From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: China(was More than 50% support TI)
Date: 3 Jan 93 18:16:28 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science

In article <1993Jan3.002820.27380@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>In article <C08u0A.6ED@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>
>>          I do  not see that way. Only twice "barbarians" secessfully invaded
>>      China, which both happened after gun power, and litht cavalry force was
>>     used(Yuan, Qing).
>
>Although I don't agree with Eric Law's argument, you're forgetting *a lot*
>of history.  The Period of the Five Hu's.  The North/South Dynasties.  The
>Five Dynasties.  Liao.  Jin.  In some senses, even Qin (the one that lasted
>only 15 years) was a barbaric invasion.
All those "babarians" are within the geographical entity. They were under
cetral government control or has to pay attributes to Central Government
during peace time.
>
>>  China possesedd(stil does) richest land in the world, numerous population
>
>I am sure that the farmers in the Great Plains will have something to say
>about that.  The Ukrainian plains (when weather/political situations
>permitting) are probably more fertile than the North China plains as well.
Please do not contend with me on this regard, It was one of my major.
>
>>could live on the land. When ever outsiders intruded in, they will be overwelmed the population(dissolved), it did not have any thing to do with Confusianism.
>
>China is never known for having all fertile lands; otherwise, there wouldn't
>have been so many famines in history.  (I have a feeling that you don't know
Harvest fluctuation resulted from climate change or war. China had one of
oldest written language, those famine were recorded. Other parts of world
, did not have rich and welthy managed land, did not support so many
population, when bad time came, famine did not hit as much at it did in
China.
>enough history.)
>
>>   People(Westeners, and their Chinese-converts) tend to demean  China's
>>ancient violence, or diseas, or famine. It shoudl be put this way in ancient
>>time in absence of birth control method, low level populathion indicated not
>>that less birth rate, but high infant motality rate, and low life expantacy
>>for other parts of the world, people die young there from lack of food,
>>diseas, animal's eating, etc. It was a bless in ancient times that Chinese can
>>be killed by War during short period of chaos comparing other parts of the
>>world, where most people could not live long enough to join the battle.
>
>Hah.  Go back and read your history books.  The mourning about deaths in
>history is *not* an Western import; it had existed in traditional Chinese
>historiography for a long, long time.
>
>>   Actually morden time, the most violent palce on earth is West Europe, if
>>you count number of people got killed per square miles.
>
>Actually, no.  The most violent place on earth was Cambodia, under the Khmer
>Rouge.
According to West, 1 million people got killed by Khmer Rouge, during period
of 1975-1978. At the time it has total populatin of 5 million, means 20%
got killed. I wonder why still so many Canbodians in rural still support
Khmer Rouge (according to West media). Is it anyother case of West propaganda
or at least exaggeration?
U.S. kill one million Vietnamese during the War, Used brutal method like the
one  in Phenixe Project: CIA extablished South Vietnamese organization, their
method was simple behead teh captured, took the heads to get payed in dollar
for superior. Most of those got killed were not viet com, just ordinary
people. It was ancient pracitice, still alive during the War. The purpose of 
the Khmer Rouge's atrocity exaggeration is probably to distract to World from
focusing on Vietname's atrocity. It was those "sophisticated" Americans'
common practice, not out of thier capacity. That is my guess.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan