A Separate Cantonese Republic???
-
KP
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
Just wondering.........do the Cantonese that ACTUALLY LIVE IN GUANGDONG have this feeling or need to separate themselves from China? If no, then all this discussion is useless no?
-
ppk
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
that is absolutely correct, kp.
if i remember correctly, bill crosby once said on his tv shows, that when he was young he was prety naughty, and always mess up the house. when his mom comes back home, she'll often say 'oh my jesus christ, wad have u done?'. so he always thought that he is 'that guy', and he always felt floating to the ceiling whenever he went to church and ppl start praising the lord. of course he realised the truth later and switched back to normal, feeling a little sad thou. then during the cultural revolution in china, mao called for the 'little heroes' to come to arms and protect the 'red china'. the chinese kids thought mao was talking to them and was so happy to fight for 'the cause', 'to liberate the other 2/3 of the world suffering under the exploitation of the imperialists and capitalists'. whether the remaining 2/3 thirds of the world are actually suffering or not, they dont care. they just want to 'liberate' them. very romantic, very impractical. in order to do this they have to imagine that those people are suffering, or worst, hope that some will be suffering in the near future so they, these little red guards, can fulfil their mission of rescuing them. they create more plight than happiness in the end.
from all these discussion, we can see the true colours of some 'romantic' separatists, see how they try to fulfil their dreams by imagining some people are actually suffering, facing cultural annihilation and unbearable discrimination in their own country, and how they are going to liberate these ppl. they can use wadever reasoning, cultural, language, racial, twisting of words etc, but they wont stand.
if i remember correctly, bill crosby once said on his tv shows, that when he was young he was prety naughty, and always mess up the house. when his mom comes back home, she'll often say 'oh my jesus christ, wad have u done?'. so he always thought that he is 'that guy', and he always felt floating to the ceiling whenever he went to church and ppl start praising the lord. of course he realised the truth later and switched back to normal, feeling a little sad thou. then during the cultural revolution in china, mao called for the 'little heroes' to come to arms and protect the 'red china'. the chinese kids thought mao was talking to them and was so happy to fight for 'the cause', 'to liberate the other 2/3 of the world suffering under the exploitation of the imperialists and capitalists'. whether the remaining 2/3 thirds of the world are actually suffering or not, they dont care. they just want to 'liberate' them. very romantic, very impractical. in order to do this they have to imagine that those people are suffering, or worst, hope that some will be suffering in the near future so they, these little red guards, can fulfil their mission of rescuing them. they create more plight than happiness in the end.
from all these discussion, we can see the true colours of some 'romantic' separatists, see how they try to fulfil their dreams by imagining some people are actually suffering, facing cultural annihilation and unbearable discrimination in their own country, and how they are going to liberate these ppl. they can use wadever reasoning, cultural, language, racial, twisting of words etc, but they wont stand.
-
Sum Won
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
¥_¤s¤§¤°
¯A©¼¥_¤s¡B¨¥ªö¨ä§û¡C
°º°º¤h¤l¡B´Â¤i±q¨Æ¡C
¤ý¨ÆÃûðS¡B¼~§Ú¤÷¥À¡C
·Á¤Ñ¤§¤U¡B²ö«D¤ý¤g¡C
²v¤g¤§ÀØ¡B²ö«D¤ý¦Ú¡C
¤j¤Ò¤£§¡¡B§Ú±q¨Æ¿W½å¡C
¥|¨d´^´^¡B¤ý¨Æ³Ä³Ä¡C
¹Å§Ú¥¼¦Ñ¡BÂA§Ú¤è±N¡C
®È¤O¤èè¡B¸gÀç¥|¤è¡C
©Î¿P¿P©~®§¡B©ÎºÉ·ñ¨Æ°ê¡C
©Î®§°³¦b§É¡B©Î¤£¤w¤_¦æ¡C
©Î¤£ª¾¥s¸¹¡B©ÎºGºG§W³Ò¡C
©Î´Ï¿ð°³¥õ¡B©Î¤ý¨Æ»ß´x¡C
©Î´ï¼Ö¼°s¡B©ÎºGºGÈ©S¡C
©Î¥X¤J·Ä³¡B©ÎÃû¨Æ¤£°¡C
I found this in the ShiJing (Poem Canon). If you take the entire poem and read it, you'll realize the section you quoted from is only used as an exaggeration, or hyperbole would be the more accurate word. The poem itself doesn't advocate taking land, it's about the toils of the adminstration. The section you quoted from only describes the vastness of the territory, in order to show how much work they have to do, to keep the administration running. In conclusion, Confucian is a set of moral ethics and codes, hence: The governing of man, not the governing of land.
Now, let's get several other things straight on my part of the arguement:
1. I never said you advocated Seperatism
2. I do not stand with "Yue" on the "VietNamese in GuangDong" idea. I used the term "Lac Viet of GuangDong", because I couldn't recall the terms later used for the aborigines of this area. *NOTE: I still think that the "Lac Viet of VietNam" are either Champas that were influenced by the culture north of them, or they were a seperate tribe with affiliations with the tribes of the Xi Ou and others.
3. I'm not advocating world-unification "for the sake of unification". Unification of the world is proposed so that peace can be made between people, and is a major step towards non-violence to achieve political and other goals. First ppk cited "economic reasons" for not joining. So I explained to ppk, how things would work out.
4. If you think my ideals are ridiculous, and the model I use to justify is even more so, then tell it to the Chinese who used it.
Both the proposal of the Cantonese Republic and the World-nation, would mean a reckoning between the former winners of history, and the losers. Because, before we come together, we'd have to settle all of our differences. Native-Americans, versus the Americans themselves, Palestineans and Israelis, Turkish and the Kurds, Ireland and Britain, Russians and Chechens, Singapore and Malaysia, etc... The only reason why none of you advocate either plans, is because you just want to bury the situation and live your "happy little lives" out. One quote that has lived with me, was a line from the movie "Judgment At Nuremberg", "You must forgive, forgiving is essential; but you must never forget." --It's been a long time, so I might have a few words wrong-- it was during the session when two American Army Officers were talking to each other. He was very true with that statement, because if you forget the ugly parts of history, which tell the horrendous sides of humans, then some guy always comes along doing something, and everyone is horrified, thinking that he's the first one to do such a horrendous act. This is the result of people who follow "forgive and forget". They don't look at themselves and reflect upon what they've done wrong, how to solve the problem, and apologize. Hence, if the world nation proposal could not be accepted, because of petty selfishness, for wanting to live a happy life with disregard for others, I re-proposed the more deadly option:
The Cantonese Republic
As debated earlier, all of you emphasize the Chinese aspect of the Cantonese, while I put more emphasis on the aboriginal side. You use assimilation as a defense, but assimilation is only the acceptance of a political structure, cultural belief, or way of living. People can easily reject it as well. You constantly say that the Cantonese are filled with mainly Chinese blood, but depending on the sources you receive, some say that even up until the Qing dynasty, that lineage percentage was about “60:40” for Aborigine to Han lineage. Some say this was maintained up until an earlier period, but this is the result of inaccuracy in census counts made on behalf of the Chinese. After these people were sinicized, the Han took them into the count, and labeled them with their own people, while they were unable to make accurate counts of the non-assimilated people. To add on top of the confusion, population counts were different from period to period, with constant redistricting. So, if you claim that the Cantonese are mainly Chinese by lineage, you might not necessarily be right. Hence, any movement on behalf of the “Cantonese Independence” would mean reckoning with the policies of China, from the past to the present. Not just with the Cantonese, but also China’s “minorities”.
One thing I was wondering was how you got the count of 54 nations? Are you aware that the system the aborigines had before the Chinese incursions and even long after that time was a clan system? The so-called Xi Ou and Luo Yue, were only a series of clan alliances, with elected heads. This is even more evident in the Alliance between the Xi Ou and Luo Yue itself, when they had an alliance and elected a head, forming the Ou-Luo (Au-Lac) alliance.
*By the way, any replies to this and other topics will be answered two months or so from now, because I’ll be gone during that duration.*
¯A©¼¥_¤s¡B¨¥ªö¨ä§û¡C
°º°º¤h¤l¡B´Â¤i±q¨Æ¡C
¤ý¨ÆÃûðS¡B¼~§Ú¤÷¥À¡C
·Á¤Ñ¤§¤U¡B²ö«D¤ý¤g¡C
²v¤g¤§ÀØ¡B²ö«D¤ý¦Ú¡C
¤j¤Ò¤£§¡¡B§Ú±q¨Æ¿W½å¡C
¥|¨d´^´^¡B¤ý¨Æ³Ä³Ä¡C
¹Å§Ú¥¼¦Ñ¡BÂA§Ú¤è±N¡C
®È¤O¤èè¡B¸gÀç¥|¤è¡C
©Î¿P¿P©~®§¡B©ÎºÉ·ñ¨Æ°ê¡C
©Î®§°³¦b§É¡B©Î¤£¤w¤_¦æ¡C
©Î¤£ª¾¥s¸¹¡B©ÎºGºG§W³Ò¡C
©Î´Ï¿ð°³¥õ¡B©Î¤ý¨Æ»ß´x¡C
©Î´ï¼Ö¼°s¡B©ÎºGºGÈ©S¡C
©Î¥X¤J·Ä³¡B©ÎÃû¨Æ¤£°¡C
I found this in the ShiJing (Poem Canon). If you take the entire poem and read it, you'll realize the section you quoted from is only used as an exaggeration, or hyperbole would be the more accurate word. The poem itself doesn't advocate taking land, it's about the toils of the adminstration. The section you quoted from only describes the vastness of the territory, in order to show how much work they have to do, to keep the administration running. In conclusion, Confucian is a set of moral ethics and codes, hence: The governing of man, not the governing of land.
Now, let's get several other things straight on my part of the arguement:
1. I never said you advocated Seperatism
2. I do not stand with "Yue" on the "VietNamese in GuangDong" idea. I used the term "Lac Viet of GuangDong", because I couldn't recall the terms later used for the aborigines of this area. *NOTE: I still think that the "Lac Viet of VietNam" are either Champas that were influenced by the culture north of them, or they were a seperate tribe with affiliations with the tribes of the Xi Ou and others.
3. I'm not advocating world-unification "for the sake of unification". Unification of the world is proposed so that peace can be made between people, and is a major step towards non-violence to achieve political and other goals. First ppk cited "economic reasons" for not joining. So I explained to ppk, how things would work out.
4. If you think my ideals are ridiculous, and the model I use to justify is even more so, then tell it to the Chinese who used it.
Both the proposal of the Cantonese Republic and the World-nation, would mean a reckoning between the former winners of history, and the losers. Because, before we come together, we'd have to settle all of our differences. Native-Americans, versus the Americans themselves, Palestineans and Israelis, Turkish and the Kurds, Ireland and Britain, Russians and Chechens, Singapore and Malaysia, etc... The only reason why none of you advocate either plans, is because you just want to bury the situation and live your "happy little lives" out. One quote that has lived with me, was a line from the movie "Judgment At Nuremberg", "You must forgive, forgiving is essential; but you must never forget." --It's been a long time, so I might have a few words wrong-- it was during the session when two American Army Officers were talking to each other. He was very true with that statement, because if you forget the ugly parts of history, which tell the horrendous sides of humans, then some guy always comes along doing something, and everyone is horrified, thinking that he's the first one to do such a horrendous act. This is the result of people who follow "forgive and forget". They don't look at themselves and reflect upon what they've done wrong, how to solve the problem, and apologize. Hence, if the world nation proposal could not be accepted, because of petty selfishness, for wanting to live a happy life with disregard for others, I re-proposed the more deadly option:
The Cantonese Republic
As debated earlier, all of you emphasize the Chinese aspect of the Cantonese, while I put more emphasis on the aboriginal side. You use assimilation as a defense, but assimilation is only the acceptance of a political structure, cultural belief, or way of living. People can easily reject it as well. You constantly say that the Cantonese are filled with mainly Chinese blood, but depending on the sources you receive, some say that even up until the Qing dynasty, that lineage percentage was about “60:40” for Aborigine to Han lineage. Some say this was maintained up until an earlier period, but this is the result of inaccuracy in census counts made on behalf of the Chinese. After these people were sinicized, the Han took them into the count, and labeled them with their own people, while they were unable to make accurate counts of the non-assimilated people. To add on top of the confusion, population counts were different from period to period, with constant redistricting. So, if you claim that the Cantonese are mainly Chinese by lineage, you might not necessarily be right. Hence, any movement on behalf of the “Cantonese Independence” would mean reckoning with the policies of China, from the past to the present. Not just with the Cantonese, but also China’s “minorities”.
One thing I was wondering was how you got the count of 54 nations? Are you aware that the system the aborigines had before the Chinese incursions and even long after that time was a clan system? The so-called Xi Ou and Luo Yue, were only a series of clan alliances, with elected heads. This is even more evident in the Alliance between the Xi Ou and Luo Yue itself, when they had an alliance and elected a head, forming the Ou-Luo (Au-Lac) alliance.
*By the way, any replies to this and other topics will be answered two months or so from now, because I’ll be gone during that duration.*
-
ppk
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
sumwon,
i meant from 'shangshu', the poem may be from 'shijing' but it was quoted in shangshu with a different meaning.
lac viet dun exist anymore. just like u cant revitalise any babylonian. its not that we just want to live the happy little lives we have. so how are u going to decide who stays and who goes? who is fit enuff, or 'lac viet' enuff to be called the true masters of the cantonese nation? we are too far away from that and racial composition far too complicated to do such examination. besides, there is not much to remember in the first place, not much was written on the situation at that time, be it the chinese or the 'aborigins'. yeah, racial composition might not be correct to prove thatthey are chinese, but might not be wrong too. u cant prove it either. 54 races/groups, not nations. thats from the vietnamese handbook on their demographic composition.
i meant from 'shangshu', the poem may be from 'shijing' but it was quoted in shangshu with a different meaning.
lac viet dun exist anymore. just like u cant revitalise any babylonian. its not that we just want to live the happy little lives we have. so how are u going to decide who stays and who goes? who is fit enuff, or 'lac viet' enuff to be called the true masters of the cantonese nation? we are too far away from that and racial composition far too complicated to do such examination. besides, there is not much to remember in the first place, not much was written on the situation at that time, be it the chinese or the 'aborigins'. yeah, racial composition might not be correct to prove thatthey are chinese, but might not be wrong too. u cant prove it either. 54 races/groups, not nations. thats from the vietnamese handbook on their demographic composition.
-
:-)
A Separate Cantonese Republic???Most Unlikely...
Like TaiWan, XiZang, or XinJiang, 90% of the world members of the United Nations will not recognize GuangDong as a separate nation.
Without international recognition, there is no point in persuing independent statehood unless you have nothing better to do.
Anyway, as a MeiJiHuaRen with ancestry to GuangDong, I and most GuangDongRen don't mind being called Chinese/ZhongGuoRen.
Without international recognition, there is no point in persuing independent statehood unless you have nothing better to do.
Anyway, as a MeiJiHuaRen with ancestry to GuangDong, I and most GuangDongRen don't mind being called Chinese/ZhongGuoRen.
-
sfboy
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
hey, I second that. as an immigrant from hong kong living in the bay area, my ancestry stems from the guangdong province. I don't think ANY guangdongren mind being called Chinese. Why? Because we are Chinese, why would anyone mind being called what they are? I have a question for Sum Won though, is he from the Guangdong area? I ask this because he seems so persistent in seeking a separate Cantonese republic... does he have support from his Cantonese brothers and sisters(if he is Cantonese)?
Although I recognize that there are differences between people from the Guangdong region and other parts of China AND it might be nice if we were independent, the most ideal situation would be if the sphere of political influence of China moved to the Guangdong region and the capital of China moved the Guangzhou. That would be sweet... the underlying point in my saying this is that we'd rather be Chinese than not. We've been Chinese for as long as anybody can remember and everyone else in China regards us as Chinese, what's the point in seeking independence?
Although I recognize that there are differences between people from the Guangdong region and other parts of China AND it might be nice if we were independent, the most ideal situation would be if the sphere of political influence of China moved to the Guangdong region and the capital of China moved the Guangzhou. That would be sweet... the underlying point in my saying this is that we'd rather be Chinese than not. We've been Chinese for as long as anybody can remember and everyone else in China regards us as Chinese, what's the point in seeking independence?
-
Red Sultan
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
We still should not deny our ancient past and we still should make attempts, no matter how miniscule the results may be, to uncover at least a few fragments of what our people once were. It is sad enough that cultures have completely disappeared due to assimilation. Valuable traditions - all vanished. Ancient wisdom - all lost. We must do what we can to re-discover these lost cultures. Betrayal to your roots can be one of the worst things that you could ever do. As a descendant of the people of Guangdong, I am interested to know what my ancestors would have been like before we were assimilated into the Empire. Must you all be so complacent on simply calling yourselves "Chinese" when there could be much more to our people and there could be a whole new possibility? The Native Americans have lost much of their culture, but even they continuously strive to revive what they have lost and rediscover the ways and wisdom of their ancestors.
-
ppk
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
as if u know that these 'cultures' are 'valuable' and 'wise'. no one is trying to deny, but we dun even know the exact 'ancient past' to start with, how can u be sure that it is a 'betrayal to our roots' in the first place? a dna test? do not accuse others without proof and try to put urself on a high pedestral. the cantonese living in canton could be from the ancient aborigins, but again, could be the northerners too. no one can be 100% sure. they can call for a revival in the ancient aborigin culture, so can they call for a revival in the northern culture. native americans look back to their cultures for different reasons, one of them being some dun give up their lifestyle and they dun follow the mainstream american way of life. do u see this in among cantonese? they followed the lifestyle of ppl all across china.
the cultures of the aborigins are only 'valuable' in the academic perspective, not in the practical sense. it is valuable cos it filled up the blanks in history and anthropology texts on how ppl around the red river delta live at that time, how advanced they are compared to other races, and how they migrate to other parts of s.e.a.. u may like to know how ur ancestors are like during the tang dynasty, but would u want to live like them, under a emperor and a feudal system, with no freedom of speech wadsoever?
the cultures of the aborigins are only 'valuable' in the academic perspective, not in the practical sense. it is valuable cos it filled up the blanks in history and anthropology texts on how ppl around the red river delta live at that time, how advanced they are compared to other races, and how they migrate to other parts of s.e.a.. u may like to know how ur ancestors are like during the tang dynasty, but would u want to live like them, under a emperor and a feudal system, with no freedom of speech wadsoever?
-
Red Sultan
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
I am not implying that we should completely create a government system completely by traditional standards. What I am saying and what you fail to understand is that re-discovering our ancient past is extremely important. Yes, you are right that we cannot be 100% sure. That is why we must make an effort to delve into the secrets of the ancient past to find the truth. No matter what, the past contains everything that we are and what we were. By simply turning your backs away from the past and stubbornly refusing to uncover the truth or even considering the alternate possibility, you are indeed betraying your ancestors by refusing to learn as much as there could be found about them.
Are you so complacent that you are uninterested in finding the truth? The more you refuse to even attempt to find one sentence of truth, the more it disappears. The truth is like a whisper. Once it is spoken, it may suddenly vanish. Thus must you do what you can to grasp it while its faint sounds still resonate in the air.
The ancient past must not be left forgotten forever. Forgetting can be easily one of the worst crimes anyone could ever commit.
Are you so complacent that you are uninterested in finding the truth? The more you refuse to even attempt to find one sentence of truth, the more it disappears. The truth is like a whisper. Once it is spoken, it may suddenly vanish. Thus must you do what you can to grasp it while its faint sounds still resonate in the air.
The ancient past must not be left forgotten forever. Forgetting can be easily one of the worst crimes anyone could ever commit.
-
ppk
Re: A Separate Cantonese Republic???
i already said, it is valuable in the academic context. but mnd u, this thread is about a separate cantonese republic based on ancient aborigin culture and race(which no one is sure wad it actually was), so it is another story. ur standpoint is actually against sum won's idea. i think we would all agree that we should look back into our past for, say, academic purposes, fill up the blanks in human history etc, but that doesnt mean we have to agree to creating a government out of that. so ur accusation of us(or me alone) being 'complacent' dont stand. and please refrain from using ur moral values as a standard of evaluation on everyone. different ppl have different sets of moral values, ur meat may be someone else's poison. i am not forgetting about the past and actually doing research on it. but even if i do forget about it, that doesnt amount to the worst crime ever.