Hong-Kong Protests

As if one needed any more proof that these traitors are just willing slaves dreaming of a time when they can live under the leash of white masters. So of course they don’t support black lives matter, and if black lives matter supports actually met any of them and learnt of their deeply pathetic and offensive views about slavery and racism, I think they will probably despise these traitors more than even white suprematists and being-nazis.

localizer said:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1269720494544052224

From a hongkong "freedom fighter"

"I think Black people living in America should be thankful their ancestors got sold to America, or else they are still living African (people's) lives, you look at how much Africans want to escape Africa, and travel to America. Allegedly American boxer "the greatest" Muhammad Ali went to Africa in search of his roots, when he left Africa at last, he said he thank his ancestors stepping on that boat headed to America as a slave."

Click to expand...

The person is a spiritual opium seller indeed.

supersnoop said:

I read an article where the HK protester mindset does not read Chinese history. They don't feel they are Chinese, so it is irrelevant. I find this hard to believe, it is so short sighted, to the point of stupidity. US as a country/nation has only exist for a few hundred years, China a few thousand! Furthermore, and this is really ignored by MSM, but China has been building a multicultural society the whole time.

Click to expand...

If my knowledge about China's history is correct, there was no one "China" until the Qing dynasty, at least not in territory. The earlier eras were all pockets of land that's a part of modern China, but not China as a whole country. Of course, if you include the Yuan dynasty, which BTW was ruled by the mongols, then there were two whole"China" in history, sort of.

That's why I'm writing here. China as a whole had only existed in a rather recent history, at most a few hundred years, not thousands of years. The Modern USA on the other hand has not break up yet after their union, aside from the civil war. IMO, comparing the "Thousand of years" China and "Hundreds of years" USA are like comparing apples and oranges.

Also, this might be relevant since it's about China's territory. The current China's territorial claim is mostly based on the legacy of the Qing Dynasty, which includes modern China and Mongolia. Before Qing, Hong Kong had been a part of China, but get this; Taiwan hadn't! Hence if you want to be political and say Taiwan is Chinese territory because it had been so for thousands of years; sorry, it doesn't stand. But if the reason is because China's claim is based on Qing's legacy and Taiwan was under Qing's control, then okay. Just make sure to sort out the mess of modern world politics.

Okay. Back to the topic.

^ what... orz

dankris said:

If my knowledge about China's history is correct, there was no one "China" until the Qing dynasty, at least not in territory. The earlier eras were all pockets of land that's a part of modern China, but not China as a whole country. Of course, if you include the Yuan dynasty, which BTW was ruled by the mongols, then there were two whole"China" in history, sort of.

That's why I'm writing here. China as a whole had only existed in a rather recent history, at most a few hundred years, not thousands of years. The Modern USA on the other hand has not break up yet after their union, aside from the civil war. IMO, comparing the "Thousand of years" China and "Hundreds of years" USA are like comparing apples and oranges.

Also, this might be relevant since it's about China's territory. The current China's territorial claim is mostly based on the legacy of the Qing Dynasty, which includes modern China and Mongolia. Before Qing, Hong Kong had been a part of China, but get this; Taiwan hadn't! Hence if you want to be political and say Taiwan is Chinese territory because it had been so for thousands of years; sorry, it doesn't stand. But if the reason is because China's claim is based on Qing's legacy and Taiwan was under Qing's control, then okay. Just make sure to sort out the mess of modern world politics.

Okay. Back to the topic.

Click to expand...

You are certainly not correct.

Mongol yuan is considered Chinese because the Mongols think they are a Chinese dynasty.

The first dynasty that's considered Chinese is Xia. Then shang. Then Zhou. You clearly failed your history class. All those spring Autumn and warring States periods are all part of Zhou.

Qin is the first dynasty is centralize the rule, thus called first empire. All dynasties before those are feudal.

China as a whole existed for a long time as in Qin, han, tang, song, yuan, Ming, Qing... Hell even ROC after the warlord era.

PiSigma said:

You are certainly not correct.

Mongol yuan is considered Chinese because the Mongols think they are a Chinese dynasty.

The first dynasty that's considered Chinese is Xia. Then shang. Then Zhou. You clearly failed your history class. All those spring Autumn and warring States periods are all part of Zhou.

Qin is the first dynasty is centralize the rule, thus called first empire. All dynasties before those are feudal.

China as a whole existed for a long time as in Qin, han, tang, song, yuan, Ming, Qing... Hell even ROC after the warlord era.

Click to expand...

Heh, some Americans just have "small history syndrome."

You only have to go to videos like these to see FLG's social media power.

In the comments, the video maker says "here comes to FLG trolls"

FLG: "Nop no trolls, u lie, u CCP shill"


I'm fine with Chinese who don't like CCP, but not if they are part of a cult backed by CIA.

dankris said:

If my knowledge about China's history is correct, there was no one "China" until the Qing dynasty, at least not in territory. The earlier eras were all pockets of land that's a part of modern China, but not China as a whole country. Of course, if you include the Yuan dynasty, which BTW was ruled by the mongols, then there were two whole"China" in history, sort of.

That's why I'm writing here. China as a whole had only existed in a rather recent history, at most a few hundred years, not thousands of years. The Modern USA on the other hand has not break up yet after their union, aside from the civil war. IMO, comparing the "Thousand of years" China and "Hundreds of years" USA are like comparing apples and oranges.

Also, this might be relevant since it's about China's territory. The current China's territorial claim is mostly based on the legacy of the Qing Dynasty, which includes modern China and Mongolia. Before Qing, Hong Kong had been a part of China, but get this; Taiwan hadn't! Hence if you want to be political and say Taiwan is Chinese territory because it had been so for thousands of years; sorry, it doesn't stand. But if the reason is because China's claim is based on Qing's legacy and Taiwan was under Qing's control, then okay. Just make sure to sort out the mess of modern world politics.

Okay. Back to the topic.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, Taiwan’s revisionist history at its worst. Next you’d be claiming Taiwan should be part of Japan.

Ancient Chinese didn’t have the same mindset as western crusaders and colonists. You didn’t become Chinese because the Han came, genocided the existing indigenous population and repopulated with ‘pure blooded’ descendants. Ancient China was very much the leading light of the world that all neighbouring powers emulated and aspired to copy or join, and the Chinese were usually very open and welcoming of outsiders who didn’t come to pillage and rape.

The ancient tribute system is pretty much a pre-curser to the current US federal system. The tribunes paid tributes (Taxes) to the Chinese Emperor and accepted Chinese primacy, and in exchange they were given massive autonomy to pass their own laws, and administer their own affairs. any of them were invaded by hostile foreign powers, Chinese Emperors dispatched Chinese troops to defend them.

Chinese dynasties pretty much viewed tribunes as de facto parts of the empire. Chinese dynasties tended to only invade to formally and directly administer hostile neighbouring powers into the empire who previously attacked China. The XiongNu, the Jin, the Mongols, the Qing and countless others were all incorporated eventually as well as countless other less famous ones.

This flexibility and open mindedness is one of the main reasons why China’s has 56 ethnic minorities (as opposed to the western model that wiped out far more), and who were all able to live in relative harmony for thousands of years. There is a reason it’s China and not Han-Land you know.

Only idiots and/or revisionists would try to impose modern day ideas and normals on ancient history to try twist history to suit their own preferred narrative rather than look at history honestly in context of the norms and custome of the time.

It seems there are a lot of misunderstandings about what I posted. To be clear, I was posting about territorial claims.

The map of China that resembles the modern China territory the most is the Qing's, and that map does include Taiwan as China's territory.

However, Taiwan had not been colored as under China's rule BEFORE Qing dynasty, at least if the Wikipedia's maps are the ones agreed upon by the members of this forum.

And NO, I am not claiming Taiwan should be a part of Japan. I just wrote if China needs a time in history for it to justify it's claim on Taiwan, it should point to Qing's rule instead of the whole China's history, much of which Taiwan wasn't even a part of.

Here's the source. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Taiwan

Can CCP control immigration for Hongkong from now on? Block all FLG infiltrators.