07-09-2017, 10:30 AM
(07-09-2017, 02:40 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > The identification of China with "Mongolians" is about as outre as
> would be the identification of Russia with "Mongolians". The
> Mongols were central Asian; they were the perennial enemies of
> China. Yes, they did take over China once, but they took over
> Russia at the same time. The dynasty they established in China,
> as usual with "barbarian" dynasties who took control of China,
> eventually became Sinicized and lost its foreign character, and
> has in the centuries since been succeeded by several additional
> dynasties which had nothing to do with the Mongols.
> It's not clear to me if the Mongols still exist as a geopolitical
> force today. If they did, they'd be associated with Mongolia and
> Kazakhstan not with China. Vestiges of the old adversarial
> relationship between the Mongols and the Chinese do still exist
> today in the conflicts in Xinjiang between the Uighurs and the
> ethnic Han.
The 1206 victory of the Mongols over the Han Chinese still has
enormous impact on Chinese thinking today.
** 6-Dec-10 News -- Mongol invasion of China in 1206 has impact today
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/x...tm#e101206
Han Chinese adopted much from Mongol culture, and many aspects of the
two cultures merged -- culturally, not ethnically.
After the Mongols conquered the Han Chinese, they went on to attack
the Russians. The Russian culture has definitely NOT merged with the
Mongol/Chinese culture. For example, the Chinese adopted the Mongols'
agricultural tax system and a four-tiered system for bureaucratic
preference, while the Russians did not do anything of the sort. So
your silly "outré" comment is completely incompetent.
(07-09-2017, 02:40 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Conflation of China with "Mongolians" would explain a lot about
> the questionable parts of your theorizing.
You're becoming increasingly hysterical.
