Comparing Asian Nationalities | Asian American Poll

COMPARING ASIAN NATIONALITIES
(Updated Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, 06:39:09 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.]

To, the traveLLer;

*Notice to rule the land, you need to speak the same language as the commoner the same case could be said as the Manchu controlled China, not the other way around. Please use your common sense rather brainwashed literature.*

Just a bit more examples of another nation taking over another, and using the language of the high class or winner to control the majority commoner. And NOW the commoners speak the language of the ruling class. So these examples kind of prove that you don't need to use the language of the commoner to rule the nation. The results of these nations were what the chinese WERE TRYING to do to vietnam, but it failed obviously, the vietnam language was restricted A LOT at first, then it was just outright banned. To try to get people to be loyal to the chinese emperor, instead of their ancestors. Ok think of mexico, think of brasil, think of peru. Now think of who's the majority in mexico, brasil, and peru. Who were the majority? The commoner and the natives there, also the blacks who were brought there as slaves, they combined were larger then all the aristocrats who ruled them or the businessmen. BUT they managed to changed the language spoken by these people to that of their own, like brasil now speaks portuguese, mexico spanish... etc... So what your saying IS logic, but not necessarily true. The chinese attempted to do with vietnam was the portuguese did to brazil, but FAILED. Because well, even the most powerful vietnamese men who were friends with the chinese help establish and spoke vietnamese in underground schools to keep the vietnamese language alive.
General Viet Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 09:59:24 (PDT)

Hey Traveller,

Tu Duc is my King? Hahaha.

Well you can say so. At least he did not ask the Chinese for help. He fought the French alone. He is much better than King Le Chieu Thong in Hanoi. I carry his last name Nguyen too.

One more thing I like him. He called the French is “White Evil”.

But my real hero is QUANG TRUNG (Nguyen Hue). Could you imagine he defeated Nguyen Lord with the help of Thai troops in the south, Trinh Lord in the north and even Chinese Qing army? Wow! Even me, I could not believe it.

My Great Emperor QUANG TRUNG was recorded in Vietnamese history as a GREAT MILITARY STRATEGIST and HERO OF THE PEOPLE. I am very proud of it.

Hey, at least Vietnamese history admitted Chinese rule for more than one thousand years. On the other hand, Chinese history never mentioned why China lost control over a little country named Vietnam.

If you can read Vietnamese, you will see tons of Vietnamese heroes because Vietnamese History is History of Wars and these stuffs are not available in English (your first language?).

No hard feeling here please. These stuffs are history. We can’t change history. Now here in America, we should get along and look forward for better future.
Just remind my Vietnamese and Chinese friends here: There is no such thing called “RACISM”
between Chinese and Vietnamese people.

An Nam Guy Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 09:44:06 (PDT)

What is there to elaborate?
I've read all your posts and the other posts for the last few pages and all you do is argue with other Chinese.
It seems you're some japanophile. Why don't you just follow who you are instead of wasting your time going to website reading useless info.
Better yet, you should take your argumentative attitudes elsewhere. After this, this is an Asian AMERICAN website. Here in the US we don't even go around arguing with other other races, let alone our own race!
Asian American Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 06:44:55 (PDT)

http://www.huaren.org/diaspora/asia/japan/news/093099-01.html

'"The Japanese Government had a very conscious effort to copy the customs of Europeans first, and then Americans," he added. "And in the depths of their hearts, the Japanese people have had some kind of contempt for the Chinese and the Koreans. Since the end of the 19th century, the attitude has been whites are superior, other Asians are inferior."'

Hahahaha

Hoklo Taiwanese Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 03:10:59 (PDT)

'Chinese invasion making waves in Japan'

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?fl20020627a1.htm

Hahahaha.

And this guy had to bring up dog meat? Screw this mofo.

Hoklo Taiwanese Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 00:35:13 (PDT)

"Is it possible that the Japanese are very jealous of the Koreans' performance in the World Cup?"

Nahhh, they need to only remember the Chinese team.

Hoklo Taiwanese Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 22:26:48 (PDT)

From my obesrvatiob, ALMOST ALL chinese, korea have their eyebrows high above the eyes, bi it curved or straight, as opposed to Malays having eyebrows close to the nose.

Of course, the eyebrow alone doesn't determine Han indentity. there are a lot of other things: skin color, nose, lips,bone structure,etc.
Curved or straight is not the question Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 20:49:50 (PDT)

Someone from a very earlier post said that Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese all look the same. On the contrary, I beg to differ (at least for Asian Americans).
I don't know much about Asians in Asia because I was born here in New York City.

The high school I went to was the Bronx HS of Science. This school had 4,000 students and was almost 45% Asian. After spending 4 years there, believe me, there was a DEFINITE difference between Asian groups.
First let me say that Chinese tended to hang out with Chinese and Koreans with Koreans, etc. It was common to see a group of 25 Koreans playing frizbee outside.
These were the obvious noticeable differences:

Koreans- They tended to be taller and have bigger builds. Average height of males I would say was 5'10". Korean eyes were almost always smaller than the Chinese students eyes. By this I mean that "one-eyelid" look was very common. MANY of the guys had very high cheekbones. Most dressed like "gangsters". Shaved and spiky hair more common.

Chinese- They tended to be shorter with smaller builds. Average height was around 5'8". Most of them had "double-eyelids". Faces were not as masculine looking. Keep in mind, that most Chinese in this school (as well as New York City) are Cantonese.

So believe me, it is very easy to see the differences in these Asian Americans! After all...

This is an Asian American website Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 19:04:56 (PDT)

Kim,

I don't think the Japanese are jealous of the Korean performance at all. Some of my friends were; however, a little pissed off at a news report that showed Korean supporters cheering when the Japanese team lost. Many of the Japanese I know or have seen on TV were actually very supportive of the Korean team's performance.
Joy Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 19:02:14 (PDT)

And here's the following paragraph from this individual:

http://www.vninfos.com/vninfos/selection/histoire/Attraction_et_repulsion.html
"Originating in the conquests of Han times, Chinese suzerainty, right down to the nineteenth century, was asserted in regard to Vietnamese territory rather than the Vietnamese people. It pertained not only to the traditionally ethnocentric and moralistic view of China as master of tian xia (天下 all under heaven), but it was also quite definite in north Vietnam, which had formed part of the ling tu 領土 or ‘contiguous land’ of the Han and the Tang.[19] Following Vietnam’s independence, Chinese intervention focused mainly on restoring Vietnamese princes deposed by their subjects. Indeed, the issue of legitimacy persisted as a Chinese concern right through to the modern period. Even the action of the Yong-le Emperor in 1407 was intended to take a disorderly vassal in hand, when its ruler appealed for help, and to put it firmly in order once and for all. During the reign of the Qing dynasty, Vietnam had been one of the three or four states most faithful in presenting tribute to the court in Peking. And on several occasions imperial arms had been sent to Vietnamese territory, at the request of the Vietnamese sovereign, to suppress local bandits. Until the nineteenth century, these facts, together with the long historical relationship and cultural and racial ties, were considered by the Chinese as sufficient proof of China’s ineffaceable suzerainty in Vietnam."
The TraveLLer Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 16:14:25 (PDT)

I also find this Vietnamese person non-biased in offering his opinion on the relation between China nad Vietnam. Click on:

http://www.vninfos.com/vninfos/selection/histoire/Attraction_et_repulsion.html
"But, if the Vietnamese succeeded in maintaining their independence over the centuries in spite of the Chinese emperors’ persistent endeavours to enforce their authority over the country, it was largely because China had come to understand that whatever she coveted in Vietnam it did not merit the price demanded for it. Hence, the tributary relationship was maintained, which from the Chinese standpoint meant the ties were those of suzerain and vassal, from the Vietnamese of independent, ‘sovereign’ (though in power terms unequal) states. Strict observance of the rules and courtesies of this relationship on the Vietnamese side contributed to peaceful coexistence. However, the relations determined by the tributary system were not relations between two equal states, but resulted from a complex arrangement that, even though not specifically expressed by any treaty, was nonetheless based on personal ties between the sovereigns of the two countries. Such an understanding implied the tacit agreement by China as the suzerain to lend assistance to her vassal in case of need, and the tacit acceptance by the latter of certain ritual obligations, above all the duty of sending periodical tribute to the Chinese court. The tributary status was not granted to Vietnam as a state, but to its sovereign who in principle obtained his legitimacy from the investiture by the Chinese emperor. Through this investiture, the Chinese Son of Heaven solemnly declared the one on whom he bestowed the title of ‘prince of the state of Annam’ worthy through his loyalty and piety of governing his country. The investiture, therefore, created dependency of some sort, but simultaneously contributed to the establishment of the legitimacy of the Vietnamese monarch with the help of the great neighbouring country."
The TraveLLer Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 16:10:37 (PDT)

to Kim:

No, but Chinese are jealous, I'm sure of that...

ABC in NYC Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 12:26:43 (PDT)

General Viet et al.,

General Viet, so it was you who addressed to me in the first post with great anger, n’est ce pas? LOL
General Viet, you need not to explain from your point of view about your heritage. I will provide you some more link, as you wished.

But all the points of view that you made are rather based on your perception and not real history. I asked many of you about the “Nguyen” last name, and all I get is a bunch of 360 degree answers. For example, An Nam Guy only brought up to me histories during15-1700’s, at the time that the “Nguyen” last name was already invented. What happened to the “Nguyen” last name prior to 1500’s? Like I said, after the French took over, most of the kings in Annam are the puppet of the French. Possibly all the history was manipulated by the French to control Annam “Vietnam” for nearly a century, that is why I asked, “How can 10,000 French Soldier sought control of Vietnam with the population of ~15 million?”. I have many elderly Vietnamese friends who are in their 70-80’s now, and I can tell you that most of you guys don’t know much about Vietnamese history.

I have spoken to one reputable Vietnamese doctor who has invested great amount of time reading and searching for the real history of Vietnam. He even wrote books and literature. He has learned Mandarin Chinese for more than 30 years and visited China, at least he and I agreed on most of the subject, to gather the fact rather than the fiction written by most today’s nationalist in Vietnam. And I bet many of you have never been to China. To think that Vietnam can defeat China is a real arrogant way of thinking.

Most of the modern history of Vietnam have a lot of missing link into its. Some claimed that they are totally independent from China during the1800’s that is totally false. Vietnam is ruled by a local king, but the Vietnamese local king is considered to be a landlord in China that is the fact as it can. Just why is the treaty of 1874 signed by Tu Duc necessary when Vietnam is totally independent from China? Why the French would go extremely to get this treaty signed and sent to the emperor of China? Is the treaty of 1874 in Saigon a false treaty? This cannot be ignored. There is a link with Annam and China, don’t you think? Here’s a link from one individual who wrote an essay on the French-Sino war, which I find it very accurate:
http://www.nhandan.org.vn/english/history/20011231.html
http://www.geocities.com/quinnelk/conflict/essay/sino1.html
And here’s a link that support this essay:
http://89.1911encyclopedia.org/T/TO/TONGS.htm

Therefore, it’s the truth that Vietnam was once a protectoral territory of China, a vassal I might add.

Most of the wars fought against China were mostly political war for the local aristocrats in Annam. The wars were about who control Annam, either the local government or the central government (in the Capital of China). Nevertheless, Annam was always been a territory of the China, a protectoral territory or a vassal.

Here is what is written in the encyclopedia of the Catholic that supports the other site that you guys seem to be against: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07765a.htm
“According to Annamite legends, however, their first rulers were descended from the royal house of China, and the Chinese dynasty ruled Annam as vassals to the Celestial Empire until 257 B.C. From 257-110 B.C. the Annamite empire was governed by two native dynasties, both feudatory to China, but in the latter year China occupied Annam, and from 110 B.C. to A.D. 930 Annam was administered by Chinese governors, except during the domination of a few short-lived native dynasties.”
“Concerning the first nine centuries of our era, we have little historical information about Indo-China. About the beginning of the tenth century, the Annamite chiefs revolted, cast off the Chinese yoke, and set up a native dynasty, although China continued to exercise a nominal suzerainty over Annam until the intervention of the French in the nineteenth century.”

Annam was never independent nation until the French took power in 1874.

And here is another website mentioned that the “Le” dynasty rule Vietnam under China:
http://www.vietnamtourism.com/e_pages/vietnam/introduction/history/eih_tayson.htm
“Le Chieu Thong was proclaimed "King of Annam" by the Beijing Court; in fact Ton Si-nghi held all the power, and every morning people in the capital could see the king and his small entourage summon the Tsing governor for an audience. The actions of the Tsing troops managed to open the eyes of those who had been mistaken about the real intentions of the invaders. Only Chieu Thong and the reactionary feudal lords who wanted to defend their privileges at any cost still clung to the coat-tails of the occupiers. Feelings ran high among the population; the prestige of the Le dynasty was destroyed.”
When the Tay Son uprising led to the defeat of the Nguyen and Trinh lords, the result is Quang Trung has to face China.
“Defeated, King Chieu Thong resorted to treason, appealing to the Manchu Tsing dynasty then reigning over China. The Tsing Emperor Kien-Jung, who harbored ambitions of reconquering Vietnam, charged Governor Ton Si-nghi (Soun Che-y) with mustering a force of 200,000 men for an invasion. On the 20th day of the tenth lunar month of the year 1788, the Tsing troops set out, proclaiming that they would "destroy the Tay Son and restore the Le". On the 21st day of the 11th lunar month, they entered Thang Long. A pontoon was thrown across the Red River, on both banks of which the Tsing troops were camped.”
Here is a strategy used by the Tay Son to win the local people heart, although they didn’t understand that Vietnam was ruled under China. This is the propaganda that they, the Tay Son brothers, spread throughout the region: BTW, the Tsing is the “Qing” dynasty.
“To deal with the Tsing invasion, Nguyen Hue acted in the name of the whole nation betrayed by the Le. In a solemn ceremony, he proclaimed himself king, taking the royal name of Quang Trung, and immediately ordered his troops to march on Thang Long. It was December 21, 1788. By December 26, the Tay Son army was in Nghe An; 100,000 men were reviewed by Nguyen Hue, who addressed them in the following words:
-"The Tsing have invaded our country and occupied the capital city, Thang Long. In our history, the Trung sister fought against the Han, Dinh Tien Hoang against the Sung, Trait Hung Ado against the Mongols, and Le Loa against the Ming. These heroes did not resign themselves to standing by and seeing the invaders plunder our country; they inspired the-- people to fight f6r a just cause and drive out the aggressors... The Tsing, forgetting what happened to the Sung, Mongols and Ming, have invaded our country. We are going to drive them our of our territory".”
King Quang Trung was a role model of Vietnam’s model nowadays. He defeated the “Qing” in the Southern province of China; however, he did go to China and got approval for him to be considered “king (Vuong)” of the province, since Annam was always a vassal to China. The Tay son brothers didn’t know this policy because they were peasant and considered to be mountainous robbers. They were less educated than the former “Le” Dynasty and their aristocrats.
Gia Long, after conquering Annam, sought the approval of the Chinese emperor to be the king of Annam.
http://www.vietnamtourism.com/e_pages/vietnam/introduction/history/eih_trieunguyen.htm
“In foreign relations, the Nguyen kings recognized the symbolic authority of Beijing, but pursued a policy of influencing Laos and Cambodia. It was from this position of weakness that the regime was to face French colonial aggression in the middle of the 19th century.”
With all these to say, I still hold my position that Annam “Vietnam” was a territory, or at least a vassal and/or protectoral territory, of China until the French took over.
To: “YUP”,
The Ly last name is the same as the “Lee” in Korea and several part of China when romanizing it, or “Li” in mainland China.
The last name Ngo, in Cantonese is “Ng” or “Ngo”, in mandarin is “Wu”
The “Vo” and the Vu” are the same last name…In Cantonese is “Mu”, in mandarin is “Wu” not the same as the other Wu.
The “Huynh and the “Hoang” are also the same, Cantonese is “Huang”, and Mandarin is “Hwang”.
The “Tran”, in Cantonese is “Chan”, Taiwan is “Chen”, in mainland china is “Zhen”.
And so on….

General Viet:
FYI, I can read French, Chinese, Vietnamese and English.

Proud Canto-American:
I have never ruled out the Vietnamese are from the “Yueh” family. In fact, there is evidence on this subject. However, when I referred being Chinese, I didn’t address every Chinese has to only have the “Han” gene. I did say it was a mood point to consider in the first place determining who are Han and the other Chinese ethics (ie: Manchrian), re-read my previous post. My post was basically focus on Annam’s political days and its population.

I have to go now. Will read your new post(s).

Be well.

BTW, the interviened toes "Giao Chi" is extinct, I work in the medical field and most, if not all, of the physician in Vietnam stated that that characteristic of toes no longer exist.

The TraveLLer Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 12:03:21 (PDT)

OPPS

I mixed Nguyen Hue and Nguyen Anh up a bit. I was in a rush and made a few typos also, so just saying.
General Viet Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 10:07:21 (PDT)

To, the traveller;

Lol, both Quang Trung AND Anh Nguyen now? C'mon, Quang Trung destroyed the troops in vietnam, i don't think he would ask permission from china after he did that. It is a welly known fact that he destroyed the chinese troops, so what do you expect Quang Trung to say to china? "I just destroyed all your troops in vietnam, so can you crown me? I just commited treason (if your annalogy is true) and defied your decicion on vietnam's leader, YUP i'm a threat to your nations unity, so crown me so i can have official power and become even more of a threat".

THROUGH logic it DOES NOT WORK. NOPE.

General Viet Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 09:44:13 (PDT)

OOPS, i mixed something up because i read it from another forum. It was the Trinh vs. Nguyen war. The trang were different? I don't know. But i think i made a mistake, i read some of this and LOTS of people made the same mistake? I think it's a site i read, so, yeah, that's another REASON WHY YOU DON'T TRUST EVERYTHING YOU READ.

PLUS, the Nguyen name was ALREADY around, BUT it was spread even wider because of the dynasty. It's not created by the dynasty, but infact there were even different branches of Nguyen, like the Tay Son WHO WERE NGUYEN. Quang Trung asked people to change their name to show allegence to him, but before that it already existed.
General Viet Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 09:34:29 (PDT)

k,

I state that proto-Mongols and proto-Khmer must have split long before the light-skinned variants of North-Asians have developed. I suggest that the light-skinned North-Asians are phenotypically more distant from Khmer than Mongols. Nonetheless the distance between Khmer and Mongols must still be bigger than the distance between North-Asians and Mongols.
rare stuff Wednesday, June 26, 2002 at 08:34:17 (PDT)

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS