please don’t just throw out the last names of random scholars and expect me to know either who they are or which works you are specifically referring to. The only one I recognize on the first list is Antonio Gramsci and his claim to fame is on the concept of imperfect hegemony and wrote nothing about Taiwan whatsoever.
Details…
That’s typical Taiwanese ignorant and foolishness that is so evident in recent years. Put it this way, you can call yourself a superman if you want to. But it is up to the world to decide if you are indeed one.
I stress again that the word “Chinese” does not strictly refer to being 中國人. The word also refers to “華人”. Look up any dictionary. There are Chinese race (migrants) in every corner of the world.
Citizens are called “Taiwanese” irregardless of race, language or religion. Hakka’s, Minams, migrants, aboriginies all are called Taiwanese. Taiwan infact is a multiracial community, of different origines right?
When we ask are you Chinese? we meant are you 華人? The answer is beyond contestation.
there is only one race: the human race. you can draw all the lines in the sand you want to help you divide the pie but at the end of the day there is but one human race. studies in DNA have shown northern chinese to be more closely related to europeans than southern chinese. all human beings came out of africa. playing the “race card” despite the realizations of microbiology to bolster nationalism has been taboo in western republics for half a century. hopefully, someday such realizations will be taught in “han” nations (including korea).
China, as like Europe and India, is not a small, racially homogenous nation but a large, ethnically & linguistically diverse subcontinent. Just as there are subdivisions between Indians and Europeans but an idea of an over-encompassing concept of “India” and “Europe”, so the same should apply to “China”. A Dane and a Greek look totally different, have totally different cultures, speak totally different languages, but are both Europeans. Taiwanese are a legitimate subdivision of the Chinese family of ethnicities. There is no one Chinese ethnicity, or even spoken language, but a multiethnic/linguistic framework. A common written language and shared history & certain common cultural values unite the various Chinese, just as the Latin (or Cyrillic) alphabet & Judeo-Christian/Greek philosophical heritage unite Europeans. China is a more solid foundation than the more recent and more artificial concepts of the EU and India, since it’s been around a lot longer.
Besides, nearly everybody has multiple identities. The ethnic, linguistic, national, religious identities are all separate identities.
There are ethnic Chinese - huaren. Not all of them live in China, nor necessarily speak Chinese (many ABC’s, for example). 華人
There are citizens of the People’s Republic of China. 中國人
There are those that speak one of the Chinese languages.
There are those that follow one of the traditional Chinese faiths/philosophies and are culturally shaped by the traditional Chinese ways of thinking. Just as once a Catholic (or Mormon, Baptist, etc.), always a Catholic, no matter if in adult life you become an atheist, so Confucianism/Taoism/Buddhism cuts into the Chinese mindset to the core, no matter if intellectually they reject traditional Chinese superstitions. For example, if you shunt your parents off into a nursing home to get them out of your hair, then culturally you are not Chinese; lack of excessive filial piety is a Western value.
[quote=“mod lang”]China, as like Europe and India, is not a small, racially homogenous nation but a large, ethnically & linguistically diverse subcontinent. Just as there are subdivisions between Indians and Europeans but an idea of an over-encompassing concept of “India” and “Europe”, so the same should apply to “China”. A Dane and a Greek look totally different, have totally different cultures, speak totally different languages, but are both Europeans. Taiwanese are a legitimate subdivision of the Chinese family of ethnicities. There is no one Chinese ethnicity, or even spoken language, but a multiethnic/linguistic framework. A common written language and shared history & certain common cultural values unite the various Chinese, just as the Latin (or Cyrillic) alphabet & Judeo-Christian/Greek philosophical heritage unite Europeans. China is a more solid foundation than the more recent and more artificial concepts of the EU and India, since it’s been around a lot longer.
Besides, nearly everybody has multiple identities. The ethnic, linguistic, national, religious identities are all separate identities.
There are ethnic Chinese - huaren. Not all of them live in China, nor necessarily speak Chinese (many ABC’s, for example). 華人
There are citizens of the People’s Republic of China. 中國人
There are those that speak one of the Chinese languages.
There are those that follow one of the traditional Chinese faiths/philosophies and are culturally shaped by the traditional Chinese ways of thinking. Just as once a Catholic (or Mormon, Baptist, etc.), always a Catholic, no matter if in adult life you become an atheist, so Confucianism/Taoism/Buddhism cuts into the Chinese mindset to the core, no matter if intellectually they reject traditional Chinese superstitions. For example, if you shunt your parents off into a nursing home to get them out of your hair, then culturally you are not Chinese; lack of excessive filial piety is a Western value.[/quote]
I think that a number of the points you have made are contestable.
See the complete dissection of these issues in Burroughs, DeLislet, Mickelmeier, Daltongroing, Attalyip, and Cakamunger. Those are the standard reference works on the subjects you have mentioned.
In my Cultural Anthropology class, when referring to a category such as “Chinese” it should come under ethnicity not race… I can’t quite rememebr the difference, so if someone knows please clarify. I recall it being something as Asian being more race-oriented, and the sub category of Chinese being ethnicity.
As a Taiwanese-American I get quite offended when called Chinese. I mean people can mistakenly call me Chinese, and that is ok, but when people know that I consider myself Taiwanese and still call me Chinese, I can get really pissed off…
The reason behind this is that I’m 14th generation Taiwanese (1.5 Gen American). There are a lot of cultural differences between Chinese and Taiwanese as well as many similar, but overall they aren’t exactly the same, which is why there should be a distinction. A lot of Taiwanese customs did not come from China.
I believe that a lot of the so-called “younger generation” referring to themselves as Chinese comes a lot from the fact that distinction between “taiwan ren and zhong guo ren” is not taught until they are older and decide to learn the history. I didn’t start to call myself Taiwanese(-American) until about 4 years ago when I started to learn the history and cultural differences.
This can be seen as similar to those who call themselves Canto(nese) or those who call themselves Tibetens… right? They are “considered” part of Chinese, but there is quite a difference between the culture to so-called mainstream Chinese culture.
I guess overall, people are going to identify themselves as they wish and you should respect how they want to identify themselves. I take pride in strong Taiwanese identity so I’d definately rather be referred to as Taiwanese.
(Oh, and if you want more examples, you can definately think of the minority populations in Japan, ie: Okinawans/Ryuukyu Islanders, Ainu, etc etc)
I think your analysis is spot on Mod Lang.
Specifically, like Europe and European, China and Chinese are concepts (as are all ethnic identities).
I think that it should be quite clear that all ethnic terminology we use has imprecise, shifting and contestable meaning. There is quite enough room for one person to declare “I am Taiwanese” whilst another int he same position would say “I am Taiwanese” and neither can be called right or wrong.
The choices are made for personal reasons and these often include the political. We should not disagree with the terminology that people use just because we disagree with their politics, unless we make it clear that it is the politics we are disagreeing with. Thus, it is a bit silly and even sneaky to try and say to someone “you are wrong to call him Chinese, he is Taiwanese”. Instead you should say “if you agree that Taiwan is not a part of China, then you are wrong to say he is Chinese”.
Brian
Agreed! I think Taiwanese should take the position as the general identifier unless otherwise mentioned, not the other way around. In Taiwan you hear people say, " my Chinese friends, Chinese girls, the Chinese in my building, the Chinese guy at the office…" Chinese are in China. What are they doing in Taiwan? Are they legal?
Taiwanese is a better blanket identifier that more people can fit under without being insulting. Many Taiwanese I first met in Taiwan set me straight and many old people I know feel very strongly against being Chinese from living under White Terror. On the other hand, the Term Taiwanese is generally accepted by all colors of the political spectrum.
China is a nation. The people of that nation recognize themselves as Chinese. The term Chinese is an English word to describe the people of China. As a nation, China is a political entity with borders defining China drawn by political entities and the definition of the Chinese border is not an agreed on matter for political reasons. Within the political entity of China there are, according to the PRC, 56 ethnicities. Each Chinese ethnic group belongs to the nation of China and for the most part accept their national identity, making them Chinese. There is no single ethnic group in China called the Chinese, but rather Han, Hakka, Shi, Miao, Nian, Hui etc…
Han is the dominant ethnicity and culture in China based mainly on Confucian ideals of filial piety and subservience to the Emperor including the obligation to pay tax.
Mainly Han and Hakka males came to Taiwan from Fu Zhou, Fu Jian and Guang dong. Those men married aboriginal women or the offspring of mixed marriages on Taiwan and their descendants became the majority of modern Taiwanese. That doesn’t matter.
Taiwan is its own political entity and most Taiwanese consider themselves to belong to a political Taiwan, but many also feel a strong han identity based on their continuing of Han customs.
Han is the correct ethnic/cultural identity for those who wish to ignore the aboriginal genes considering the dominant cultureresembled Han as Han was economically advantageous in early Taiwan.
Chinese, Taiwanese, Formosan, Dokamin, Gao Shan, Tong bao
are all political terms for differing cultural polities on Taiwan. The term “Taiwanese” is more accurate for it covers ALL the people on the political and physical Taiwan.
Chinese are in China!!!
[quote=“maowang”]
China is a nation. The people of that nation recognize themselves as Chinese. The term Chinese is an English word to describe the people of China. [/quote]
So chinese only exist in china, is that what you mean?
Show me your dictionary…
Joannie, you must have heard of the term ABC, but have you ever heard of ABT?
maowang, if you don’t have a proper dictionary, click on the links below:
m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?b … &x=12&y=17
bartleby.com/61/3/C0300300.html
dictionary.reference.com/search?q=chinese
The word “Chinese” is often referred to 華人 instead of 中國人. Apparently, you choose to ignore the fact that there are millions of Chinese (華人) from South-East Asia, their ancestors left mainland china for the South some 200 years ago. It’s about the same time that your ancestors left for Taiwan.
FYI, the current population of Chinese in South East Asia is greater than the total population of Taiwan. They are 華人 a.k.a “Chinese”, so are you.
Uhhhhh… the dictionary definition is a bunk reply. Once again, Hua Ren is dealing with Chinese as those people under the political China and is probably being misused. Hua being magnificent or great or Chinese the political entity. All those Hua Ren are linking to a political history, not ethnic.In Taiwan, Taiwanese is the proper term for generalizing because it deals with the immediate reality of a shared space rather than constructed myths of the historical narrative.
My two boys are half-Taiwanese.
OK now what is the english word for 華人 (hua2 ren2)?
My wife is Pingpu apart from a Chinese great-great-great-great (or something) grandfather. To describe her as “Chinese” would be like me trying to claim that I’m Monrovian rather than Scottish since that’s where my great-great-great-whatever grandaddy came from in the 10th century.
I’ve always heard people refer to themselves as ABC, but I’ve never personally used the term. It’s always been Taiwanese-American for me. Yes I was born in America, but ABC was just never really in my vocabulary. Anyway, ABC is a coined identity, people who want to identify with it, do, people who don’t, dont.
But both Monrovians and Scots are Europeans. Scottish is a subdivision of European. Taiwanese is a subdivision of Chinese.
There’s a word to umbrella all of us people of European descent - Westerner. Chinese umbrellas all of the people that are ethnically descended from Chinese and adhere to Chinese language & culture.
I mean, you say you’re not Chinese, then what are you doing reading in Chinese characters? Taking a week off for Chinese New Year, making offerings at the temples, eating noodles with chopsticks, etc.? Culturally and linguistically most Taiwanese are 90% Chinese. There are differences between Cantonese and Hakka and Shanghainese and Taiwanese, sure - but they’re all basically Chinese. There are great differences between Czechs and Romanians and Russians, too, but they’re all basically Slavs. I don’t think this concept is that hard to grasp.
What about the millions of overseas Chinese that have lived for generations in Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines? They still refer to themselves as Chinese and seem quite proud of that fact. So do most people of Chinese descent in the West. There are Chinatowns all over the world, in almost every major city bar Mecca and Medina. This issue of Chinese vs. Taiwanese seems more a problem of the Taiwanese identity crisis than anything else; it only seems to bother Taiwanese - I mean, you don’t see people in Hong Kong claiming that they’re not Chinese, except in the strictly political sense. I don’t mind being considered a Westerner; that’s what I am, same as you are Chinese.
[quote=“songzzz”]
OK now what is the English word for 華人 (hua2 ren2)?[/quote]
A slippery concept, but in my opinion, a huaren is an “ethnic Han Chinese,” or just “ethnic Chinese.” I’ve never once heard a non-Han PRC or ROC citizen call himself a “Huaren,” but I have heard a few (a minority, I might add) call themselves Zhongguoren. I’ve known plenty of pro-unification ROC citizens who take offense at being called “Huaren.” To them, that’s just shy of being called a huaqiao.
Careful laddie! Them’s fighting words. Next you’ll be trying to tell me I’m in some way related to those damned sassenachs! :raspberry:
I think it is safe to say that only the Taiwanese currently have an identity issue due to the politics of TI at this time.
Every other Chinese person has no problem saying they are Chinese because political claim to their territory has been resolved.
Only because the USA is the current dominate exporter of cultural identity do you see some ABC or ABT even tried to tackle the issue.
Chinese people already resolved this issue a few hundred years ago and invented the term Hua Ciao, Overseas Chinese.
Ask someone who is Wen Zhou, Cantonese, Ke Jia, Toishan, HK, or Singaporian Chinese if they are Chinese. And they will answer with no political qualifiers that they are Chinese.
Scotland v Monrovia?!? Who would win…
(probably the Faroes!)
