Basques in Spain... it's quite a complex thing, but my first-hand knowledge of it would tell you it's mostly a fabrication. Without discussing origins, there has never been a military invasion of the Basque country, and they voluntarily submitted to Spanish rulers for centuries. They were mostly assimilated by the 19th century. But then a separatist movement aroused, mostly to claim economical privileges.
How about the Basques in Spain?
As for reservations for the native Ameicans, it is laughable. I have studied the plight of the native Americans in the US, and thinking that the government is repaying them for their misdeeds in the past by reservations is saying how you repay your sins of raping a woman by giving her 2 dollars for an abortion.
Not to be mean, but your basis for bashing China is ignorant and most commonly seen amongst the eurocentrics.
Of course if you look for it you'll find the opposite view, but that's a complex discussion as a said. And yeah, Indian reservations are quite laughable. I just guessed about what the government justifies them for.
Gotta laugh about eurocentricity. Hey, i haven't claim chinese are useless piece of human trash and that colonization was a good thing. Just wanting to get facts straight. If rationalism is eurocentrism, then count me on it.
Wow! I'll admit my deep ignorance about Chinese historical identity. In my eurocentricity I just assumed it as a given fact. Now, if you just could elaborate a little more on that...? I always thaught that there was an assumed collective identity by all speakers of chinese languages, and that there was a fundamental difference between
And just to tell you guys, there's no such thing as a Han ethnicity. It is a biggest failure of China to produce a "Han" ethnicity because it doesn't really exist.
Han, Tang or Ming dinasties, and Jin, Yuan or Qing, seen as foreign. Are you telling me that people from Guangzhou found the Ming as foreign as the Qing? Or that northerners felt exploited by the Tang? Hey, no sarcasm, I really wanna know.
Oh, no encouraging of Han migration to those places? Not a single effort of altering the previous demographic balance? I've read on the contrary. But you sure know better.
There's no such thing as sinicization, but standardization of practices. Just as you use English and was taught English, the Tibetans and Uyghurs have to be taught Chinese to compete in the market. Too bad, in a world like this, majority rules.
Say what you mean by imperialized, what you understand of the Han people and the Han culture. Your arguments don't make sense.
Read up about the boxers. The boxers are convinced that the Qing represent the legitimate government. The Chinese people do not really care for the ethnicity of the ruling dynasty, but more for the protection, philosophy and authority it represents. the Yuan and Manchu government both claimed to be legitimate government and a continuation of the dynastic system, and both claimed that they're Chinese. The boxers buy that, and they are generally xenophobic towards white Europeans and not the Manchus.
Hell, I don't remember, I'm not that into the matter, but anyway; the Ming also asked the Manchus for assistance, and the Koreans to Japanese and Chinese before the 1894 war. My views of ethnic nations are not 'eurocentric' or whatsoever; they are just modern. Anyway, I know it's anachronistic to think of medieval societies sharing a collective identity such as today's nation-states; I never said the Ryukyuans felt japanese in the first place. True, those things didn't matter on those times. But they do matter today. And for what I know, most Ryukyuans think themselves as Japanese today, independence movements notwithstanding.
Which expert? Which institution is he or she trained in? What is his or her discipline? Manchu historical records contain an excerpt in which the King of Ryukyu inquired the Manchu Emperor for assistance against Japanese invasion. It does not matter if the people are the same stock. It matters when one does not want to be invaded by the other. Your eurocentric views of ethnic nations is not applicable to Chinese history.
It's funny for you to call me 'eurocentric' (you could just called me racist if it's what you want) when you're the first of claiming that Chinese reality is not measurable by objective standards, which you despise as 'western'. Hey, as a write before, ethnic nations is not a traditional european concept; it's just a modern one, shared by all civilizations who have entered modernity. It's perfectly appliable to chinese history; the problem is that the concept, being a modern one, doesn't really fit with agricultural societies. But it doesn't apply to pre-20th century china as to medieval europe.
Before using nonsense relativism to insult any challenging view, think of what you're saying.