23

"you have spent all your time in denigrating my personality."

Nobody can denigrate a void. I was denigrating your posts, particularly their evasiveness and dishonesty.

And no need to reach for that Net martyrdom status. ("Help, I'm attacked for my personality!"). The only thing you've been setting off as a cyber suicide bomber/martyr is stink bombs, and the only casualty has been your own credibility.

Reply To This Message
 
 Death rates in China and US.
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 00:11

Tom,

I don't know how you got this number of 300 million died in China in the last 56 years. There was never any reference source to this number to any statistics. But I think it is just a bit underestimated.

Here is a simple calculation with the statistical references:
--------
The population of China in 1949 was about 600 million
The population of China today 2005 is about 1300 million.
http://www.cpirc.org.cn/en/eindex.htm
Just take the average of the two as 950 million.
The natural death rate is 6.94 per thousand of 0.69%
http://www.indexmundi.com/china/death_rate.html CIA World Factbook
So annual death would be 6.55 million.
x 56 years = 367.08 million. (not far from your 300 million)
--------------
US population in 1949 was 149 million
http://www.infoplease.com/year/1949.html US population today is 297 million.
http://www.census.gov/
US death rate is 8.47 per thousand, i.e. 0.847%
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
Again assuming the same death rate for every year,
Taking the average population as (149+297)/2 mil = 223 million.
Annual death = 1.89 million
x 56 years = 105 million.
-------------

The above calculation is based on linear population growth of course. It is not substantially deviated from actual growth.

Let's play with the numbers a bit more.
The deaths per thousand for US and China are 8.47 per thousand and 6.9 per thousand respectively. That is US has 1570 more deaths per million. Comparing a population of 297 million (US today), there are 466,290 more deaths/year in US than in China for the same population size.

This figure of 300 million Chinese died under the Beijing government has been around for some time. I just never figured out how the number was arrived at. The arithmatic is quite simple and intriguing. The trick is - it is not a lie when it says so many people died under the government of so and so. It is only a lie when the word 'killed' is inserted. People can be killed by disease too. So may be 'killed' is still ok. But the next interpretation is "murdered". There is a significant difference between 'died', 'killed' and 'murdered'.

--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Death rates in China and US.
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 00:24

Just another footnote.

If the Beijing government 'murdered' 300 million during its administration, then what happened to those murdered in the statistics? The death rate should be double to 1.4% rather than 0.69%. The other interpretation is no Chinese in the past 56 years died of natural death. They were all murdered. Which is true?

Statistics don't lie, but the numbers can be twisted to make different interpretations and mislead the unaware.

--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Death rates in China and US.
Author: suen.kuen 
Date:   11-30-05 00:28

Prof Lee: how does one attain the cool you achieved?!
(I have saved your post for future reference if you don't mind.)...Thanks.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Death rates in China and US.
Author: wankee1 
Date:   11-30-05 00:35

As far as I am concerned Tom just swallowed shallow journalism lock stock and barrel.

I am reading Jung Chang's first book...Wild Swans, a book of hatred but very popular in the West and treated as bible for anyone who hates communism.

In my book, any Govt that kills 300 million of its own people will be hated and toppled and not so loved and so respected as the Chinese govt is today.

Reply To This Message
 
 Population statistics again
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 01:20

One must be aware that statistics today is aided by computer, thus a lot more accurate than 50 years ago.

There was an abrupt drop of population during the famine years of 1959-1962. But that was followed by a sudden surge of population right after.

There were definitely more people died during the famine years. But does the statistics reflect true death rate and birth rate? I believe that 'population' statistics is not a registration of that actual death and birth rate because of the "hukou" policy at that time. When people moved out of the natural disaster area and lived with their relatives in another village, they were removed from the registration of their original residence, but they could not registered in the new settlement as new registrations were prohibitively difficult. A lot of people went through this. When the famine was over, people simply went back to their original residence, and the population surged (or rather resumed).

If one looks at the birth rate and death rate chart below, it really does not make sense how birth rate could suddenly increase so fast when the total population was dropped dramatically. It takes people to give birth to people. There is a limit of 9 month gestation per kid.
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/ChinaFood/data/pop/pop_10.htm

Population is a major issue in China. To feed, employ and care for 1.3 billion people is a formidable task. I find the few sites I mentioned quite useful to stimulate our thoughts on the history and future of China.
--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-30-05 02:06

tom,

My interpretive analysis follows along your line of thought,where we differ,
I see WSQ as more opportunist rather than a traitor.
To support my position,during the Sino-Japanese war,Jiang Kai-shek concentrated his forces against Mao and let the Japanese to advance their forces in China until his general,I believe a Manchurian took him as a prisonner called Xian incident,that was Jiang strategy.
A few months ago,Lee Teng-Hui called the opposition leaders as traitors when they visited China,my question here ,are the opposition leaders traitors or Lee Teng-Hui and Chen Shui-ban the traitors,the Chinese people seems to confer traitors to those they dont like,if there was anyone who fitted to be called a traitor was Li Zicheng,he turned against emperor Chongzhen and forced him to hang himself with his concubines.
Yuan Chonghuan,general of the empire's northeastern armies was also accused of alliance with Hong Taiji,son of Nurhaci.
As you put it tom,some was called traitors,others were not.
In 1635,peasants in Rongyang(Henan) discussed alliance against the Ming,according Zhao swearing loyalty,they were traitors as well.
If we try to list all who was against the Ming,we have to list a large number of traitors.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: wankee1 
Date:   11-30-05 04:06

I see WSQ as more opportunist rather than a traitor"""""""""""

ALL OPPORTUNISTS are traitors and that is very Confucian. of course to western minds ,opportunists are good as Gods under the capitalists system

there is no need to demonise all opportunists but those w/o morals are all traitors.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: John Mak- our Mauritian Big Bird :)
Author: Paul Yih (---.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com)
Date:   11-30-05 08:18

John, the day when Bush is eating crow with Rove and Libby -- I hope you will be invited for the same "crow feast" :) You know we love your presence in here -- so we can brand you our favorite "Banana" from Mauritius --- what ever happened to that extinct bird -- big bird -- you look a kinda like that bird :) going into extinction :) lol

Reply To This Message
 
 ok a little less than 300
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-30-05 08:36

I haven't read any of her books yet, but swan sure make the list of reading, it's always interesting to read a book , or the mind of the writer.
I don't mean 300 millions deads were caused by the communists alone but commi + Taiping's job would make 300million. Some author includes starvation and I accept that too.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-30-05 09:23

ok now you start to make a little more sense without that "conquest is good" kind of Christian rhetoric stuff.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: hopi 
Date:   11-30-05 09:55

Opportunist and traitor can be different or the same.

Li Kashing is an opportunist, but he is not a traitor.
WSG is an opportunist and a traitor.
All traitors are opportunists, but not all opportunists are traitors.

John, this is the logic (or lack of) in your arguments.

If what WSG did is ok with you and 'positive' by Chinese history, then the Jews should just surrender and walk right in to the gas chambers to save some troubles of the Nazis. A united Europe, who knows, could be a good thing after all. Agree?

Or, China (whether KMT or CCP) should have laid down their arms and let Japan in. Perhaps Japan will assimilate with China and become sinocized? No more visiting of Yasukuni shrine is necessary. Hirohito can stay in Beijing's forbidden city. OK? What Diaoyutai?

That would save a lot of lives, wouldn't it?

Peace on Earth

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: ok a little less than 300
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 10:18

Tom,

You still have not provided the reference source to back up the numbers, whether these people just died, or killed, or murdered, how and by whom.

One source I know (and there are too many derivatives to name) puts all Chinese died during the Sino-Japanese war, the civil war between KMT and CCP, the natural disaster (such as Tangshan earthquake) and everything in between under the account of the current Beijing administration.

It is wrong to defend any mistakes made during the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution, it is also wrong to exaggerate the mistakes with irrelevance. I think you are objective and inquisitive enough to tell the difference. One thing we all need to do is to remove all the labels and look at facts. Unless we are willing to give up the imprint of propaganda, either positive or negative, we will never be able to find truth.
--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: ok a little less than 300
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-30-05 12:45

[the numbers, whether these people just died, or killed, or murdered, how and by whom. ]
More likely a combination of all those things including natural desasters like flood or drough , when a contry the size of continental China was thrown into chaos, natural desasters only exacerbate things, famine were unavoidable.
250 to 300 million is high number for some, 200 +million would be more conservative. Nobody know the real number really. But it's always one person too many.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: John Mak 
Date:   11-30-05 13:45

hopi,

I agree largely with tom,but not you,reading tom's post convince me more that WSQ is an opportunist,not a traitor

>>Li Kashing is an opportunist, but he is not a traitor.
WSG is an opportunist and a traitor.
All traitors are opportunists, but not all opportunists are traitors.<<
Reply:You dont do yourself justice by just being a parrott.

>>John, this is the logic (or lack of) in your arguments.<<
What are you talking about,I provided justifications.

>>If what WSG did is ok with you and 'positive' by Chinese history, then the Jews should just surrender and walk right in to the gas chambers to save some troubles of the Nazis. A united Europe, who knows, could be a good thing after all. Agree?<<
Reply: Another stupid comparison,read tom's second thread,he describe northeast China in details.

>>Or, China (whether KMT or CCP) should have laid down their arms and let Japan in. Perhaps Japan will assimilate with China and become sinocized? No more visiting of Yasukuni shrine is necessary. Hirohito can stay in Beijing's forbidden city. OK? What Diaoyutai? <<
Reply: Again another stupid comparison,the above statement,what I call "if" "then" conditional events.
The event at Shanghaiguan happened,what we are discussing the scenario at the gate,it is a replay of the scene.
If you want to compare it to the present,"what makes Bush decides to invade Iraq".

>>That would save a lot of lives, wouldn't it?<<
Who knows?????????????

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: ok a little less than 300
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 13:54

tom lo wrote:
>
> Nobody know the real number
> really. But it's always one person too many.

This is not a responsible answer, just like "Who knows".
--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: ok a little less than 300
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-30-05 15:00

I thought the numbers flashed across my mind under some other threads, here it is :

[The Taiping Rebellion (1851–1864) was one of the bloodiest conflicts in history, a clash between the forces of Imperial China and those inspired by a Hakka self-proclaimed mystic named Hong Xiuquan (洪秀全), who was also a Christian convert who had claimed that he was the new Messiah and younger brother of Jesus Christ. Most accurate sources put the total deaths at about 50 million civilians and army personnel, although some claim the death toll was much higher . There are reports that "Some historians have estimated that the combination of natural disasters combined with the political insurrections may have cost on the order of 200 million Chinese lives between 1850–1865 [2]". That figure would generally be considered out of the mainstream in historical circles though as it equals half the population of China in 1851.[3] The rebellion is named after the revolutionaries' name Kingdom of Heavenly Peace or Tàipíng Tiānguó (太平天國, Wade-Giles T'ai-p'ing t'ien-kuo), which lasted as long as the revolution]
http://www.asiawind.com/forums/read.php?f=3&i=186273&t=186269

+200million (caused by Taiping Rebellions. high number because it also took into account of natural disasters combining with chaos, but 100million would be fair.)
+ 60 million (per Jung Chang's book account of the Cultural revolution casualties. Not taken natural disasters into account)
+ few million ( war with Japans.)
+ few million (war with KMT.)
+ few million (some other wars like with the Qing, WSG etc..)
+ few million (more natural disasters, flood, famine etc..)
------------------------------------------
Grand total =300 million


So 200million is fair and conservative.

Reply To This Message
 
 Someone is playing with words and statistics
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 15:41

Tom,

That is a better, but you still haven't done enough to verify the numbers.
The numbers for Taiping tianguo are too rough, and will need more research to verify. Let's look at the cultural revolution era.

I would bring your attention to the chart I cited again:

http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/LUC/ChinaFood/data/pop/pop_10.htm This is an American website with reliable statistical data that can be corroborated with other sources.

If you look at 1966-76, the death rate has been decreasing quite steadily, except for 1976 (Tangshan earthquake). It has been steady at ~7 per thousand.

The population grew from 700 million to 900 million during those ten years. If you consider the average population as 800 million and a 7.2 per thousand crude death rate (average around the 10 year period 1966-76) for 10 years, the number is 57.6 million

800 million x (7.2/1000) per year x 10 years = 57.6 million.

You said Jung Chang's book quoted 60 million died during cultural revolution. She is right, except that by quoting this number, people would associate with the number of people died out of persecution, rather than natural death. She doesn't lie, only mislead.

If her calculation is correct (implying all 60 million died of persecution), then no one actually died of natural death in those ten years. That of course is totally absurd.

Now do you see the trick of playing with statistics and words?
If this is the kind of data reported by the author, what else do you believe in?

When we read something, we better find out if it makes sense or not. Verify the data with your own calculation.

--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Someone is playing with words and statistics
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   11-30-05 18:03

How can in 1995, the death rate remains still 7/1000?
so death rate 20 years before 1995 should be much higher than the 7/1000 rate.
The explaination under the graph also said that : [ in the most severely affected provinces the increase in mortality and the decline in births was much higher. Their estimates range from 25 to more than 40 million premature deaths due to famine and famine-related diseases.]
Maybe that was what Jung Chang was talking about.
Some big spikes on the graph shouldn't have to happen at all but it was all caused by man.
Man-made desasters were more serious under anarchist government, that's what we've been talking about. Economic lost were not accounted for, the lost of interest would be in the trillions alone.
Any lower death toll will be increasingly being challenged, since many deaths went unreported, or were actively covered up by the police or local authorities. State of Chinese demographics at the time, combined with the reluctance of the PRC to allow serious research into the period, means that the real figures are unlikely ever to be known.

Half the US. population is 170 million people, if Taiping combining with Mao's period cost half of US. population, in today's standard that's still a lot of people(at that time, US.population were much smaller.) Not to mention the lost of productivity, lost of economic development etc..
How many 10 of thousand trillions of dollars were lost in interest alone ?
That's what anarchy is about, it causes chaos, chaos create changes, changes made new orders, new orders and system not necessary work, unless radically reverting back to capitalism or risk economic collapse(like that of Old Soviet Union.)
Today, any anarchist revolution is seen by most people inside and outside of China, including the Communist Party of China and Chinese democracy supporters, as an unmitigated disaster, and as an event to be avoided in the future. There are no politically significant groups within China that defend the Cultural Revolution, maybe aside from the still-ruling Communist Party minority hardliner.
But we weren't focusing and singling out CR alone, we were talking about "anarchism" in general-- the bigger piture of any chaotic anarchist event that potentially can cause longterm sufferings and economy burdens to the people and the country and it did. We are still paying for it no doubt about that.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: Paul Yih (---.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com)
Date:   11-30-05 19:19

As I have posted that to John Mak many times - according to his flawed logics --- Adolf Hitler is now a hero for the Jews -- because indirectly or directly Adolf Hitler had given the Jews their homeland -- mind you - looted homeland by their own fable -- Israel :) So Hitler is a great contributor to the independence of Israel :) By John Mak's flawed logic :)

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: Paul Yih (---.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com)
Date:   11-30-05 19:21

The famous line " I have provided justificaitons " --- rationalizing is the lower form of thinking - Reasoning is far better and superior :) Need I say more -- All things for John Mak is just to "justified " I am shocked you don't see Bin Laden indeed is a great hero -- based on your justificaton and "irrationalization " :) Binny Laden had won this war thus far and continues to win :) No wonder the West will fail --- they tried to justify and fail as in Iraq --- in Vietnam and in North Korea --:) They tried to justify in fighting commies and they failed absolutely most miserably :)

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: wankee1 
Date:   11-30-05 19:39

tom

if difficulties polishes, if hardship strengthens
all the sufferings that China has under gone
is the best indication
that the future of China is indeed bright.

only war and democracy (a divided China)
can derail China

democracy for China to satisfy USA
is a very lousy idea

why is it American public will keep harping on
China's recent problems including human rights, death figures of CR, TNM etc while Europens and Chinese have moved on?

But many in America loves China and Chinese civilisation...
let the force of peace and respect win
whatever happened within China in the last century happened
due to the position China found itself in
and mainly carried out by ordinary Chinese citizens
It is the wishes of its citizens then

It has no relevance to USA
and USA need not be afraid.
Nor shed crocodile tears for Chinese.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Someone is playing with words and statistics
Author: SL Lee 
Date:   11-30-05 20:48

Tom,

What do you expect for a normal attrition rate (average natural death rate)? It will never go to zero. For a normal population without wars and major natural disasters it should be quite constant. In China's case, it is about 7/1000, which is better than the >8/1000 in US. As you questioned, why was the death rate remains that low 20 years before 1995? But the number is a number. The projection of population to today proves that the chart is an accurate reflection of the population.

I have explained (still a reasonable hypothesis) that the spike of death rate was a decrease in resident registration (fleeing the famine area) rather than death. Otherwise, there would not be a spike in the birth rate either. The 'birth' is really the increase in resident registration of the retuirning residents after the disaster. One cannot expect a sudden decrease followed by a sudden spike of births.

We do agree on one point, no country would have stability under anarchy. Cultural revolution was an uncontrolled 'democracy' of the extreme.
--------------

SL Lee

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: John Mak 
Date:   12-01-05 03:11

wankee,

>>But many in America loves China and Chinese civilisation...
let the force of peace and respect win
whatever happened within China in the last century happened
due to the position China found itself in
and mainly carried out by ordinary Chinese citizens
It is the wishes of its citizens then<<

Where did you get this simple idea,you speak like a evangelist,you really believe the "harmonious concept of Hu Jintau",you forget the "Human Greed",the Human Greed has no racial boundary.
The Chinese could be arrogant as well.
Scenario 1997,I left the Vancouver Expo. by taxi to the airport,my taxi had an old-timer Chinese,he stroke a conversation with me,he complained about the arrogance of the new Chinese immigrants from HK,as they were fleeing HK from the take-over.
Neutral policy is not necessary an advantage to China,example ,Philippines has conflicts with her Muslim separatists,China has a non-interference policy,the US came forward to offer logistics and arms,who do you think Philippines is more friendly with,let me tell the US is already in Philippines,that military relationship could be a danger for China,especially China/Taiwan relationship.

john

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: wankee1 
Date:   12-01-05 04:07

the US came forward to offer logistics and arms,who do you think Philippines is more friendly with,let me tell the US is already in Philippines,that military relationship could be a danger for China,especially China/Taiwan relationship.

=============

John, there is nothing wrong with my message. Internatinal relations is like frying fish. The more u poke , the fish will spoil. I am surprised the Philipinos kick out the Americans from the air bases...Americans can never buy hearts with money, any where. I really dont know why . Please one group, angers another group. America itself is divided. Policies change every few years. The best thing America can ever do in the international scene is not to do any thing until people come begging and pleading.

and by the way I think Philipine/China has never been closer and Philipine /US relations have not been worse for a long long time. Philipinos are ditching the Presidential system for a parliamentary system.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: tom Dragon 
Date:   12-01-05 10:35

[It is the wishes of its citizens then] I don't think the citizens then wished to have poverty and hunger in their town and city.
So what is the wishes of the citizens currently , do you know?

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: wankee1 
Date:   12-01-05 11:01

tom. The CR is itself a miracle because it could not happen any where else. There is no precedent in history. It is not soviet style KGB vs the people. It is people vs people. The participants were ordinary people driven by ideology in a class war. And it took hold into every corner of society. It is the unique conditions in China.

A ruling class that self destructs and millions of Red Guards who are teenagers is not a normal human event. The energy of the people is frightening. And the energy arose from patriotism.

Now that there is peace, the same energy directed to correct use can and is producing miracles daily.

Reply To This Message
 
 Re: Traitor/opportunist
Author: wankee1 
Date:   12-01-05 11:31

So what is the wishes of the citizens currently , do you know?"""""""""""""""

now that there is peace, everyone wants the same as every one else during peace time.....make enough money for children and grandchildren and pray peace continues.

Reply To This Message
 Forum List  |  New Topic  |  Go to Top  |  Go to Topic  |  Threaded View  |  Search  |  Log In   Newer Topic  |  Older Topic 


 Forum List  |  Need a Login? Register Here 
 User Login
 User Name:
 Password:
   

Google
 
Web asiawind.com
phorum.org The Asiawind forums are provided to you by InTechTra Inc.