origin:

As this book published in 1980's,the language style still featured by Mao's time.But the viewpoint and facts it presented was valuable and convictive.

(1) In Chinese

An outline for historical study on Korean immigration in China

(2) On the ingoing time of Korean immigration 

Hmmmm.  Simplified Chinese....

I don't think any Korean can read that

(3)On the deploitation of YanBian

Simplified Chinese share most characters with traditional Chinese, I can read and write both of them... 

I think skim over these infomation is enough, I will post an article in Korean, you can easily understand it     but I doubt some viewpoints of it ...

(4)On general situation of Korean migration during the latter Lee Dynasty

any question about Jian Dao can look it from Another book :

Because Chinese Korean are living in the area where the mural was discovered. The relics in Ji An(Jip-ahn) become a golden egg to local people. This is not new evidence my friend...

As for the ownership of Goguri history, TRUE evidences can be achieved only by careful analysis on historical books of ancient China. not that by finding "evidences" of this kind...

too many such things on the website of www.chosun.com...

you realize there is still some Chinese in that Korean text.

I still cannot read it.

as for history books, China has kept good historical records throughout its history, whereas in Korea, the next dynasty was always trying to look down on the previous one..

but I don't know what you mean by TRUE evidences. do you mean how Koguryo is always written in DONGYI section of history books?

sure, that doesn't prove it's Korean, but it does prove it is NOT Chinese.

we have other things to prove it's Korean anyway..

btw, Chinese historical records weren't 100% correct either.

i.e. it wrote nice things about Buyo people and not-so-nice things about the Koguryo people because it was allied with Buyo against Koguryo. in reality however, Buyo and Koguryo are of the same ethnicity with the same customs etc.

Anyone can archive that much stuff in a matter of minutes.  You jsut need the courage

And hannibal, even with Koreans I do not think I can read that much Chinese.  Like I know around 100 chinese characters- 30 of them perfectly.  You are providing with the rest 900 chinese characters that I've never seen . 

And only the adjective is in Korean (noun and verb which make up the core of sentence is in Chinese) so I don't think any Korean in this forum can understand what the sources say .

Hey Koreans,

    You guys need to understand something about China's (not Chinese -- let's not put mainland gov't's words into every Chinese mouth) position about Koguryo.  They are not saying that people in Koguryo weren't Koreans; they are saying that some Koreans are a part of the Chinese people -- an ethnicity among many Chinese ethnicities.  Compare this to America: many Americans have two identities -- African Americans, Chinese Americans, Italian Americans, etc.  The idea is to denote sub-identities within an umbrella identity.  What China is trying to do, like many other countries are doing, is to establish a multi-ethnic nationality -- something we should actually applaude.  After all, it's terrible to treat ethnic groups as the "invisible others."  The catch here is the extension of this logic -- this is where it goes terribly wrong, and frankly this extension of logic makes no sense at all.  Koguryo is a part of Koreans' (or, more precisely, they are called Choson people, "Chiu Shin Ren,") heritage, in particular, Northern Koreans' heritage.  Many Northern Koreans are now living in China, and are Korean Chinese.  Therefore Koguryo is a part of Korean Chinese heritage And then there's something weird: Since Korean Chinese are a part of the Chinese people, China has the responsibility of protecting the heritage of the Korean Chinese, China's own people. 

    Now, still, I suppose China can make a case here: if the US wants to protect the ancient ruins of the Native Americans, that's a very good thing.  The US can even say that these ruins are a part of American heritage, as long as "American" doesn't denote White Anglo Saxon Protestant supremacy.  The pretext in China's case, however, is more difficult: sure enough, China does promote the equality and harmony of all the ethnicities, Han or otherwise.  One cannot help but fear, however, that China might also turn this around to implement its expansionism.  After all, we have Taiwan, Tibet, and Turkestan as examples.

    A part of this issue is also the lack of mutual and self-understanding.  When China says that Koguryo is Chinese, do most Chinese understand that this doesn't (at least shouldn't) mean that Koguryo is Han or Han-dominated?  Same goes for the Koreans: do they recognize the multi-ethnic definition of "Chinese?"  If not, then all the debaters are arguing from all the wrong perspectives.  And what I said before I say again: there is no way we can prove that social entities of the past and those of the present are temporally continuous.  In that sense, China and Korea only existed for a century.  What we need to realize is that, when we say that "such and such" is a part of national heritage, both the "national" and the "heritage" parts are socially constructed -- only the artifacts are real.  So this entire debate is more a matter of definitions than actual historical researches -- the latter are best left as matters of fact; our interpretation of them only obscure this debate.  As far as Hannibal's concerned, he's wasting his time in the wrong direction: appealing to some history books isn't gonna prove anything.  Any historical record is automatically an interpretation of facts.  There is no need to inquire whether the historical records accurately depict the facts to understand this.

Peace,

Michael

8-29-2004

MengTsu, I don't think you know all of the problem.

China is not saying Koguryo is part of the heritage of the Chosun ethnics of Chinese nationals.

China has actually started a propaganda program where it says Koguryo was not a part of the three kingdoms of Korea, but it was a regional power of China.

one of the claims: Sui invasions into Koguryo was not an invasion into foreign territory, but an attempt at unification.

Hey I/eye,

    I suppose the two things can go hand in hand.  There's a thin line between invasion and reunification (look at Taiwan.  Those poor bastards.)  What I'm saying isn't that the two things are the same: what I mean is that an invasion can easily be pretended to be a reunification.  It is precisely this ambiguity that enpowers China's expansionist gears.  I still insist that what I mentioned above is at least a pretended premise of China (it is, therefore, a point we can use to turn the problem around.)

Peace,

Michael

8-29-2004

Originally posted by Gubukjanggoon Very well said, Meng Tzu, I applaud your wisdom! BTW Hannibal, what do you think of this, what is your opinion, is this a big misunderstanding?

As Zhuang zi,a famous Taoist philosopher of ancient China,said:"the world will not in peace,unless those saints all in tombs. (Sheng Ren Bu si,Da Dao Bu Zhi)" MengTsz is such a saint.

Gubuk,I will list several questions in you post about Goguri,after you give me your answer, I will give you my point.

I particularly love the little white hands.  I must say all that simplified Chinese itched my eyes so much, I thank those little hands for scratching my eyes for me.

Well.  Isn't it nice for these nations to continuously create topics for us to talk about?

Do you think if there's some Indian palace in Pakistan and Pakistan claimed it is part of Pakistan there would be this much fire?

At least back in the Corean imperial court people dressed more Chinese than Chinese people did in Qing dynasty...

Oh yeah, China promotes equality for between different races?  You mean as long as they obey the orders from the Han Chinese dominated communist party right?  I sure didn't see much equality when the Tibetans and the Uyghurs were being massacred.  Wait, they are not being killed now?  Oh, yeah, they are obeying orders now...

You know what is the difference about American civil right and the Chinese civil right movement?

In America, people were denied being real Americans, and they had to fight to be part of America.  In China, these people don't want to be part of China, and they were force to be part of this "multi-racial China".

There is the fundamental difference in the methods, America's bottom up approach, and China's Top down approach to racial equality.  In all honesty, if China is a very free and prosperous country, as I am sure it can be, you don't need to force people to be part of China.  People will flock to China wanting to be apart of it.

It is exactly due to the fact that in China it isn't free and it isn't equal, that people don't want to be part of it.  And forcing them isn't helping the cause.

There's always hidden agenda's to an invasion.  It is almost never just about what's on the surface.  Chairman Mao himself said back during WW2 that Taiwan should be independent.  Why all the sudden changed to claim Taiwanese people have always been Chinese?  Why the need for all the "researches" to stress Taiwanese aboriginals came from China?

China invaded Tibet for the Uranium.  They invaded East-Turkistan for the test sites.  I sure know why they want Taiwan, for its position in the pacific, For an open door to be a pacific naval power.  The problem is can the Chinese people see it.  Can they see beyond the "historically inseparable, always part of China" propaganda?  Or are they going to be like the Germans and Japanese back in WW2, completely buy in the propaganda created just to fulfill a political agenda.

I see the word propaganda used a few times to describe the Kuguryo situation.  I don't think it is just yet.  If it is, I'll have to start thinking what is the purpose behind this propaganda.

Hey Hannibal,

    Confucianism and Taoism have a lot more in common than most people think.  The wisdom that Chuang Tzu criticize cannot truly be of the type of Meng Tzu's, since both emphacize acting according to one's nature.  That is not to say that they agree on everything, but I doubt Chuang Tzu would unequivocally criticize Meng Tzu.

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Hey Hansioux,

    No offense, but if you think that I'm suggesting that Mainland actually practices ethnic equality, you have no appreciation for my sarcasm and subtext.  I'm a frigging Canto from Hong Kong, I fled from the Commies because of 1997's "turnover," just as my grandparents fled from the Commies decades ago.  you think I was defending the Fascist regime of the Beijing mobsters a.k.a. PRC Government?  Let's not forget prop 23 and the march of 500000.

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Hey all,

    It appears that people (may be except Gubukjanggoon) failed to see my point.  My point isn't that China's rationale is correct or its possible expansionist motive laudable.  My point is simply that the debate cannot be solved by historical researches.  No amount of documents can prove the debate in either way, because it is ultimately a debate of interpretation, not of facts.  People also failed to see that the allusion to America doesn't make China look any better; America is another hypocritical nation that claimed to do what it essentially failed.  I went to the leftest of the leftist universities in America for crying out loud.  (Guess which one just for kicks =)  Hint: we beat both Stanford and USC last year and also won a bowl game.)

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Hey Michael,

I wasn't writting that to you.  I think I was writing that to the person who said China is trying to become America.  Which I don't recall who that was and actually can't even find it   Maybe I read it in some other post and just brought it here because it was along the same topic *_*

I rather enjoyed your sarcasm. ^_^~

We Taiwanese are the poor bastards. Damn it!  We have been invaded by the colonialists for one too many times already!

Hey Hansioux,

    I knew they were invaded many times, but for some reason I never thot of it that way.  Now that you put it that way, yeah, you guys have every right to be disgruntled.  (Same with the Koreans, I doubt that many countries can beat their score of number of times invaded over the centuries.)

    I think it was, in fact, me, who said that China wants to become America (so does that mean you were writing to me?)  That, too, is a criticism.  America is the self-proclaimed guardian of the world -- but frankly nobody enjoys its guardianship.  I won't lie to ya, I love being an American.  But you just gotta know how to critique your own country (hence my constant rage against America and China.  No complaint against Hong Kong, it has suffered enough.  Those complacent jerks, they -- or we -- used to laugh at the Mainlanders, see who is laughing now.)

    I actually have a quick question about Taiwan.  Are the majority of Taiwanese Han?  (Let's avoid calling them "Chinese" to avoid ambiguity.)

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Culturally yes.  That's the disadvantage when Autronesians don't have writing.

Ethnically no.  As explained in my long and boring thread.

Darn it, then I was talking about you.

I sometimes wondered why the Hongkongese couldn't see this coming.  Why when Taiwan was struggling for it's democracy the HK press often laughed at the Taiwanese.  If Hongkongese had asked for freedom and self-determination back in the British control, it would make things much easier now.

Imagine what China would be saying... "Hey, you HKese never complained when England was your boss, you never asked the English to let you vote for the head of HK. now you are back to your fatherland, what are you complaining about?"....

Man, we are way off topic v_v

Hey Hansioux,

    "I sometimes wondered why the Hongkongese couldn't see this coming.  Why when Taiwan was struggling for it's democracy the HK press often laughed at the Taiwanese.  If Hongkongese had asked for freedom and self-determination back in the British control, it would make things much easier now."

    Hongkongese are a bunch of complacent punks.  They laughed at Shanghai for trying to industrialize (and now Shanghai is kicking everyone's ass and then some,) and they laughed at the people who tried to be democratic.  Hong Kong is a capitalist dream comes true -- everyone has the shortest term of goals possible.  It's all about immediate profits.  Political activism is considered stupid.  Guess what's happening now -- they are reduced to a bunch of whinny bitches.

    Can you summarize in short what you mean by the majority of Taiwanese not ethnically Han?  I thot most people in Taiwan are immigrants from Fujian over the course of centuries.

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Most of the today "Han cultured" Taiwanese are simply Chineselized aboriginals.  It is really easy for these people to forget who they were when they were driving off their tribal lands, with no writing to remember who they were, losing their own language within a few generations.

This is the brief version from my thread:

Dutch people even gave the Silaya tribe writing inorder to preach to them. Silayan writing continued to the end of Qing dynasty.  Many sales documents were written both in Silayan and Chinese.  The Dutch estimated the aboriginal population to be around 600 to 700 thousands, which was an underestimation due to the lack of knowledge of Mountainous area and the East coast aboriginals.

The Chinese male came to Taiwan in hope of making a living and return to China with wealth. However, most of them were just as broke in Taiwan as they were in China and never returned. Most of them ended up marrying the aboriginals. Therefore there's a Taiwanese saying ¡u¦³­ð¤s¤½¡AµL­ð¤sÀ¨¡v "These are only Grandpas from China, no Grandmas from China". Due to the lack of writing, and the concept of ownership like most Austronesians, the strong Chinese culture influence eventually assimilated most of the aboriginals who lived along the coast (¥­®H±Ú Ping-Pu aboriginals). That is why average Taiwanese has 80% of Austronesian traits show by the recent DNA tests. Most Taiwanese people are still Austronesians. The all 700 thousand didn't just all disappear to occupy less than 2% of the Taiwanese population.

Hey Hansioux,

    Why is it, then, that Taiwanese sounds so similar to Fujianese?

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

So called Taiwanese language is a term given by the Japanese and continue to be used by the Chinese colonialists.  Two major groups of Fujian language combined to form this language.  It is similar to the language used in ·HªùXiamen, in Fujian China.  It is a combination of the ºs¬w Zhang Zhou and ¬u¬w Quan Zhou dialects of Fujian.  People migrated to Taiwan from this two different parts of Fujian used to have large mob fights.  Now, few people even remember which one of these they are. 

Fujian has so many different dialects due to different eras of Chinese  migration to avoid invasions.  These languages have also mixed in the ¶V Yue aboriginal languages already existing in Fujian.

The Taiwanese using this dialect actually refer to this language as Holo.  They write it as ªe¬¥ (The Luo river next to the ancient capital of ¬¥¶§ Luo Yang), implying their ancestor came from the ancient capital.  However there are other Chinese dialects used in Taiwan, such as «È®a Hakka (meaning Guest, obviously also migrated to the south to avoid invasion).

The aboriginal languages now is still used.  The few PengPu (Low land) aboriginal language still being used.  Katagelan is one of them.  Others Mountain tribes such as Atayal, Amei, Bunun, Puyuma, Paiwan, Tsou, Sasiat, Tao, Chou and several more are used but in the brink of extinction.

Thanks to the effort of foreign linguist such as the Japanese, many of the already extinct Peng-Pu languages were recorded.  There were as many as few hundreds of different austronesian languages existing in Taiwan along.  Studies on Taiwanese languages led to the Australia linguist Peter Bellwood to theorize that the Austronesians actually spread to the pacific islands from Taiwan.  Since the origin of a language contains more diveresed forms of the language.

My father's family have heritage from the Taokas tribe, and my mom's family has heritage from the Silaya tribe.

People in Taiwan have been pushing the word Taiwanese to be used to refer to Austronesian languages and call the current title holder Holo again.

Hey hansioux,

    Is your name an allusion to the American Sioux, btw?  (Except in this case, Han Sioux?)

    These are some interesting things you're dropping left and right here.  I still need a more accurate breakdown though.  How many people are actually aboriginal in Taiwan?

    Thanks in advance!

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Currently, the Taiwanese government only admits people from 11 tribes to be aboriginal.  These people have already stopped living in tribes.  There is no more tribe's common wealth.  There is about 432,667 aboriginals in the year 2001, that makes up about  2% of the total population.  37% of them live in the mountain still, but also 33% lives in the cities.  They are losing their culture fast.  Eventhough the Taiwanese government are doing a lot to reverse the process, but I think the trend will continue.

I am one of the Han-washed Taiwanese who actually loves aboriginal culture.  I love their music, love their legends, love the connection to the other Austronesians.  There are a lot of legends that Taiwanese and the austronesians share.  I have an interest of collecting them.

Hey Hansioux,

    Okay, I'm confused again.  There are 2 percent aborigines, and then there is a minority of people who came to Taiwan from China with the Kuo Min Tang during the 20th century.  What are the rest of the people, which makes up of the majority chuck of Taiwan population?

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

Hey I/eye,

    The thing is Taiwan does have a flag and an anthem.  I love the old Nationalist (not the crazy "nationalists" that I decry, but an actual party with that name) flag (the one Hansioux is using.)  It's "Ching Tian Ba Yi Wan Di Hung," "The blue sky, white sun, and the red field," the red field, if I'm not mistaken, symbolizes the blood of the martyrs who fought against Ching dynasty.  It might be an allusion to the "Red Flower Society," a secret society that fought against Ching (please correct me if I'm wrong here, cuz I'm not entirely sure if the Red Flower Society was real or fictional.  In any event, though, I think the Nationalists were associated with the Triads, and I think Sun Yat Sen was a Triad member himself.) 

    My own family has something to do with the Nationalist party.  We used to fly their flag (way before I was born though.)  And, no, as far as I know, my family was not gang related.  Would be cool if it was though.

    The reason that the Taiwanese aren't supposed to use their anthem and flag in the Olympics is because of China, really.  The UN only recognizes Mainland as China (they used to only recognize the Republic of China in Taiwan instead.)  Now we can't call Taiwan China cuz we'd have two Chinas, but we can't call it Taiwan cuz then we'd be recognizing its independence, and doing either of this would piss off Mainland.  Like I said, those poor Taiwanese bastards.  One should note that Taiwanese teams in the Olympics represent "Chinese Taipei" or something.  That's part of the PC talk described above.

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

I know.. that's why I said poor Taiwanese Olympians.. having, and not being able to use it, is much worse than not having any at all

To Mengtzu..

Well, in Taiwan aboriginals gets some special previliages like in education or job security and stuff.

That is why the government recognize that there are two types of aboriginals.  Ping-Pu tribes who consist of most of the Han-cultured Taiwanese people are not a part of this aboriginal count.  They are counted separately from those who still retained their language and culture.

What's left are 11 tribes, soon to be 12 that will be recognized as aboriginals that still retained their language and culture for the most part.  They are 2% of the population.

However counting in the Ping-Pu aboriginals, which can be traced through family names, family history, religion and DNA, the both aboriginals comes up to be 80% of the Taiwanese people.

Hey Hansioux,

    Hun culture?

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

It should be 'Han', I think.  Huns already disppeared in history. Maybe can find some in Hungary......

My typo, fixed it.

The intersting thing about this Taiwanese flag that I love to hate and hate to love so much. 

The original ROC flag was the five horizontally colored stripe flag, elected by by congress in 1912.  The five colors were Red, Yellow, Blue, White and Black symbolizing the Han, Manchurian, Mongolian, Uyghur and Tibetan.  Doctor Sun Yetsen wanted the flag of just the blue sky and white sun without the red soil to be the flag, but after the flag lost the election, he chose it to be the flag of KMT, the Nationalist Chinese, till today.  The Chinese navy also chose the Blue sky and white sun flag and added the red boarder to be the naval flag of China.

hmm.... the five colored flag of ROC.  The real flag of ROC.

After Dr. Sun's death, Jiang took a few years to quell the warlords in China.  By the time when he is done, the Japanese began their invasion of Manchuria nd started the WWR2 early for the Chinese.  During the 8 years of war, Jiang became a dictator and ruled China with absolute power.  He was a strong follower of Dr. Sun, so to fulfill his wishes, he forced the all Nationalist congress to choose the current flag as the new flag of ROC.

Jiang also selected Dr. Sun's speach to the Nationalist Huang-Pu military acadamy as the lyrics of national antheme.  Disregarding a sone already written for this new flag.

At the end of ROC's rule over China, Jiang brought the whole thing to Taiwan and forced it on the Taiwanese people.  There are flags proposed as the new flag for Taiwan.  But much like changing the name of Taiwan can cause PRC to go nuts, changing the flag doesn't make PRC too happy either.

Hey Hansioux,

    I like the flag you hate =P  I think the basic premise behind it is cool.  Very poetic and revolutionary.  Anyway, are most of the Han-cultured Ping Pu intermarried with Chinese from China?

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004

No, not most of the Han cultured Ping Pu intermarried with Chinese from China.

However most Chinese Taiwanese are intermarried with Ping Pu of Taiwan.

I don't just love to hate it, I hate to love it as well.  It's more like a love hate relationship.

Hey Gubukjanggoon,

    If you're talking about the flag with five stars, then yes, the five stars represent the five major ethnicities.

Peace,

Michael

8-30-2004