Comparing Asian Nationalities | Asian American Poll

COMPARING ASIAN NATIONALITIES
(Updated Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, 04:39:09 AM to reflect the 100 most recent valid responses.)

CONTACT US | ADVERTISING INFO

© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.

WHAT YOU SAY

[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]

I have read somewhere that the Coreans have two descendants: the Mongols from Mongolia and the Ural-Altaic(Aryans from western and central Asia) groups. I think. I am not clarified if my information is correct. I also know that the Chinese have about 55 different minorities in China, though the Hans make the largest group.
chinalova Thursday, June 06, 2002 at 05:39:31 (PDT)

To Filipino Language

wow really, how come when i hear filipinos speaking tagalog its sounds kinda chinese or maybe viatnamese?
danish girl interested Thursday, June 06, 2002 at 01:42:00 (PDT)

rare stuff,

Are the Oguz you referring to, the Central Asian Turkmens?

Turkmens have features that are both East Asian and Mediterranean.

http://www.turkmensahra.com

Check out the Turkmens of photos:

#110 and #66

#110 looks absolutely Han Chinese.
tri Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 23:59:44 (PDT)

Dravidians are a Hamatic and not a Negroid people thus their origins are not from Nubia. Also The Dravidians had been living in the Indus valley for over 10,000 years before they came about to form the Indus valley civilization. Prior to that, they spent the last 40,000 years in what is middle east. Your theory about Dravidians being from Nubia is flawed for two major reasons. The main one being the time line since the people known as Dravidians had left Africa thousands of years before there ever was a Nubia or any city state for that matter. The other reason is that you are basically making an uneducated connection to explain a similarity in skin color. The Dravidic language has no familial root with modern or ancient African lanuages. Infact its closest linguist cousins are dead languages that were once spoken in Mesopotamia and the Middle East (Prior to Arabization in 700 AD). The theory taht there is a relationship between the Dravidians and China's early Shang dynasty is quite possible as archeologists have proven a trading link bewtween both river valley civilizations as early as 2200 BC.
Hence there was also an exchange of ideas, words and beliefs between both civilizations.
A unique footnote to this is that in the Mahabharata (written around 1200 B.C). The emperor of China is mentioned in the epic as sending gifts to the victorious Pande clan of Arjuna. He is referred to in Sanskrit as the "Son of Heaven" and ruler of the eastern kingdom of Cheen.
Makadu Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 23:10:57 (PDT)

Malaysian-Eurasian Gal18
Bah, malaysians do not like chinese, especially, because the ones living in Singapore. I know, Im one of them. You dont drive a car with S'pore plates to Malaysia and safely leave it alone.
Singaporeman Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 22:14:29 (PDT)

One more thing before I go to sleep:

I just remembered someone mentioning "Puyo Manchurians" founding Paekje kingdom in the previous post. You might as well or rather should replace the word "Manchurians" with "Koreans" to avoid the confusion because the Manchurians you referred are not the same/familiar Manchus that conquered and ruled China from 17th century on until 20th century. I exactly know what you meant and you are perfectly right in using that term. Absolutely. However, because most people in the world today don't know that we Koreans occupied and ruled Manchuria/Northern China/Siberia/ETC., for much of our history, sometimes in loosely formed tribal confederation with other related ethnic groups, it might confuse some people who are not familiar with ancient Korean history, you know. If someone says Puyo Manchurians, people probably or rather automatically will refer to those Manchus who founded Qing Dynasty, and not think of us Koreans at all. They dont' know what Puyo is. Yes, Manchurians of old time meant us Koreans, but from modern perspective, no longer valid.

Anyway, a few days ago, I came upon an anonymous internet site(a Korean site to mind you) that had some interesting features about a certain history book written by a very prominent Manchu scholar back in 18th century. Boy, I was somewhat surprised by what I read. I confess that I have never heard of such a book before in my life. And I haven't lived in Korea for the past 25 years. Yet, as I read the main points of what the book was all about, I remembered a certain thread I wrote on Corean Reunification forum which was deleted by Goldsea. In that thread, out of frustration/retaliation against some annoying Chinese posters, I basically came up with my own silly theory about Altaic race and Koreans in general. I thought it was pretty reasonable/valid -- for most part.
In this history book written by an eminent Manchu scholar, you can almost see the same kind of reasoning albeit it was written with extreme Manchucentric point of view. And old Korean scholars and ruling class didn't like this book at all from what the site webmaster said.

Basically, what the book said was that Koreans and Manchus are blood brothers, together forming the main/essential/vital parts of so-called Greater Manchuria Tribal Confederation or something dating back thousands of years ago. It is our right to rule Manchuria, Northern China and yes, even the whole of China since that's what the Greater Manchuria Tribal Confederation had done for thousands of years. And now, since Manchus are in power, their blood brothers Koreans should do everything they can to comply with Manchu rules and help Manchus to perpetuate this Confederation and so on and so on. It was very interesting. This Manchu scholar went to great length/detail to write about ancient Korean history, specifically focusing on those prehistoric times when various tribal states were in existence before the Three Kingdom period began. He wrote about how Koreans along with Manchus/or rather Jurchens, Turkic, some Mongol, and other various Tungustic groups formed the early tribal confederation, and thereby citing such an association stressed the kinship between Koreans and Manchus. Also, he used up a lot of ink on Goguryo...and on others which had some significant influence in Manchuria...

Of course, Korean scholars/ruling class, who were suffering from a thousand years of China-worship syndrome, wrote a retaliatory response saying how Koreans and Manchus are this different and that different and so on and so on. They feel humiliated and indignant...

My take on this: forget about Manchuria, Northern China or Siberia. We Koreans or so-called the Greater Manchuria Tribal Confederation will never be able to take back those lost territories. If one think we could, he/she is a lunatic. They are gone forever.

However, we cannot, I repeat we simply cannnot, let our history be stolen from us either. We can never allow, particularly Chinese and Japanese to steal our history or distort/destroy it...

I don't know what they are teaching back in Korea or China/Japan. I don't even know what they are teaching in those Asian American History classes or Ancient Korean/Chinese/Japanese history classes at the universities in this country. However, after reading many postings authored by young teenagers or college students -- I presume a great number of them are from California where they are taught the history of East Asia -- I'm beginning to be worried, and feels somewhat helpless...After all, there are so many Chinese, and so few of us...Japanese? Hahaha...

One Korean Man Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 21:48:09 (PDT)

The blacks in china theory is highly debatable. I suggest you check out this site.

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Bay/7051/Southchina1.htm
There's no black in China Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 21:18:01 (PDT)

Even though I'm not an expert, let me add a few more things concerning Korean/Japanese languages. And a few others.

Not only am I running out of patience/time but I admit, I'm running out of ammunition as well due to my lack of knowledge in this subject. If one is willing, I bet there are thousands of internet sources from which he or she can easily gather more accurate, indepth, scholarly opinions regarding this particular topic. And hopefully he or she can come to the same conclusion that I had had some 10-15 years ago. Then again, based on what other posters have written/argued, there seems to be such a strong disagreement among contemporary international scholars (who are the original authors of many research papers quoted on internet sites, I assume) that I feel it might be really difficult for an average or even a highly intelligent person to arrive at any concrete/definite conclusion -- which I was able to do about a decade ago. Yes, I personally find this on-going discord very very surprising/disturbing and extremely frustrating. Yet I understand why.

After all, that's what many intellectuals/scholars like to do, you know, ARGUE and DISAGREE!, particularly in the fields of humanity/social sciences. Even as physical or natural science disciplines are much more clear-cut in comparison, biologists/physicists/chemists/etc., still do the same thing, and often come up with totally different interpretation/conclusion regarding same data!! Why? There are many legitimate reasons/motives as you can imagine, and sometimes it's better not to come to any universal agreement, maybe in fear of tarnishing one's academic/professional reputation for one thing. But, then in other cases, petty personal ambition/greed/jealousy/prejudice/nationalism/etc., play a major role contributing to the incessant fights/shaping up what a scientist is -- how fraud he/she may actually be. If you really know what kind of person sometimes roses up through ranks of academic hierarchy and be a tenured professor, you wouldn't want your own children sitting in his or her classroom/lecture...

As unified or cohesive a Korean American community may seem to appear to outsiders, in academia, that's not the case at all -- at least from what I've heard over the years. It's a well-documented history/trend that some K-A scholar loves to devour/attack and destroy nobody but his/her own fellow K-A professor(s) for whatever personal/professional reasons/gains. Maybe deservedly so in certain instances. Anyway, this sickening psychotic/cannibalistic behavior is especially prevalent among those with the FOB background...

Several of my old friends of Korean descent are now assistant professors at various universities across USA, some considered to be "the top institutuons of higher learning." Let me just say that they are not saints at all. Far from it. Personality-wise, some are even worse than those on well-fare system...We are all a product of our society/environment/upbringing no matter how learned/scholarly we become later on...

Then, let's look at professors/scholars -- so-called the elite intellectual class and who are in charge of educating and leading the masses -- of European/Chinese/Japanese ancestry.

Boy, just knowing how historically biased/extremely nationalistic these people have been -- as I mentioned in the previous post to some length in citing some acts of irrational Japanese historians, I wouldn't feel too comfortable in taking up their words at the face value. Be careful...Need I even mention some of the examples I've found here on Goldsea among "average" Chinese posters with their extreme/distorted Sinocentric views? Where did they get all this prejudiced and sometimes plain idiotic opinions from? Young and immature they are, yes...Once again, young and immature...So, you were the ones who built the Aztec empire and their glorious ancient civilization? Maybe old Chinese people conqured/populated the whole continent of America hundreds of years before when white people were still living on the trees...Haha...And as a result, both North and Latin Americas rightfully belong to the modern Chinese as birth-right. Is that what you are saying? You have more rights to be/live in this country than any other ethnic groups. Don't make me puke...So, if it is true at all, in the end what does that prove to you? Look up in world history and learn what happened to the native Americans on this continent. No excuses/blame games, please. Yeah, same sort of thing happened when Europeans came to China to mind you. I didn't want to mention about Koreans, Jurchens, Manchus, Huns, Mongols, and other various ethnic groups who once ruled over huge parts of or conquered the whole of China while vastly vastly outnumbered by the Han Chinese, but that's a part of your heritage too. Rather a huge huge
part of your history. Don't try to underestimate or hide the profound
influences that the latter grous had on your culture/racial make-up, even language/military aspects/
etc, particularly in northern China,
while trying to only assert or emphasize your influence on other Asian nations at every given opportunity. BTW, Beijing is believed to be founded
by one of those Eastern barbarians that you Han Chinese refered to, specifically Jurchens. Yes, Jurchens had been completely assimilated into the northern Han Chinese population centuries ago, and had been extinct, much like Manchus(who were the descendants of Jurchens)
, many Mongols, even some Huns, etc., who met the similar fate. They have been completely Sinicized
now,linguistically, ethnologically and culturally, etc.
I mean, conquering China is one thing, but governing it/staying in power
is extremely
difficult for obvious reasons...

At any rate, I know some Jurchens were a part of loosely composed ancient Korean tribal confederations, along with some Turkic people, some Manchus, some Mongols, and other various Altaic strains before the so-called Three Kingdoms period emerged about 2000 years or so ago...

Thank God, at least, Koreans -- despite losing vast amount of our ancient territory and basically confined to the present-day Korean peninsula -- have been able to keep our own identity/language/racial integrity/etc., to this day unlike our unfortunate
cousins from old days...

Do try to see the whole picture, please even though you may be young/immature or maybe even fairly advanced in age and blinded by your undying love for your motherland...At least Korea is a tiny tiny nation in comparison...

However, Japanese are the worst IMO. They are totally helpless, and I genuinely feel sorry for them becaue I fully understand why...

Well, let me just say this; generally-speaking I consider myself well-educated and above average in intelligence. And I'd like to think that although I tend to be Koreancentric from time to time, overall, I'm very open-minded and fairly unbiased when it comes to Japanese or Chinese related issues. Having lived in this country for a quarter of a century have prevented me from adopting some of old world views/ or extreme anti-Japan sentiments which seem to be prevalent among many modern Koreans.

In any case, broadly-speaking
I think Koreans only retaliate when provoked by outsiders...

Okay, back to the discussion; yeah, it's getting really tiresome for me. I'll just say this and shut up.

Forget about those linguistic scholars for now, okay?

Let's listen to what average people -- people just like you and me -- say about Korean and Japanese languages.

Almost universally, Westerners who had lived in both Japan and Korea remarked on the fact that how similar Korean and Japanese sound to each other. Many of them were dumbfounded.
I guess they figured that since Korea is bordered right next to China, and Korean culture has many similarities with those of China, etc., plus Korean surnames/or many nouns appear to be of Chinese origin, Korean language had to be closely related to Chinese, not to Japanese. They quickly found out their preconceived notions were entirely wrong.

And then there are hundreds of exchange students who studied in Korea or Japan, Koreans in Japan and Japanese in Korea. Once again, universally, they remarked on the remarkable similarities between two languages, e.g., how similar many words with same meaning do pronounce alike or identical in Korean and Japanese. More importantly, they discovered a great number of similar/identical traits in grammar/syntax/morphology/etc., etc...
Both Korean and Japanese exchage students conclusively claimed that it was relatively very easy for them to learn other's language -- of course, I think they were comparing to English -- because of so many of fundamental similarities shared between the two respective languages.

One of my old in-laws(my brother's father in-law) was a middle-school principal back in Korea. He could speak and write perfect Japanese. He also said the same thing to my brother while I was visiting Washington D.C.

And then there are linguists/scholars. What can we do about them, huh? I don't remember too many details that these people wrote comparing the two languages. As I said, it's been long time since I read up on this subject. And the ones I remembered clearly, I listed in my previous post albeit only a few.

In any case, what I gathered and concluded from reading such articles were that yes, the quantity is very impressive and convincing, but the QUALITIES of evidences that the articles presented were so overwhelming/striking as to
leave no doubt whatsoever regarding the relationship between K- and J- languages. There can be no other explanation to link not only the quantitative aspects of similarites, but also QUALITATIVE aspects of similarites between the languages, but to the common ancestor shared by Korean and Japanese languages in ancient times...

Sure, as with any two languages, there are some differences and I read them also. However, the differences between Korean and Japanese languages
seemed very artificial in nature, and can be bascially explained by the
geographical isolation that the two languages went through. Yes, there were some points made about possible foreign influence, particularly in Japanese, like how phonetically Japanese sounded somewhat Austropolynesian or whatever compared to Korean which still maintained its continental roots/sound, etc., etc.

Same kind of arguments were used to link Korean and Japanese to the Ural-Altaic language sub-family. Yes, the evidences were very convincing in the same way regarding Korean and Japanese linguistical relationship. A few argued that Korean should belong to the Ural group along with Finnish, Estonian and Hungarian(Magyar) languages. Majority accepted the Altaic grouping.
I don't understand what the current
controversy is all about, yet I think I'm beginning to understand as to why...

BTW, Korean and Mongolian share about 500 words that have exactly same meaning and pronounce exactly the same way. From what I read, if two languages
share these many words with same meaning and same pronouncition, the relateness/relatioship is indisputable. They are related. Period.

Bottom line = if you insist, go ahead and maintain the independent groupings that these contemporary
linguists insist upon. However, if you believe in greater cause or whatever, try to become like the Russian scholars or whoever and help them in solving the mystery surrounding the origin of human languages even though I suspect tremendous difficulties will lie ahead of them.
I happen to belong to the latter, maybe because I'm a Christian by conviction and I believe in the story of Tower of Babel, etc. I mean, you don't have to believe in biblical story to see the relationship between Ural-Altaic languages and K-/J- languages...

Of course, as I mentioned in the previous post, solving linguistical relationship doesn't always solve the racial/ethnological relationship/origin. Yet, it is a very powerful tool, and for most part, it is accurate...

If you think otherwise, why don't we just agree to disagree? That's fine too, yet I think it's very regrettable...

Okay, yes, modern Korean is mainly derived from Shilla language. Yet, I must tell you that all three languages spoken in Goguro, Paekje and Shilla came from one common ancetor, Puyo language I think. It's just that because of greater geographical isolation Shilla kingdom had to go through -- I mean, Shilla kingdom was a tiny tiny province based in small province called Kyungju in southeastern part of Korean peninsula and remained in obscurity while its two northern neighbors flourished in the early part of three kingdom era, over time Shilla language didn't have as much Puyo language chracters as Goguro or Packje languages did. It's been found that Shilla language had a considerable amount of different-sounding words particularly from its most northern neighbor, the Goguro words. As some of you might know, Goguro was a northern kingdom and Shilla a southern one with Paekje roughly falling in-between. Not exactly accurate, but that's sufficient for this particular argument. Scholars also have found, that between Paekje and Shilla languages, the difference in vocabulary was very minimal at best and the people from two respective kingdoms could communicate with relative ease. It appeared that Goguro and Shilla people also could communicate with relative ease.

However, if Goguro -- the northern part -- and Shilla people --the southeren part -- wanted to communicate to each other, often Paekje people had to come in-between as mediators to help facilitate the communication.

Anyway, yes, Shilla kingdom finally unified Korean peninsula in 6th or early part of 7th century and ruled until 10th century. However, their capital was still based in Kyungju, the southeatern city, and the influence of Shilla language on the whole peninsula was not as great or profound as one might suspect. Many people from old Goguryo territory still spoke Puyo language. When Goryo kingdom replaced Shilla, the capital was moved to Gaesung, just above present day Seoul. Gaesung was a part of old Goguryo kingdom where original Puyo language was spoken. And because of this move, Shilla language started to adopt back some of Puyo characters, particularly in vocabulary. Anyway, the backbone of modern Korean language still came from Shilla language when all is said and done. It's a hybrid of the languages spoken in the three kingdoms, but Shilla characters are predominant. From Goryo kingdom on, the peninsula basically had one common language with same set of common vocabulary although regional dialects existed. Of course, Seoul dialect became the direct forefather of modern Korean language when Chosun dynasty was founded in 14th century...

I don't understand why some poster suggested that Kaya kingdom was founded my Malay-type people?! Where did you get that information anyway? Please feel free to enlighten me. I'm not denying that some Malay type people might have existed in prehistoric Korea, they probably did. But to suggest that one kingdom, albeit very very small in size, was founded by such people is too speculative at best. This is in line with some Korean scholars who claim that so-called Samhan states were founded by Ainu people. They cite some Korean words that have very very common/similar features with Ainu language and other very speculative historical references, and so on. We Koreans know that Ainu people did exist on Korean peninsula, albeit very small in number, but suggesting an Ainu-originated kingdom is going too far IMO...Anyway, much history of Kaya kingdom or Samhan confederation along with other various tribal states, is shrouded in great mystery, I'm afraid...

Okay, yes, studying Puyo language is a difficult task. After all, it wasn't until 15th century when we Koreans invented our own alphabetic system. Despite the tremendous difficulty in deciphering Chinese characters of ancient Korean history books/annals/etc., and coming up with original Korean sounding words, some scholars are making great/steady progress. The research paper I cited (comparing Puyo language and old Japanese language) came from the results of such a painstaking work.

And let me just say once again that it's a widely accepted theory or rather a fact in Korean academia now that old Japanese came directly from Puyo language via Goguryo kingdom. Also, Paekje language, an offshoot of Puyo language, contributed somewhat as well.

Okay, over 1/3 of Yamato aristocrats came from Koreans, Chinese, Koreanized Chinese?? Hahaha. You make me laugh...
I bet you are Chinese...
BTW, what's your source?
From what I had read about this topic in the past -- I'm not suggesting my source is more reliable. And I admit it's been awhile now -- it seemed as though the percentage was significantly higher than 35-40%(over 1/3, huh?) with the greatest number originating from Paekje kingdom, then some from Goguryo kingdom, a few from Kaya or even some from Shilla and so on. Yes, there were some Chinese as I recall, but, compared to Korean nationalities, the Chinese number was miniscule. What's Koreanized Chinese? Are they 2nd or 3rd or 4th or 5th generation Korean-born people of Chinese origin, probably of Tang dynasty?? What's your defintion of Koreanized Chinese? How many generations will have to pass before a Korean-born person of Chinese origin be considered fully Korean?

I'm right in one aspect? I could be. And I'm wrong in 10 other aspects? I could be. I just don't like your condescending attitude suggesting that you know everything and what I wrote was mostly wrong. BTW, what's your educational background? What are your sources? No, you don't have to tell me...Like I stated before, I don't know too much about East Asian history in general. That's why I try to be careful in what I write about and try to shy away from making some ridiculous claim regarding topics I know nothing about, because some of the issues are very sensitive/unproven...

I think what irks/irritates Korean people in general regarding Japanese attitude towards its Korean origin(at least a majority of it) is Japanese people's outright/steadfast/categorical denial. We Koreans have nothing to gain from associating our ancestors to Japanese ancestors who came from Korea. Actually, I think many Koreans are totally disgusted/sick about it. Look how much hurt/destruction/humiliation/etc., had been inflicted upon Koreans by Japanese. However, history must be told in truth no matter how painful/disagreeable it may be. Unlike some Koreans, I don't claim Karate, Sumo, Samurai, and many others as derivatives of our unique Korean things although they appear to be so. It's theirs. They developed Karate, Sumo, Samurai, what have you, on their own. I don't try to find Korean origin in every aspect of Japanese culture/society, etc. (don't we have Chinese for that? They now have rediscovered the America!! Just wait until they reclaim Europe and maybe Africa too in a few years.) I also find it ironic that these same Koreans prefer Japanese-made automobiles, electronics, pop culture, etc., over everything else. I don't particularly blame them either seeing how good the Japanese-made products are. It's a consumer's right and preference living in a capitalist society to choose and pay for what they want. (For my part, along with all of my immediate family members, we've been exclusively favoring American-made or sometimes German-made electronics/automobiles over the Japanese-made ones, not entirely because older generation hated Japanese. They certainly did to a great extent. But, we bought American things, also partly since we live in US, and we decided to patronize domestic American products...) Anyway, Koreans and Japanese are two different people/nations, just like our languages, looks, cultures, personalities, or whatever are different from each other.

As I reiterate, only if Japanese admit the truth about their Korean origin(the ultra-nationalistic Japanese scholars refuse to publish papers, and continue to destroy/distort evidences regarding their Korean origin) -- believe me they will never admit to it in million years -- then, I would begin to see them in different angles than I used to.

Also officially apologizing to the Koreans for what they had done in the past, would greatly improve the strained relationship between the two neighboring countries. Believe me they would never do it in million years.

Compensation to comfort women could also be discussed even though I doubt anything will come out it since Japanese government feels like they paid their debt to Park Jung Hee government in 1960s. Yes, they will never do it in million years...

How do I feel about all this? That's why they are Japanese and that's why they are Chinese. And yes, that's why we are Koreans too...

One Korean Man Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 19:26:46 (PDT)

Well help me out for the post before this of mine. I got a friend from Hong Kong, and another from Shanghai to check out the pics. They confirm that there seems to be no chinese in there. A viet friend of mine is pretty sure they're viet. And a japanese friend couldn't find any japanese models in there. So a conclusion is that they must be viet. But hey if you find a chinese or japanese in there, tell me and post it. If you can then you can truly tell the diff. between asians, hence comparing asians.

Hmmm, i can tell the distinctiveness of the viets and see that they resemble more of the central and northern viets. But they don't look like the southern chinese much. A viet told me that he's pretty sure they're northern vietnamese models, because he knows that they don't look like the HK models, and don't look like the japanese model types.

So that's comparing asian nationalities for yah.
Cantonese-American Chinese Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 17:18:10 (PDT)

Hmmm, i found these two links on vietnamese models. Vietnamese do look a bit different then we chinese a bit, but nevertheless the vietnamese still don't look too bad. I'm not very familiar with asian models, and am just wondering are any of these models japanese or chinese? Last time vietfun had a few japanese names in the models list, but someone told them to put only vietnamese models. My friend (who's viet) says that all the models appear to be viet, in looks and by the name also. But he says that the similarities could just be there, and the names could be a translation, and he's not very familiar with vietnamese models. But through logic, if all the models are the same on two different sites for vietnamese people, then they should be vietnamese models. As i found two sites with the same models. Another friend of mine (who's taiwanese) says that the girls are definitely vietnamese as they don't look much chinese, but have a more distinct look. Just to make sure, if you pick up a chinese or non-vietnamese model can you tell me her real name and her nationality? Just curious, and the list is below.

http://www.vietsong.com/cgi-bin/gallery/imageFolio.cgi

http://vietfun.com/models/
Cantonese-American Chinese Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 16:44:27 (PDT)

www.colorq.org/HumanRights/Indonesia/Vivian.htm
verysad Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 15:41:44 (PDT)

Filipino is a bastardization of Tagalog. It is a stupid fabricated dialect concocted by the government to try to unite all ethnic groups in the country. Filipino is nothing more than a dialect of Tagalog. However, the government would like all Filipinos to believe that it is a language. That's their propaganda for trying to justify it. That's why you see them promoting it heavily in the media.

Sure it has some words from other Malayo-Polynesian languages, but by definition it is still a dialect of Tagalog. It has the same gramatical structure of Tagalog and pretty much the same lexicology.

Filipino is only used by 20% of the population in everyday life. Outside of the Tagalog regions you won't hear it being used. Non-Tagalogs don't care much for it. It should be junked as a national language.

The teedot in 2k3 Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 15:05:18 (PDT)

To: Mixed Malay & Malaysian Eurasian Gal18.

I apologize as you feel offended.

We are discussing some issues related to Chinese in Vietnam during the Vietnam War and China Vietnam border War in 1979.

I should say there could be some “extremists” in Indonesia might hurt ethnic Chinese if Indonesia was in the case of Vietnam. In the Vietnam War, China supported the North. Some think China put more oil into the fire. After the war, China attacked the unified Vietnam (Border War 1979). Fortunately, there is no Vietnamese extremist who might hurt Chinese in Vietnam. That is my point.

I know Malaysia is a peaceful country and so are their people.

Please accept my apology.

An Nam Guy Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 11:11:13 (PDT)

I'm a Chinese American who actually do find many admirable traits of the Koreans. I know many OTHER Asians dislike the Koreans because they might seem arrogant or unfriendly at first sight. They might be also boastful and overly proud about themselves which turns some people off. But these negative traits shouldn't discount their positive ones.

I have a couple of Korean friends who I find them to be dilligent, industrious, goal oriented and unassuming. One thing I noticed is their tendency NOT to "appease" "worship" "kiss up" to the White people, something that Chinese, Japanese and especially the Filipinos are very guilty of doing.

Koreans prefer to be self sufficient, self employed, and most of all not to take sh*t from anyone. Koreans are said to have the most businesses of all of the Asian groups in America. Some of them even compete with White Businesses. Theirs might not be as sophisticated as the Chinese or Japanese, but they are very self sufficient and are less concious of their image from others like the other Asians.

Few years ago, I was enrolled in a music school encountering some Asians students who were guitarists. What I noticed is that the Japanese and Filipino guitarists were very eager to form bands with Whites (forget the Chinese - this group of has no interests outside the realm of money). I also noticed a number of Koreans, most were unassuming, doing their own thing and practicing by themselves. I went to ask them if they were interested in creating an "Asian sound" in their music, and they all said "yes", "we all want to be original and different". This is what I admired, people who don't need self justification from Whites which is so typical of some Chinese, of most Japanese, and probably nearly of all Filipinos.

The other aspect of Koreans Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 10:56:56 (PDT)

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS