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.]

Sean,

You posted, "Actually, Viet is firmly defined as a Mon-Khmer language."

It is interesting, but this is still in debate whether Vietnamese really falls under Mon-khmer or Sino-tibetan language. There's an ongoing research by a Vietnamese rather than French men. Who has the right to say that the Vietnamese language belongs to the Mon-Khmer or Sino-Tibetan, a Vietnmaese or a French man? As a Vietnamese, I trust a Vietnamese rather than a Frenchman.

Click on: http://vny2k.net/HanNomE.htm
The TraveLLer Friday, September 27, 2002 at 08:46:14 (PDT) [66.25.134.136]

To, Sean;

"Look how many Viet now are part Chinese, like 20%? (I'm not even talking about the pure ethnic Chinese in Vietnam.) These are actually people who can trace their roots because it happened within the last 2 hundred years?"

Oh, and that shows your ignorance. You don't even know if those numbers are right. Like 20%? How ignorant. Did vietnam had like some national tracing your ancestry day to check and see specifically if your ancestors were chinese. OMG, what a waste of time and close to impossible. Most lineage books trace to a NAME, DATE, PLACE OF BIRTH, OCCUPATION, SIBLINGS, CHILDREN, PARENTS AND SPOUSE. I don't think they'll say something like. Oh, Dat Le was a chinese, and his wife was a cambodian and his son was a laos. OMG, how stupid are you? Hahahaha.

Oh wait, your the same guy that said that 50% of the northern population had nomads at one time, and tried to deny it. But hafti quoted it and then you left for a while then now your back. Hahaha leaving a trace of your stupidity again?

Your lowering the IQ of the boards, try to increase it or something. Learn some grammer skills too, matter then you'll understand how to differentiate between different grammar styles.

"Yueh was the original name of a Kingdom south of the Yangtze R. that was ocean going and culturally very unlike the Central Plains Hua, if not ethnically unlike them. This word was later applied to Vietnam, among others, but it had little or nothing to do with the local people of Vietnam."

Actually, the word Yueh has alot to do with the origin of modern vietnam. Through CHINESE (not vietnamese, to rule out personal agendas) the MODERN vietnamese came from what the chinese called the Yueh. The kingdom was attacked and destroyed, the people then migrated in mass numbers to what is today Guangdong and Guangxi. After a while this territory fell to the Qin under the general Chao To, who then killed all who was loyal to the chinese (not all the chinese, just those loyal to the chinese) and took up Yueh customs. This kingdom was then destroyed by the Han. The Yueh then moved more south around the Red River Delta region, making it the most densely populated area of it's time for the areas around SE China. This is a welly recorded migration. Look it up in chinese! To make sure there aren't any personal agenda's i won't give my sources. Until you start to give sources. What i am saying is a welly supported fact written down by the chinese historians, of which the vietnamese today have their history. The books of vietnam at those times were written by the chinese, since during the Ming's 20<30 year rule they burnt all the books forcing the vietnamese to take up the chinese variety. Then the french came in, but books were saved, but many more were borrowed from the chinese.

Never doubt vietnamese sources, unless you want to doubt china's sources and also the french's and that'll be a lot of research you'll have to do to just prove that the sources were distorted.
L Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 22:49:26 (PDT) [142.59.79.119]

To, Sean;

Get a life, there's no conspiracy going on that's trying to decieve you and just you. I don't think anyone here would go through the trouble of making up pseudonyms just to trick you. Get over the fact that life does not revolve around you, and that you know very little about vietnamese, cambodian, laos, and thai history. Stick to chinese history before you lecture me or anyone else on who we are or what we know. We have our sources and you have yours, but you have not yet shown much of your sources.

I think the administrators have started to put the IP addresses when we post. Check the bottom. If it's not our IP's then it's some reference number for our IP's. Since every post you have it the same. Here, check the bottom and remember. Me, K, Hafti, TSJ, Jeff and some people who leave no nick aren't the same people. I don't think many people have access to 5 computers with different IP's and if there was anyone who had that access they have other things to do then switch computers everyday to post a message. FYI, most computers in HS, commerce and some universities share the same IP so even they don't have the capacity to take on 5 different IP's. So it would take someone wealthy to have 5 different connections, readily available (if you notice these people usually post on a daily bases), with five different computers to go with it. I think people with this kind of resource would have a life, either a job or at least school (rich sons of filthy rich guys).

-Hafti Monday, September 09, 2002 at 15:44:24 (PDT) [142.59.36.71]

-a Vietman Tuesday, September 10, 2002 at 11:18:35 (PDT) [198.64.15.168]
-TSJ Eric@KristinKreuk.net Tuesday, September 10, 2002 at 13:01:26 (PDT) [209.162.48.81]

-The fact can not deny Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 14:10:49 (PDT) [63.93.107.124]

-Jeff Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 19:12:03 (PDT) [64.130.235.33]

-k Wednesday, September 18, 2002 at 13:43:40 (PDT) [61.11.245.6]

-L Thursday, September 19, 2002 at 22:32:07 (PDT) [142.59.79.119]

You seem to be a rather big loser. Hahahha, get a life.

-Sean Saturday, September 21, 2002 at 09:07:37 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

-Sean Saturday, September 21, 2002 at 09:49:46 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

-Sean Saturday, September 21, 2002 at 10:51:15 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

Our grammer and writing style's the same? LOL, you need to get an education before you know how to differentiate between one persons writing and anothers. Look, you started typeing at 9:07 and you finished at 10:51. You seriously have that much time on your hands everyday? A slow typer i might add. Try some community work or sports. It'll help clear things up, like you might learn more to life then a few fictional made up books you make up everyday.

LOL, funny that you claim to be smart. Are you paranoid or something? Hahaha.

Ok, and i think hafti is gone, didn't you notice his last post said that it doesn't matter where you came from, but more on where your at. Then from then he stopped posting, are you trying to seize the moment to bash him because he's not here and can't defend his ideas? So funny, it's funny what a coward would do.

FYI, for one Muong aren't dark minority groups. They actually look mongoloid if you ever see one, take it from a VIET, a full VIET. There is no discrimination against Muong people. The second largest ethnic group in vietnam.

From PERSONAL knowledge. The vietnamese hate the chinese for the years of wars we had with them, that's understandable right, it's more joke like these days rather then insults. The vietnamese look down at everyone that's nomadic and are minorities who are known to do stuff like voodoo (for the fact that if they rely on voodoo to curse people they have no moral). And we hate the cambodians for their ethnic cleansing of vietnamese a few years back (but then again i think we did that to them, or did we? need to check up on that, all i know is that we destroyed the khmer rouge). Simple as that. So don't assume anything. You're not even viet. So don't go telling people the vietnamese don't like the muong so the muong shouldn't defend the viets. You have VERY little knowledge on viet history at all, not to mention contemperary knowledge. The Muong and Viets are believed to be of the same family by the way, this is accepted by the Muong as well as the Viets (look it up).

For one, you lack the ability to debate, you can only whine (two very different concepts if you have an education). You don't have sources or references to back up half of what your saying. You 'pretend' to be knowledgeable, and that REALLY shows. If your 'pretending' then your trying to fill in a void somewhere, and if your pretending to be smart, then you have a 2 digit IQ. If your smart you don't need to 'pretend'. And then all these flaws wouldn't show up.

NB: L, K, Hafti, TSJ, Jeff and you are all different people on different IP addresses (if that number is your ip, please confirm admin) so drop the conspiracy theory where everyone is wrong because we're all one person trying to lie. The only one disillusioned here is you.
L Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 22:32:39 (PDT) [142.59.79.119] [We post IP addresses to discourage those who use multiple IDs or post under assumed IDs. --Ed]

"Vietnamese and Filipinos are completely different in both racial and cultural relations. They did not have any contact for thousand of years because of the South China Sea. Vietnamese celebrate Lunar New year, Mid Autumn Festival, and Qing Ming like Chinese. On the other hand, Filipinos don’t."

Obviously, Filipinos shouldnt be grouped with East Asian countries. Sorry to say but it is the TRUTH, filipinos have no asian values at all. They are too westernized. Look at their culture. Aboriginal tribes, spanish, american. Althought they are essentially an asian culture, they are too ambigious.
killahcam Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 18:41:27 (PDT) [172.162.199.180]

The Aryans which constitute most people in India orginated in Aryavarta you foreign guy on this forum.
Ganesh Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 18:08:07 (PDT) [213.107.244.181]

There is no doubt that those who brought the tonal language to what is now Northern China were Southerners. Ancient scriptures tell about the Shang dynasty's orgies which can be traced back to the heritage of the Southern cultures connected with Daoism. The Northern peoples of today are not like that. They have all the reputation to be chaste. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

About the bad consequences of the Southern "fertility cults" see e.g.

www.albany.edu/faculty/jhobson/slaveryinthailand .

(This is a site about Thai people which I recently discovered. It supports that the Southerners of Daic stock have such attitudes as those above mentioned.)
There are also some less spectacular mental traits which distinguish Southern Mongolids from Northern Mongolids. Maybe I will later comment on those.
rare stuff Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 18:03:17 (PDT) [62.227.111.34]

sean:

when did i say who and who look viet????and I claim to be chinese????????
And no, I'm not Hafti or L. just because many people disagree w/ you doesn't mean you have to think all the posts are from the same individual.

*it is you who is having problems with reasoning skills here.

'idiotic reasoning skills'

Ok...i don't mind it since i already know you are also an idiotic. I've seen from you the tendency to insult people in a debate from time to time. i don't have to waste my time for an immature brat like you. don't deny you resort to insulting and degrading people whenever you have a heard time dealing w/ them. I'm very sure that's how you are.Learn to be respectful before you learn how to discuss with people. Otherwise no one give a rat's ass what you rant about. You thought I was idiotic and didn't even read my post, let alone try to make out what my point is. Don't lie.

you're right. Viets have been greatly mixed w/ chinese, and even other races like khmer, malay,.. for 1000 years and more. I never conclude that they are pure-blooded either. purity is baloney.
btw, Can you tell me from which CREDIBLE source you got the fact that Viet is firmly defined as Mon-khmer? Once it was firmly defined as sino-tibetan....other theories even arise vietnamese is a malay language.
k Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 11:04:34 (PDT) [203.162.19.37]

"The racial relationship between Shandongers and South Koreans is also evident for foreign people. Maybe you stress local differences more because you are from there."

??? Have you seen a lot of "Shandongers" and compared them with South Koreans? The people from Shangdon are one most of the most "southern-looking" of northern Chinese. Have you been to Manchuria and compared "Shandoners" with the ethnic Koreans there? The differences are dramatic once you put the two together...on average of course...many exceptions. There were population exchanges where Chinese from Shangdon sailed to Korea and I think where pre-historic Koreans who went to Shangdon, but this simply skews the differences rather than changes them.
Actually, the people who inhabited Shandong were called the Yi by the Hua, two people who formed part of the Chinese "race" with the latter's name preserved. The "Yi" were hypothesized to be related to the Wu and original Yueh because they had close political relationships during the Warring Kingdoms period. The Wu kingdom and the Yueh kingdom are recognized as branches of the same ethnic group. The two words might be the same word. The word Yi might also be an altered form of wu/yueh. Even Hua(meaning Chinese...Han is a more artificial term) might be an altered form of this word that designated a proto-ethnic group of some sort. The original pronounciation is unknow but it's interesting to see the similarity in sound once you pick up the hint. Hua is Wah in Cantonese and I think Wu in Shanghainess: hua/wah/wu/yueh/yi/wieut...
The Vietnamese version of the word is Viet, but I dunno if this is later artificially adopted or carried by a yueh people to Vietnam who mixed with the locals.
Sean Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 10:17:56 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

"www.eki.ee.books/redbooks/nivkhs stating that Nivkhi and Evens are small; and in general regarding Tungus:"

The Koreans were designated as short and stocky and bow-legged not too long ago, but now they are considered a relatively tall people. Why? Milk...calcium.

Well, firstly, you source for this is really unreliable. I know this Eki. He is this radical Taiwan identity guy who writes and quotes up some pretty far out stuff.
Second, physical anthropologists are unreliable by nature. This is because there is natural variation within all peoples (Chinese skulls being classified as Caucasian while his mother's is designated as African) and also because physical appearance depends on nutrition and environment. Physical anthropologists, especially in the past, also went about with biases and pre-conceptions that distort objective fidnings.
Third, the Mongols are tall, besides the fact that genes allow them to grow tall, because they drink milk and eat meat...that's all they eat. The Tungustic people you describe, (I'm not even sure they are Tungustic...I though Evenkis were an Monolian people) are all related to Mongolians by language and appearance...so I doubt with the same nutrition and environment, they would be short on average. The Manchurians were a Tungustic people, but they are, were, very tall, as described by both Chinese people and western anthropologists.
Sean Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 09:53:41 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

"I didn't doubt this, but modern Northern Chinese are predominately of Northern race while they speak a language which is nowadays to be counted as Southern language."

Language, culture, and race probably has never corresponded exatly with each other.
I guess Sino-Tibetan overall is a "southern" language family, as compared to lanaguages such as Manchurian, Turkic, or Korean. But Sino-Tibetan was this way from the beginning.
Culturally also, Chinese civilization falls under the southern half. (I'm not even talking about superficial things such as buildings or written characters or adopted philosophies, which are shared with Koreans and Japanese, as well as Vietnamese.) The deeper cultural values, such as habits of matrilineality (word?) and valuation of women, the pre-historic "Asian domesticated foods...chicken, pig" ...these teh Chinese actually have in common with the southern peoples.

Racially, the Chinese are physically closer overall to Koreans and Japnese, although the Chinese more "southerly-looking." Genetically, as in haplotype, not genes, the Chinese are half-way or even closer to southeast Asians. There was a source, I can't remember, that said that 95% of Chinese share the ultimate male, I think called M95, ancestor with like 80% of Cambodians and only 60% of Japnese. Strange...but not really because phenotype is a result of the breeding population you are in whereas haplotype is passed down from father to so..(a white man having a black great great grandfather).
It also depends on where the line for the "northern race" is to be drawn, as the differences occur gradually. Is the line to be drawn in Vietnam? South China? Japan? Cambodia? Objectively, if the arbitrary line is to be drawn so that half falls on each side, the line is in China or Vietnam. However, as I pointed out repeatedly earlier, the people in this region look similar to each other across lines than they do with the poles. For example, if the line is drawn so that south Chinese fall into the "southern race" and northern Chinese fall into the "northern race," the line is simply an arbitrary line. It doesn't mean southern Chinese look like Malays or have similar genetic heritage. Any objective person can see that southern Chinese look more alike to northern Chinese than they do to most of the SE Asian populations. It is like cutting a line between the colors orange and yellow. The line is arbitrary but necessary. The shades inbetween are actually closer to each other.
Sean Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 09:37:38 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

"the vietnamese language actually is one that they haven't yet to be able to define which group it belongs to."

Actually, Viet is firmly defined as a Mon-Khmer language. It is very different from other Mon-Khmer languages in having tones. The Viet are very different-looking from the other Mon-Khmer peoples. The Mon in Burma are significantly darker and less North Asian-looking than the Burmese; the Cambodians are this way too; the pockets of Mon-Khmer peoples still left in China also look different from their Tai, Hmong-Yao, and Tibeto-Burman neighboring ethnic groups. However, Viet, especially northern Viet, does not have this Mon-Khmer look, or phenotype. What is the exact origin and admixture of Viet, I dunno. But they do look more Chinese.

"i think southern chinese look like viets than they N.chinese."

I never said they don't look alike, but they don't look the same either. The southern Chinese have an intermediate phenotype between Viet and northern Chinese. In fact, the Viet can be very close genetically to south Chinese. i never said it couldn't. Just because south and north Chinese are genetically close doesn't mean south Chinese can't be close to Vietnamese. The Viet might have a similar genetic profile with north and south Chinese, or the south Chinese genetic profile might be intermediate between the two. GET IT?The genetic data I showed you is simple numbers, so don't tell me that you think this and this and so you are right. Judging from your ability to write clearly (I can't even make out what is exactly your point half the time) and your fractured reasoning skills, what you think isn't worth two pennies.

Also, you always say who and who look Viet. (Are you Vietnamese? But then you claim to be Chinese. Are you L, or K as you say, or Hafti, who is half Chinese one day and half Muong another. Yall write in the same style and have the same exact views, not to mention the same idiotic reasoning skills. One and the same...damn psycho) Maybe Viets look like southern Chinese instead of southern Chinese looking like Viets. Maybe the Viets look so different from other Mon-Khmer peoples is because they have had a lot of Chinese and other admixture. Look how many Viet now are part Chinese, like 20%? (I'm not even talking about the pure ethnic Chinese in Vietnam.) These are actually people who can trace their roots because it happened within the last 2 hundred years? What about the thousand years of rule by China. I've read there were Chinese colonies in the Tongking Delta, I think the original source of Viet civilization. These settlers would have been northern Chinese, since southern China was also being settled by these northern people --taking advantage of the relatively empty land. And don't tell me the soldiers stayed virgins their entire lives while stationed there. What about after the thousand years of rule? There would be still Chinese migrating to Vietnam. So, how much Chinese (northern Chinese even) do Viet have in them???
Sean Thursday, September 26, 2002 at 08:33:24 (PDT) [68.14.94.53]

The transition from southern Chinese to northern Chinese is gradual for the most part. Far north, you will never see individuals who fit the "malay" description (flaring nostrils, flat nosed, large eyed. if you watch Chinese television, you'll note it immediately). Along the yangtze, there are a few. In the south,...well, the trend should be obvious by now.

In reality, it seems the majority of Chinese do take an intermediate appearance. Although notably, there are variances, such as nose prominance and size, but for the most part, these differences are not as great as some make them out to be.

Besides, why have this polarization of China? It hardly brings people closer together, and it makes us seem petty.

I'm glad to see Sean noted that a vast number of dongbei ren are of Shandong descent.
chinatown Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 19:34:53 (PDT) [67.98.161.149]

Sean,

It is said that Asians are not genetically that much different from each other compared to the diversity of Europeans and Caucasoids.

All the differences among the north and south Asians can be attributed to weather and adaptive lifestyles, diet. Of course, one living the frozen tundras of the Arctic is much different from one living in jungles near the equator.
But, on the whole, even a Malaysian looks quite the same as an Eskimo, compared to let's say an Arab with a Swede.
Jeff Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 19:12:03 (PDT) [64.130.235.33]

Sean,

"the Southern Chinese languages are actually closer to ancient Chinese":
I didn't doubt this, but modern Northern Chinese are predominately of Northern race while they speak a language which is nowadays to be counted as Southern language.

"the Tungustic tribes are tribes are tall":

untrue, especially if you refer to tribal people. There are many sources including reknown anthropolgists (Japanese, German etc) stating that Tungus people are of small stature. In the internet there are

www.eki.ee.books/redbooks/nivkhs stating that Nivkhi and Evens are small; and in general regarding Tungus:

97.1911encyclopedia.org/T/TU/TUNIC and www.fikas.no/~sprocket/snpa/chapter-VII2
.
Udeghe are known to be the smallest people of Siberia and speak also Tungus.
The original Tungus however are of Altaic race and thus different from most actually Tungus speaking peoples. Racially they had only small influence on the modern day Tungus speakers. And not even they were tall in terms of international standards.

The racial relationship between Shandongers and South Koreans is also evident for foreign people. Maybe you stress local differences more because you are from there.
rare stuff Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 14:58:17 (PDT) [62.158.89.17]

Whoever group Vietnamese and Filipinos needs to do more research.

Vietnamese and Filipinos are completely different in both racial and cultural relations. They did not have any contact for thousand of years because of the South China Sea. Vietnamese celebrate Lunar New year, Mid Autumn Festival, and Qing Ming like Chinese. On the other hand, Filipinos don’t. The fact is Vietnamese are heavily Chinese influenced because Vietnam used to be a province of China under Han, Sui, Song, Tang, Ming Dynasty for a thousand years. The Vietnamese used to use Chinese script for their written language for thousand of years. Remember that Vietnam is the ONLY Kingdom in South East Asia that used Chinese script.
The fact can not deny Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 14:10:49 (PDT) [63.93.107.124]

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS