hakka: Re: Hakka

["Dixie" <Dixie@singnet.com.sg>]

> I think for the sake of inclusivity, this
> forum has adopted the definition that if one has an ancestor who is
vaguely
> Hakka, then one can call oneself Hakka if so desired. 

I think, like surnames, only the paternal ancestry is recognized.
This forum is an open one. Anyone can claim to be a Hakka but it is up to
the
others to accept/rebut it.

> I however do not
> subscribe to this generous definition. To me, being Hakka is being
> culturally Hakka, in the present tense. If let's say a Caucasian White
> should speak Hakka and chooses to adopt Hakka culture, then he should be
> entitled to be a Hakka. I personally think that a culturally Cantonese
> person in Hong Kong for example if he discovers that in fact he has
> ancestors who were Hakkas probably will not call himself Hakka if he
doesn't
> speak Hakka. One can change one's culture, but not one's race. As SL Lee
has
> pointed out repeatedly, we are all Chinese.

I have come across non-Hakkas who discovered their Hakka roots in the
latter part of their
lives and they proudly proclaimed that they are Hakkas although they do not
understand a
word of it. We will be denying their claims to their ancestry if we were to
follow your definition.
Perhaps, in Hong Kong, Cantonese dialect is prevalent and as Hakkas are
considered poor, 
backward and old-fashioned, they therefore feel ashamed to identify
themselves (my personal
assumption). But I do not think this is the case in Singapore, Malaysia or
Taiwan. It could be 
that Mandarin and not Cantonese are used in these countries and Cantonese
is consider as 
just another dialect.

> But, there are Chinese out there who will call themselves anything when
it
> suits them, votes to be gained, helps from guilds, etc.

Blacksheeps do exist everywhere.


- Dixie