Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Hong Kong (香港人) vs Taiwan(台灣人) vs Singapore?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 TaishanLOVE

TaishanLOVE

    Provincial Governor (Cishi 刺史)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 30 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Physical anthropology

Posted 17 May 2011 - 11:08 AM

Hong Kong( 香港人) vs Taiwan (台灣人) vs Singapore (新加坡人)

Which of these 3 doesn't want to identify as chinese the most? even though they are all different han chinese,they are still han chinese.However nowadays most taiwanese will refer to you "please don't call me chinese,I'm taiwanese". Some like hong kong people will be like "I'm from hong kong, I'm hong kong cantonese chinese". Others like Singaporeans prefer being being called sinaporeans first than chinese.Basically taiwanese are mostly made up of fujianese with all the other hans people in taiwan idendifying as taiwanese. And hong kong are mostly made up of cantonese people with all other han groups in hong kong that identifies with cantonese.And singapore are mix of mostly fujianese,teachow,cantonese,hakka but prefer to identify with being Singaporeans since their an majority.( btw it's strange how only the cantonese and fujianese descendants have their own native province,lands,entertainment media with majority population.While the hakka and teachew doesn't ,and always the minority)


http://en.wikipedia....aiwanese_people

Taiwanese people ethnic groups: the Hoklo (70%), the Hakka (15%), Mainlander (13%). In other words Taiwanese majority are basically fujianese people.But anyway whether they are fujianese or hakka makes no difference,as I'm sure they all don't want to identify as chinese.

(BTW the mainlander identify with both taiwanese and chinese)

http://en.wikipedia....ese_Singaporean

Singaporean chinese: Hokkiens or fujianese (福建人) constitute around 41%.Teochew (潮州人) in Singapore constitute about 21% of ,The Cantonese (广东人) make up 15% of the Chinese Singaporean population,Hakka (客家人) constitute 11.4%.Hainanese people (海南人)This group constitutes 5% of the Chinese Singaporean population. Taiwanese (台湾人 less than 2% of the Chinese Singaporean population.

(BTW keep in mind some cantonese Singaporeans are also toishan cantonese but are part of cantonese ethnic).

http://en.wikipedia....ong_Kong_people

Hong Kong people: Cantonese people represent the largest group in Hong Kong. Beside the Cantonese, people of other Han Chinese groups also reside in Hong Kong. However, the Cantonese remains the largest group even amongst other Han Chinese groups in Hong Kong. As such, Hong Kong culture is highly Cantonese-influenced. Together with the fact that Cantonese is most commonly used as the language of both everyday and formal conversations, as well as its use in the media and education. other Han Chinese groups in Hong Kong, such as the Hakka, the Hoklo (Hokkien), the Shanghainese, or the Teochew, in particular those who are Hong Kong born or raised, often assimilate into the mainstream Cantonese identity of Hong Kong.

(BTW taishanese makes up 30-40% of hong kong population, but we too are cantonese sub-group. Our dialect,culture,mentality were alrealy similar to those of cantonese and hong kong cantonese to begin with)

Edited by TaishanLOVE, 17 May 2011 - 11:17 AM.


#2 Loong

Loong

    General of the Guard (Hujun Zhongwei/Jinjun Tongshuai 护军中尉/禁军统帅)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 113 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    History

Posted 18 May 2011 - 12:50 PM

This is political vs cultural.

Everyone is a chinese descent, which is agreeable. The nationality comes first, as it is more of a political issue. It would be same as a national of Thai but chinese descent would be call a citizen of Thailand, of Chinese descent.

Maybe it is convention, as we would put country before ethnicity. It doesnt mean they disown their chinese heritage.

#3 peger

peger

    Provincial Governor (Cishi 刺史)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 49 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 19 May 2011 - 08:52 AM

Singapore has never been under Chinese rule; Hong Kong was founded and developed by the British; Taiwan was likewise a frontier backwater which was largely developed into the modern state it is now by during fifty years of Japanese rule and then further politically and culturally on its own after '49. All three have Chinese roots, but all three have developed in unique ways. It is hardly surprising that most people in these countries identity with the locality and not Mainland China. How many Canadians, Americans, Australians or New Zealanders do you know refer to themselves as British?

As to your question, Singapore is probably the 'least Chinese', but I'd imagine Taiwanese far more vehemently reject the label given the heavy political connotations that carries.

#4 TaishanLOVE

TaishanLOVE

    Provincial Governor (Cishi 刺史)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 30 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Physical anthropology

Posted 19 May 2011 - 09:59 AM

Singapore has never been under Chinese rule; Hong Kong was founded and developed by the British; Taiwan was likewise a frontier backwater which was largely developed into the modern state it is now by during fifty years of Japanese rule and then further politically and culturally on its own after '49. All three have Chinese roots, but all three have developed in unique ways. It is hardly surprising that most people in these countries identity with the locality and not Mainland China. How many Canadians, Americans, Australians or New Zealanders do you know refer to themselves as British?


As to your question, Singapore is probably the 'least Chinese', but I'd imagine Taiwanese far more vehemently reject the label given the heavy political connotations that carries.



It's true british founded hong kong and advance them,but this opportunity was given to hong kong people to developed for themselves and made it what they are today.If they didn't they would have been just like philippines,Burma or every other african nation who were colonized in past.All of them were given many opportunities to developed during their colonization but did not succeed while hong kong people did.Hong Kong is only 2% of guangdong(canton) and guangdong served as an very important trading port with rest world.The canton system was also set up in guangdong this is why british were so interested in guangdong, so they took piece of it which became to be known as hong kong.

You can't say singapore was never under chinese rule,it's true that it was under the british before,but after their independence it was mostly under the chinese rule,most of the president was chinese,the majority of the population is also chinese aswell and if the singaporeans chinese don't vote you other ethnics don't have a chance.It's true british advanced singaporeans,but this opportunity was given to the singaporeans people today.All of southeast asia were colonized by european powers in past and were given opportunity but in the end only singapore is the most wealthiest of them all.


Taiwan was developed by japan for long time since it was under it for 50 years, before it was under the spanish rule and dutch rule who they also developed taiwan.Japans was the first asian nation to accept western civilization in all asia.After their surrender,atomic bombing of their country.The japan mainland was under 7 years american rule and allies and Okinawa was under for more than 30 years under american rule, even though it's still has 8 u.s base in japan.Americans build their country and forming modern japan today, the same goes with south korea, it was developed by japan in beginning but it was mostly built by americans.


(I know this has nothing to do with question on the topic but I can't help but feel annoyed about giving all credits to westerners.It's true that western civilization dominated modern asians civilization and world in last 500 years, but since history it was chinese,indian,mesopotamia civilization that have dominated the west and world, for many thousands of years.Europe was still uncivilized during this period.)

Edited by TaishanLOVE, 19 May 2011 - 11:37 PM.


#5 Loong

Loong

    General of the Guard (Hujun Zhongwei/Jinjun Tongshuai 护军中尉/禁军统帅)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 113 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    History

Posted 19 May 2011 - 10:43 AM

If I may add, you have touched a very good subject.

As you know, the chinese have absorbed a lot of cultural influence from mongols, jurchen etc over the course of history. During this current century, the chinese (ethnicity, not the country) is now exposed to western culture, which is starting to contribute to the identity of the younger generation. I guess it'll be interesting to see how the next generation develops in their thinking, mentality, outlook etc.

#6 TaishanLOVE

TaishanLOVE

    Provincial Governor (Cishi 刺史)

  • CHF Rookie Member
  • 30 posts
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Physical anthropology

Posted 19 May 2011 - 04:06 PM

If I may add, you have touched a very good subject.

As you know, the chinese have absorbed a lot of cultural influence from mongols, jurchen etc over the course of history. During this current century, the chinese (ethnicity, not the country) is now exposed to western culture, which is starting to contribute to the identity of the younger generation. I guess it'll be interesting to see how the next generation develops in their thinking, mentality, outlook etc.


Isn't the cultural influence weak? other than the manchu's qipao and the altaic influence in mandarin language I don't see how they influenced chinese.Mongolian architecture was influenced by chinese, the khitan script was influenced by chinese aswell.

#7 General_Zhaoyun

General_Zhaoyun

    Grand Valiant General of Imperial Han Army

  • Owner
  • 12,281 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore (Taiwanese/Singapore Permanent Resident)
  • Interests:Chinese History, Chinese Philosophy and Religion, Chinese languages, Minnan/Taiwanese language, Classical Chinese, General Chinese Culture
  • Languages spoken:Mandarin, Taiwanese (Hokkien), English, German, Singlish
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese (Taiwanese Hoklo)
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    General Chinese Culture
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese Language, History and Culture

Posted 19 May 2011 - 09:05 PM

Hong Kong( 香港人) vs Taiwan (台灣人) vs Singapore (新加坡人)

Which of these 3 doesn't want to identify as chinese the most? even though they are all different han chinese,they are still han chinese.However nowadays most taiwanese will refer to you "please don't call me chinese,I'm taiwanese".


Taiwanese prefers to be called Taiwanese first than later Chinese. Pro-Taiwan Independence-leaning Taiwanese do not recognize themselves as Chinese nationally (Zhongguoren 中国人), but do not deny their "ethnic Chinese roots" or Chinese cultural roots (Huaren 华人). Only aborigine Taiwanese will not recognize themselves to have Chinese cultural roots (or ethnic Chinese), and they are not culturally or ethnically han-Chinese. Pro-China leaning Taiwanese do recognize themselves as Chinese nationally (Zhongguoren) and culturally Chinese (Huaren). So it's matter of different perceptions amongst Taiwanese people. However, if you're holding a Republic of China (ROC) nationality, you are not just a Taiwanese and by right also a Chinese nationally (Zhongguoren 中国人), though of course in today's world, "Zhongguoren" usually refers to people holding PRC nationality.

It might be better to label Taiwanese as "Huaren 华人" (a neutral label for all Chinese) instead of "Zhongguoren 中国人" (Chinese national) to avoid the controversy. However, in reality, most Taiwanese prefer to be called Taiwanese
Posted ImagePosted Image

"夫君子之行:靜以修身,儉以養德;非淡泊無以明志,非寧靜無以致遠。" - 諸葛亮

One should seek serenity to cultivate the body, thriftiness to cultivate the morals. If you are not simple and frugal, your ambition will not sparkle. If you are not calm and cool, you will not reach far. - Zhugeliang

#8 peger

peger

    Provincial Governor (Cishi 刺史)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 49 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History

Posted 26 May 2011 - 03:01 AM

It's true british founded hong kong and advance them,but this opportunity was given to hong kong people to developed for themselves and made it what they are today.If they didn't they would have been just like philippines,Burma or every other african nation who were colonized in past.All of them were given many opportunities to developed during their colonization but did not succeed while hong kong people did.Hong Kong is only 2% of guangdong(canton) and guangdong served as an very important trading port with rest world.The canton system was also set up in guangdong this is why british were so interested in guangdong, so they took piece of it which became to be known as hong kong.

You can't say singapore was never under chinese rule,it's true that it was under the british before,but after their independence it was mostly under the chinese rule,most of the president was chinese,the majority of the population is also chinese aswell and if the singaporeans chinese don't vote you other ethnics don't have a chance.It's true british advanced singaporeans,but this opportunity was given to the singaporeans people today.All of southeast asia were colonized by european powers in past and were given opportunity but in the end only singapore is the most wealthiest of them all.


Taiwan was developed by japan for long time since it was under it for 50 years, before it was under the spanish rule and dutch rule who they also developed taiwan.Japans was the first asian nation to accept western civilization in all asia.After their surrender,atomic bombing of their country.The japan mainland was under 7 years american rule and allies and Okinawa was under for more than 30 years under american rule, even though it's still has 8 u.s base in japan.Americans build their country and forming modern japan today, the same goes with south korea, it was developed by japan in beginning but it was mostly built by americans.


(I know this has nothing to do with question on the topic but I can't help but feel annoyed about giving all credits to westerners.It's true that western civilization dominated modern asians civilization and world in last 500 years, but since history it was chinese,indian,mesopotamia civilization that have dominated the west and world, for many thousands of years.Europe was still uncivilized during this period.)


I don't think you quite understood my point. What I said had nothing to do with giving Britain or Japan credit for the development/achievements of Taiwan, HK, or Singapore; I was illustrating that all three areas have been heavily influenced by outside cultures in ways mainland China was not, and have thus developed culturally in divergent paths.

In addition, I wasn't saying Singapore has never been ruled by ethnic Chinese, but by mainland China. It seems like you're heavily focusing on ethnic identity whereas I was talking about cultural and political identity. All three groups are obviously still 汉族, but they also clearly have distinct identities.

#9 xng

xng

    Emperor (Huangdi 皇帝)

  • CHF Han Lin Scholar
  • 3,898 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Languages spoken:English, Cantonese, Minnan, Mandarin, Singlish, Thai
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese Language
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese Linguistics, Buddhism, East Asian anthropology

Posted 28 February 2014 - 07:51 AM

I dont know why these people like to be different. They are all still Han Chinese.

 

When Gengzhis Khan united all the different mongol tribes, he created a powerful country.

 

United they stand, ... they fall.

 

It's precisely this disunity, that Japanese and Manchu were able to invade a much greater country than theirs.



#10 mrclub

mrclub

    Emperor (Huangdi 皇帝)

  • Supreme Scholar (Jinshi)
  • 2,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore
  • Interests:Chinese Language/Dialects, history on China, Chinese Culture
  • Languages spoken:English, Mandarin, Singapore Teochew
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese (Teochew People)
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese Language
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Forummer

Posted 02 March 2014 - 08:14 PM


I dont know why these people like to be different. They are all still Han Chinese.

 

Because the issue has been politicized more or less and since we don't live together at all.


Shantou Skyline (汕头市的天际线)
Posted Image

#11 YummYakitori

YummYakitori

    Grand Marshal (Da Sima/Taiwei 大司马/太尉)

  • Supreme Scholar (Jinshi)
  • 1,291 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore
  • Languages spoken:English, Mandarin, Hokkien, Teochew, Korean, Japanese, Mongolian (a bit)
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese 漢族
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Korean History 朝鮮歷史 조선역사

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:35 AM

I dont know why these people like to be different. They are all still Han Chinese.

 

When Gengzhis Khan united all the different mongol tribes, he created a powerful country.

 

United they stand, ... they fall.

 

It's precisely this disunity, that Japanese and Manchu were able to invade a much greater country than theirs.

In China itself, you will see the same disunification even amongst Han Chinese who speak different dialects. Despite being in the same province of Guangdong (广东省), the Cantonese (广府人), Hakka (客家人) and the Teochews (潮州人) draw very distinct lines to separate themselves from one another. Probably this is somewhat understandable since Cantonese (粤语) is a Yue Chinese dialect , Hakka (客家话) is a Gan dialect and Teochew (潮州话) is a Min Chinese dialect.

But even in Fujian Province (福建省), very clear boundaries are drawn to separate people who speak the Minbei (闽北话), Mindong (闽东话), Minnan (闽南话) and in Minnan itself, there are also clear-cut lines drawn to separate the people who speak the Amoy dialect (厦门话), Zhangzhou dialect (漳州话), Quanzhou dialect (泉州话) and Teochew dialect (潮州话).

The reason for this is simply because the Han Chinese race is simply too big. With a population of around 1.4 billion worldwide, many different groups of Han Chinese developed the mindset to think that they are separate from one another. The contributing factor is due to how the Han Chinese in different regions in such a big country like China have developed a lifestyle / form of speech as they deem fit according to where they live in.

It is still prevalent today when you hear terms such as Gaginang (自己人) being used by Teochew speaking people to refer to one another within the same community. 'Ga Gi Nang' is never used to refer to a fellow Han Chinese, it is strictly used to refer to Han Chinese of the Teochew dialect only. Cantonese speakers are never referred to as 'Ga Gi Nang', neither are people who speak other dialects referred to as 'Ga Gi Nang'.

The reason why Genghis Khan was able to unify all the Mongol tribes under his leadership was due to the small population size of these Mongol tribes. Today, there are only around 6 million Mongols (蒙古族) in the People's Republic of China (中华人民共和国) and barely 2.8 million Mongols in the country of Mongolia (independent). This totals up to only around 9 million people and the figure was likely even smaller around 750 years ago.

The number of Teochew dialect speakers today are already at around 12-15 million. Therefore, you can see why Han Chinese are so disunified. You can't compare the Han Chinese with the Mongols - the difference between the population size already speaks volumes.

There are only around 50 million Koreans in South Korea, which gives rise to Korean ultranationalists popping up all over the internet and supporting each other despite the differences they have with one another. Small population sizes are the main factor to which ethnic races are able to unify and recognise each other as one big family. China obviously does not have a small population size.

The extent of disunity in China is almost as if everyone is of a different ethnic race now. If you ever visit any forums based in China, you will see what I mean. There are forums based in Guangdong Province which has Cantonese, Hakka and Teochew quarrelling with one another over 芝麻绿豆的小事 such as 'Which dialect group has the purest Han Chinese?' and all sorts of irrelevant stuff.


Edited by YummYakitori, 03 March 2014 - 02:51 AM.

Буурэг дэрсэнд уурэглэсэн бужин туулай нь ч амгалан Булээн нууранд нь ганганалдсан хотон шувууд нь ч амгалан Буувэй санаа нь ивлэсэн Бусгуй сэптгэл нь ч амгалан хонхон дуутай бойтгийг нь Цэцэг унсэх нь энхрийхэн хöгöн горхины урсгалд нь Цэнгэг хараахай зуггуйхэн Хиртэшгуй ариухан дагшинд нь Монголын узэсгэлэн яруухан

#12 YummYakitori

YummYakitori

    Grand Marshal (Da Sima/Taiwei 大司马/太尉)

  • Supreme Scholar (Jinshi)
  • 1,291 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore
  • Languages spoken:English, Mandarin, Hokkien, Teochew, Korean, Japanese, Mongolian (a bit)
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese 漢族
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Asian History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Korean History 朝鮮歷史 조선역사

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:53 AM

Taiwanese prefers to be called Taiwanese first than later Chinese. Pro-Taiwan Independence-leaning Taiwanese do not recognize themselves as Chinese nationally (Zhongguoren 中国人), but do not deny their "ethnic Chinese roots" or Chinese cultural roots (Huaren 华人). Only aborigine Taiwanese will not recognize themselves to have Chinese cultural roots (or ethnic Chinese), and they are not culturally or ethnically han-Chinese. Pro-China leaning Taiwanese do recognize themselves as Chinese nationally (Zhongguoren) and culturally Chinese (Huaren). So it's matter of different perceptions amongst Taiwanese people. However, if you're holding a Republic of China (ROC) nationality, you are not just a Taiwanese and by right also a Chinese nationally (Zhongguoren 中国人), though of course in today's world, "Zhongguoren" usually refers to people holding PRC nationality.

It might be better to label Taiwanese as "Huaren 华人" (a neutral label for all Chinese) instead of "Zhongguoren 中国人" (Chinese national) to avoid the controversy. However, in reality, most Taiwanese prefer to be called Taiwanese

I think GZ sums it up pretty well. It's the same for Singaporean Chinese. We identify ourselves as 'Huaren 华人' but certainly not 'Zhongguoren 中国人', but in reality, most of us still prefer people to call us Singaporeans (that is, unless you are talking to an immigrant from Mainland China)


Буурэг дэрсэнд уурэглэсэн бужин туулай нь ч амгалан Булээн нууранд нь ганганалдсан хотон шувууд нь ч амгалан Буувэй санаа нь ивлэсэн Бусгуй сэптгэл нь ч амгалан хонхон дуутай бойтгийг нь Цэцэг унсэх нь энхрийхэн хöгöн горхины урсгалд нь Цэнгэг хараахай зуггуйхэн Хиртэшгуй ариухан дагшинд нь Монголын узэсгэлэн яруухан

#13 xng

xng

    Emperor (Huangdi 皇帝)

  • CHF Han Lin Scholar
  • 3,898 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Languages spoken:English, Cantonese, Minnan, Mandarin, Singlish, Thai
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese Language
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese Linguistics, Buddhism, East Asian anthropology

Posted 03 March 2014 - 05:00 AM

The extent of disunity in China is almost as if everyone is of a different ethnic race now. If you ever visit any forums based in China, you will see what I mean. There are forums based in Guangdong Province which has Cantonese, Hakka and Teochew quarrelling with one another over 芝麻绿豆的小事 such as 'Which dialect group has the purest Han Chinese?' and all sorts of irrelevant stuff.

 

That's why a small country such as manchu and mongolia can conquer china  because of all these internal bickerings.

 

there's a famous chinese quote,

 

we come from the same roots, why then do we 'sear/burn' each other anxiously?


Edited by xng, 03 March 2014 - 05:09 AM.


#14 xng

xng

    Emperor (Huangdi 皇帝)

  • CHF Han Lin Scholar
  • 3,898 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Languages spoken:English, Cantonese, Minnan, Mandarin, Singlish, Thai
  • Ethnic Groups or Race:Han Chinese
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese Language
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    Chinese Linguistics, Buddhism, East Asian anthropology

Posted 03 March 2014 - 05:05 AM

I think GZ sums it up pretty well. It's the same for Singaporean Chinese. We identify ourselves as 'Huaren 华人' but certainly not 'Zhongguoren 中国人', but in reality, most of us still prefer people to call us Singaporeans (that is, unless you are talking to an immigrant from Mainland China) in malya

 

Everyone's ancestors in Singapore are immigrants from mainland china at one time or another.

 

Even LKY who is a baba , one of earliest chinese who arrived in malaya admit they're not anglo or malay but have roots in china.



#15 Eidolon

Eidolon

    Grand Guardian (Taibao 太保)

  • Master Scholar (Juren)
  • 241 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Main Interest in CHF:
    Chinese History
  • Specialisation / Expertise:
    none

Posted 07 April 2014 - 02:06 PM

Of the three groups, Taiwanese have the greatest resistance to the idea that they are ethnically Chinese. However, the caveat is that this applies only to a section of Taiwanese society - albeit this section is becoming the majority. The conflict within Taiwan between the KMT and the DPP is, to a degree, a conflict of identity: the KMT, based in the north, is the bastion of Chinese nationalism in Taiwan, being comprised primarily of recent, Mandarin speaking immigrants. The DPP, based in the south, stands for the old Min speaking Fujian immigrants who came during the Ming and the Qing, and who intermarried greatly with the native Austronesian aborigines. The two groups are a microcosm, in a way, of the north-south divide that had existed in China proper during periods of disunity.

 

Unfortunately, history studies have been affected by this conflict. DPP aligned writers have been at the forefront of a revisionist movement to 'de-sinicize' Taiwan, for example by stating that there was no 'Chinese' identity to begin with, that the Huaxia have long died out, etc. Ironically, these ideas, initially created to support Taiwanese independence, were later used by Korean and Japanese nationalists to attack Chinese and Taiwanese as a whole. There is a profound lesson about identity politics here: within a group, internal differences are magnified; when viewed from without, however, the tendency is to stereotype.


Edited by Eidolon, 07 April 2014 - 02:13 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users