Most Deserving Civ

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by YefeiPi

Also, you are not even European, how can you say that in the minds of Europeans, China was conquered? It's a joke! Speak for yourself next time.

Because I have always been a student of History, and I can read.
I look at thing in the world and then sit back and study it and only than will I come to a conclusion.
Another thing going for me is that I'm many years older than you. You are 16, and I'm 57. When I was 18/19/20 I visited Asia, not all, but a lot.
Japan
Korea
Hong Kong
Taiwan
Phillippines
Okinawa
You know my wife has a cousin that came from China 30 year ago and spoke like you. Today she speak a lot difference.

[Transcend]

joseph1944, your definition of "conquest" is pathetic. Occupying a few ports of a big nation temporarily implys conquest? You better go back re-learn English!

[YefeiPi]

Because I have always been a student of History, and I can read.

No, you are not a student of history because then you wouldn't have said a lot of nonsense that made you look foolish.

I look at thing in the world and then sit back and study it and only than will I come to a conclusion.

Sure you do. Yeah, like how you said Tibet was a small empire before China was even a country.

Another thing going for me is that I'm many years older than you. You are 16, and I'm 57.

What's your point? No offense or anything, from the inaccurate posts you made, I thought you were younger than me. Also age is not that important, sure I respect the elderly, but it's the knowledgeable ones that I respect more.

When I was 18/19/20 I visited Asia, not all, but a lot.
Japan
Korea
Hong Kong
Taiwan
Phillippines
Okinawa
You know my wife has a cousin that came from China 30 year ago and spoke like you. Today she speak a lot difference.

Looks like you have never EVEN been to China. You sound like you know about the nation like the back of your hand, but since you never been to it, now I totally understand your lack of knowledge of it completely.

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by Transcend
joseph1944, your definition of "conquest" is pathetic. Occupying a few ports of a big nation temporarily implys conquest? You better go back re-learn English!

If I was as smart as you!!!!
See if you can understand this. If some people from Kansas came to Denver and took over the city including the Airport and made everyone in the greater area pay them a tax on everthing they wanted to send by air from Denver, would they not control a large part of CO.?
That is what the European did to China. They control the major ports in China. Anything coming in or leaving China had to be cleared by the European power. That is how you control.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by YefeiPi


I think you can't read, Dark Cloud. Whoever said the Chinese were the first to use guns? I said Chinese invented gunpowder. Not guns! Also Europeans conquered China? Define "conquered" a bit further please. You mean like how Mongol conquered Europe or what? Anyway, China is still alive and well. Isn't it?

I read that somewhere in this thread... perhaps it was a typo, but that is what I read... The British "occupied" China... They 'conquered' it more in the way of the Mongol's conquering Europe-
The Chinese beat back the British mostly because the Chinese had more people.

And yes, British did not conquer all of China. they went inland a bit. They occupied it for a number of years... I still maintain that Rome is better than China.

They are less different actually, the writing for mandarin and cantonese are very much alike except cantonese have more strokes. Only the way it is spoken that is different. I don't even think you know Chinese.

I dont. I never said I did. If what you say is true, I was incorrect. But what you say is not what I have heard. Perhaps I should do more research on that subject.

--

YeFei-

1. have you ever been to China?
2. no student of history can be an expert in everything.

[DarkCloud]

joseph- I think he meant that China was isolationist and that that did not hurt the country- he probably wants you to prove that by taking the port cities, England hurt China.

[Transcend]

Originally posted by joseph1944

If I was as smart as you!!!!
See if you can understand this. If some people from Kansas came to Denver and took over the city including the Airport and made everyone in the greater area pay them a tax on everthing they wanted to send by air from Denver, would they not control a large part of CO.?
That is what the European did to China. They control the major ports in China. Anything coming in or leaving China had to be cleared by the European power. That is how you control.

Well, the US controlled all major cities in South Vietnam. Did they conquer the nation? No. They couldn't even protect South Vietnamese villagers from Communist incursions.

Foreign powers did control several Chinese ports indeed. Did majority of Chinese population submit to them? No. Did these powers created their own administrations in China proper? No. They might have controlled the foreign trade of China back then, but 95% of the Chinese had nothing to do with these trade anyway.

Conquest would be far reaching, like what British did in India: absolute control of the majority of Indian population under direct British administration and taxation. China, except during the Japanese invasion, had never been placed under any of these systems. At most other times, foreign merely excersized an influence, sometimes strong, on Chinese government.

As you see, conquest and influence are very different things. I'm amazed that you, joseph1944, fail to understand such simple differences.

[YefeiPi]

And yes, British did not conquer all of China. they went inland a bit. They occupied it for a number of years... I still maintain that Rome is better than China.

Ok, if occupying Hong Kong for some years makes you think English "conquered" China, haha, then by all means, it is "conquered"

I maintain the position that China is better than Rome though.

They control the major ports in China. Anything coming in or leaving China had to be cleared by the European power. That is how you control.

Hong Kong isn't the only major port in China. You love control don't you, joseph? Where is the European control now? You are not even English, I don't think they need you to feel proud for them.

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by YefeiPi

Hong Kong isn't the only major port in China. You love control don't you, joseph? Where is the European control now? You are not even English, I don't think they need you to feel proud for them.

Actually I don't like control so why say I do?
I could care less where the European control is today.
Actually through my Father and his Father etc. we are from England. however since my ancestor came from England in 1634 to America, I have no connection to England.

[Transcend]

The reason I pick Chinese over Romans is because Romans were completely conquered in the end. They didn't manage to assimilate the Germanic invaders and many of their civilizational achievements were lost in Europe until after the Age of Reformation. Western Civilization is no doubt the greatest in World today, its achievement unrivaled by any other's. But Rome was not solely responsible for its glory. Western Civilization had its root in Ancient Greece, expanded by Rome, changed by Christianity which itself was derived from Jews, thrashed by Germanic Barbarians, revived 1,000 years later by Italians, and finally brought to its peak by the French, English, Germans, and Americans. They all deserve credits for today's Western Civilization. I would go so far as to say that even English/British deserved more credits than the Romans: representative democracy, rule of the law, capitalism, and industrialization. Especially the Industrialization and Capitalism are the characteristics of the Western Civilization that set it apart from other civilizations and gave its dominance today.

However, just by taking each Western country on its own, then I think China still has the advantage.

[fred]

Actually Hong Kong is not the port that would be the top of China's list. Shanghi was the port that the Europeans occupied which was more valuable. But those Europeans where in Shanghi by right of the Chinese Dynasty. Since Shang hi was important to the trade the Chinese government allowed them access and divided the city into different quarters.

And Yes i have been to china .

[ranskaldan]

it all depends on how you look at it... I mean, if you look at the Romans, they didn't exactly exist for a very long time, but their culture was very influential, ultimately becoming the source of Western civilization, which is, in addition, the dominant force of the world today. The Chinese stayed there for a really long time (5000 years to be exact), assimilated all the invaders, and made a lot of contributions to science and art --- but its influence today is less far-reaching. So basically, the Chinese are more important than the Romans, but the influence of the Romans is more far-reaching than the Chinese. (But my vote goes to the Chinese. We are looking at the individual civilizations here, not their influence after they had disappeared.)

And as for the part about languages... from a speech point of view, the various dialects of Chinese are indeed as divergent as the Romance languages, but when you write them down, they all look very similar. This is because the Chinese writing system is word-based, so it can basically ignore variations of pronunciation between the dialects, while the European writing system is sound-based, so when the sounds of the languages differ, the writing has to, also.

(However, in addition to pronunciation, the dialects of Chinese differ in grammar too. So actually the writing of Cantonese and Mandarin still differ, but it's not that different.)

(Also, about the point that Cantonese writing has more strokes than Mandarin --- that is a difference in 'font', not language. It is equally possible (and indeed is still done) to write Cantonese in the less-strokes method or Mandarin in the more-strokes method.)

[Transcend]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
it all depends on how you look at it... I mean, if you look at the Romans, they didn't exactly exist for a very long time, but their culture was very influential, ultimately becoming the source of Western civilization, which is, in addition, the dominant force of the world today. The Chinese stayed there for a really long time (5000 years to be exact), assimilated all the invaders, and made a lot of contributions to science and art --- but its influence today is less far-reaching. So basically, the Chinese are more important than the Romans, but the influence of the Romans is more far-reaching than the Chinese. (But my vote goes to the Chinese. We are looking at the individual civilizations here, not their influence after they had disappeared.)

Have you read my previous post? Here is the reason why Romans should not be placed ahead of Chinese: Romans cannot claim the sole credit for Western Civilization. It was a combined effort by the Greeks, Romans, Italians, Spanish, French, British, Germans and Americans. Several most important concepts of the Western Civilization, such as human rights, representative democracy, industrialization, and capitalism, had nothing to do with Romans.

The Western Civilization as whole outshines the Chinese one, but China outshines each country individually.

[shade]

if you look at the Romans, they didn't exactly exist for a very long time,

>1500 years,nah that isn't that long

The Chinese stayed there for a really long time (5000 years to be exact), assimilated all the invaders, and made a lot of contributions to science and art

And the Romans assimilated all those they conquered,they were able to expand like they did because they absorbed knowledge like a sponge and adapt it to their needs.
I also would dare to say that they did some substantial contributing to science and art.(but their scientifical achievement are rather of the engeneering kind)

Shade

[YefeiPi]

The Western Civilization as whole outshines the Chinese one, but China outshines each country individually.

Wouldn't it be unfair to compare the ENTIRE Western civilization to China? Anyway, yes China has far less influence nowadays due to its isolationism, that's something for a fact. However, China has realized the negative side of isolationism and is opening the country up more and more to the world. It is on the rise very rapidly again, I believe it will return as a world superpower very soon again. World leadership is a strange thing, it alternates between sides, first China then West, who knows where it is in the future.