Differences of Opinion between "Han Nationalists" and "Great China Activists" (Repost)

In recent years, the views of "Han nationalists" and "Great China Nationalists" on the Internet have diverged. In recent years, the "Han nationalists" and "Great China activists" on the Internet have been in a state of great controversy. And there are a lot of questions that have been debated dozens of times.

In fact, the main issues of debate are as follows:

A, B, C, and D represent the views of four different groups of people.

- Welcome to your seat.

A→B→C→D, which can roughly represent the following

Extreme Han nationalists→ moderate Han nationalists→ rational Great China → radical Great China Nationalists

A table of the order of activities.

Of course, there are many other points that are not listed. However, it can also be classified into the above categories.

The views listed in the following questions represent only the corresponding views of the various categories of people under this question, and do not necessarily include all the views of these people.

In fact, more often than not, some people may favor Han nationalists on one side and Chineseists on the other.

In addition, some points of view, it seems, and the conclusions seem to be the same, but the starting point and the angle from which the problem is looked at are different, and the methods and basis of argumentation are also different, so they are not grouped together.

01. How do you view the relationship between ancient China and modern China?

A, I don't think there's a difference in this. All of them are "Han" countries.

B. The historical development and cultural continuation of ancient China gave rise to modern China.

C, history includes historical events and historical understanding, the former, from ancient China to modern China, is the natural process of historical development, from ancient times to the present; The latter, from modern China to ancient China, is a logical process of historical evaluation, from the present to the ancient.

D. The territory and territory of modern China determined the scope of ancient China.

02. How do you view the regimes of ethnic minorities on the map of ancient China (referring to the separatist regimes that stood side by side with the Central Dynasty, excluding the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty)?

A, of course, they do not belong to ancient China.

B, they belong to the scope of Chinese history, the regimes that existed in Chinese history, and the main one, they were later incorporated into the territory by the central dynasty (especially the Qing Dynasty), so we say that his history is an inseparable part of Chinese history.

C, of course, they are the Chinese regimes, because these regimes entered into the historical process of the formation of modern China.

D, of course, is the Chinese regime, because of the territory of the Qing Dynasty in 1840, and it has been since ancient times

03. How do you view the ethnic minorities on the map of ancient China?

A, they are not Chinese, Han = Chinese.

B, they must wait until they are integrated before they can be counted as Chinese. After all, fusion is a long period of time, and there is no definite upper and lower limit (that is, there is a definite date), and it can only be determined according to a vague age.

C, First, Chinese...... Was there such a country as China at that time? Second, what do you think? It will be interesting to see if he has entered the historical process of the formation of the Chinese nation.

D, undoubtedly Chinese. What kind of nationality are they not Chinese, can they be Japanese?

04. How do you view the national wars in history (especially the Mongol destruction of the Song Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty's destruction of the Ming Dynasty)?

A, it was a war of aggression, and the Yuan and Qing dynasties were the period of China's demise

B, at the time, was a war of aggression. But later, their rule was gradually recognized and accepted by the people, and they were gradually integrated, so their regime became the Chinese regime.

C, that is, the national civil war. Because both sides entered the historical process of the formation of the Chinese nation and modern China, of course, it was a civil war. As for how to evaluate? Affirm the unification of ethnic minorities, unify nomadic civilization and agrarian civilization, and at the same time deny the killing in the process of unification, and affirm the righteous behavior of resisting the killing of the Mongols and Manchus.

D, reunification is good, anyway, are they all Chinese. Whoever unifies whom I support. The unified side is the just side, the People's Liberation Army; Those who resist reunification are bound to be decadent and declining, and will be swept into the garbage heap of history.

05. What do you think of the outstanding figures who emerged from the national war?

A, they are national heroes, and those who are Han must be right.

B, they are national heroes, and we also recognize the outstanding figures of ethnic minorities who have emerged in resisting the oppression of the Han Chinese.

C, they are positive people, always will be. In addition, this is a moral judgment and should not be associated with anything else

D, they resist reunification, they are scum who hinder the tide of history, and should be denied and defeated.

06. What do you think of the Mongol Empire and later the Yuan Dynasty?

A,, the Mongol Tatars destroyed China......

B, the Mongols hit the Danube in Eastern Europe, hit West Asia, and whether the Yuan Dynasty is strong or not, what does it matter to us, is it worthy of our pride? That is obviously our lowest era, if it is Mongolian, it is okay to be proud, what are we Chinese proud of?

C, is this kind of question meaningful? Let's figure out the difference between the Mongol Empire and the Yuan Dynasty.

D, the Yuan Dynasty was the most proud and arrogant era in our Chinese, and we also hit Europe......

07. How do the emperors of ethnic minorities evaluate?

A, Tartar chieftain I'm the most disgusting

B, except for Kublai Khan, the Yuan Dynasty really has nothing else to praise; As for the emperors of the Qing Dynasty, they were generally good, especially Kangxi and Qianlong, but the emperors before Kangxi still resisted.

C. Academic research should follow the norms of academic research, and value neutrality is one of them. …… (Omit a few hundred words recorded in historical sources)

D, they are the emperors of China......

08. How do you view the inferior nature of the Han nation?

A, joke, what kind of inferiority can the Han people have? Yes, it was also brought in by the Tartars

B, C, the Han people do have shortcomings, the fall of the Song Dynasty and the Ming Dynasty, the lessons are painful, these reasons should be found from the Han people. It is not right to blame foreign invasions.

D, the Manchus and Mongols came to help China, to save the Han people......

09. What is the relationship between unity and division?

A, the unification of the Han nationality is good, and the unification of ethnic minorities is bad

B, Unified ...... Split...... History really plays mercilessly. However, it is okay for me to admit that the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty were Chinese dynasties, and let me affirm the behavior of unification, so ......

C. The affirmation of reunification is an affirmation of the positive consequences of reunification, not an affirmation of the violence and its negative effects in the process of reunification. In addition, education has always instilled the understanding that unity is good and division is bad. In fact, this is nonsense, reunification is not necessarily good, division is not necessarily bad, and reunification is nothing more than creating conditions for some measures to be implemented in a larger space. If the measures are good, then reunification is good, and vice versa.

D, unification is good, and those who oppose unification are bastards. Therefore, in the XX War, those who resisted the reunification of the Qing army were separatists.

10. The difference between the Yuan Dynasty and the Song Dynasty, the Qing Dynasty, the Ming Dynasty, and the Japanese invasion of China, and the evaluation of the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty.

A, exactly the same, the difference is that the Mongol and Manchu invasions succeeded, while the Japanese invasions failed. If the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression fails, I am afraid that the result will be the same as that of the Yuan and Qing Dynasties. The Yuan and Qing dynasties were both periods of China's collapse.

B, not exactly. Differences: The first two are the change of dynasties between dynastic countries, while the essence of Japan's invasion of China is fascism under colonialism and imperialism. Similarities: At that time, the conditions were all foreign wars of aggression, so the resistance to the Mongols and the Manchus was completely reasonable at that time, and it was to be praised, which was to be praised in the same way as the anti-Japanese heroes. The Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty, because the later rule was recognized by the people, they were integrated and accepted the Chinese culture with Han culture as the main body, therefore, they gradually transformed from Chinese conquerors to Chinese rulers, therefore, these two dynasties should be regarded as dynasties in Chinese history. In particular, the Qing Dynasty brought China into the modern state system in modern times, and it is even more necessary to recognize it.

C, first of all, the nature of conquest is different between dynastic changes and sovereign states. Success or failure is the biggest criterion for judging, and what is orthodox is orthodoxy when winning a war. The Qing Dynasty succeeded and became the ruler of China, that is, orthodoxy, and the territorial scale of today's China was laid by the Qing Dynasty. As for Japan, if the anti-Japanese resistance fails, China and Japan merge and become one country, logically (recognize the Japanese as orthodox), it is entirely possible, what's wrong? Don't like it, but the logical relationship and moral evaluation should be distinguished!

As for the Yuan and Qing dynasties, the establishment of the subjectivity of the state must start by ensuring the continuity of history, and the dynasties established by the minority regimes in history must be regarded as part of the history of the country. This is a reason for national identity.

D, of course, is different, the first two are China's change of dynasty, and the latter is a war of aggression against China. Because the Mongols and Manchus are Chinese, they should not resist their unification, they are also Chinese if they are not unified, and the Japanese are not Chinese, so they must resist desperately, otherwise if they fail, the country will be wiped out.

Therefore, the first two, the side that supported the unification of the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty, were just, and those who resisted the Mongol army and the Qing army were both ********. Mongolian Army and Qing Army = People's Liberation Army; Those who surrendered to the Mongol army and the Qing army = the Kuomintang generals who surrendered to Chengcheng followed the trend of history; Resistance to the Mongol army and the Qing army = Li ****, *. And against Japan, it is necessary to resist. The surrender of Mongolia and the Qing Dynasty was honorable, while the surrender of Japan was shameful.

A simple sentence: if you are Chinese, you will welcome it, and if you are not Chinese, you will oppose it.

Article 11, the reasons for China's backwardness and why capitalism did not take shape in China

A, it must be the Mongol, Manchu invasion. Without their aggression, China would certainly be strong

B, the main reason is the problem of China's system, which is the main reason; The invasion of the Mongols and the Qing Dynasty played a role in fueling the flames, and it was even more regressive.

C. There are many reasons for China's backwardness, and it is inappropriate to blame the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty for the reasons for China's backwardness.

D, China's system is not good, and the Han nation is extremely cowardly and deserves to be backward. Without the Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty, China would have fallen behind faster, and if the Han nationality was replaced, it would only be more vain! In 1271 and 1644, the Mongol soldiers and Qing soldiers came to liberate the Han people, and those who saved China came to help the "******".

[ This post was last edited by thd on 2006-8-2 11:39 AM ]

Some ethnic minorities who accept the official positions granted by the Central Plains Dynasty (the highest is the king, but not the king) and their place of residence is under the jurisdiction of the Central Plains Dynasty, or although there is a certain degree of autonomy, their supreme leaders are absolutely subordinate to the Central Plains Dynasty, in addition to the supreme leader, the leaders below them must also be recommended by the leader to accept the official positions granted by the Central Plains Dynasty, and the Central Plains Dynasty can remove the dissatisfied leaders at any time, but the new leaders are generally held by the people. Such ethnic minorities were 100 percent Chinese at that time.

Some ethnic minorities, whose supreme leaders pay tribute to the Central Plains Dynasty, and the leaders below them also have to be recommended by the leaders to accept official positions granted by the Central Plains Dynasty; although they do not obey the dispatch of the Central Plains Dynasty, when dealing with foreign countries, they still claim to be under the jurisdiction of China's central government, and such ethnic minorities can also be said to be Chinese at that time.

Some ethnic minorities, whose supreme leader is a king or equivalent to a king, only accept the canonization of the Central Plains Dynasty when they ascend the throne and pay tribute to the Central Plains Dynasty, but the leaders below them do not need the approval and appointment of the Central Plains Dynasty, and such ethnic minorities were not Chinese at that time.

You might as well take a look at this

Throughout the text, the A view, despite its many radical biases, still shows the blood of young people, while the D view is completely shameful capitulationism.

It is foreseeable that during the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the Great China Advocates with the D-type viewpoint must have been very willing to accept Japan's transformation and devote themselves wholeheartedly to the "great cause" of 'Greater East Asia Co-prosperity'.

And the so-called C who flaunts his sanity is probably Wang Jingwei, Zhou Zuoren's first-class character, although he seems to be full of economy, he is actually a quasi-slave, with no backbone and position at all.

Personally, I agree with the B view.

[ This post was last edited by Scarlet Polyp on 2006-8-2 01:24 PM ]