India and Pakistan are united by language and history, divided by commerce

[Water Car Engineer]

Yes. "Han" is a very fluid concept.

Once upon a time, the modern-day Southerners, Northerners, Easterners etc. were not considered Han. As outsiders started to assimilate into the Han culture, they became known as "Han" as well.

Although there seems to be very little genetic variation between different subgroups of Han. I read that the same applies to India, i.e. there is not much genetic variation between North and South.

Thats why I just consider Hans like a big blob. What happened is amazing. Like Indians just throw way all the other names(sub groups) and just started calling themselves "Indians"(only) after India.

I am sure this took 100s and 100s of years for all these groups to come together and call themselves "Hans". And join the larger Han identity right?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Thats why I just consider Hans like a big blob. What happened is amazing. Like Indians just throw way all the other names and just started calling themselves "Indian" after India.

I am sure this took 100s and 100s of years for all these groups to call themselves "Hans".

That is right, and as you might have read, we have recently assimilated groups like the Manchus into the Han identity as well.

I consider China to be more about "shared civilization" rather than a "shared race". It is just a stroke of convenience that we also happened to have very similar DNA to each other.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Yes, and as you might have read, we have assimilated groups like the Manchus into the Han identity. Fairly recently as well.

I consider China to be more about "shared civilization" rather than a "shared race". It is just a stroke of convenience that we also happened to have very similar DNA to each other.

Manchus I think will completely disapper. They came as invaders, but their going to assemble into the larger blob. And the Mongols for that matter, but the Tibetian and Eastern Turkics cultures are I think to strong.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Manchus I think will completely disapper. They came as invaders, but their going to assemble into the larger blob. And the Mongols for that matter, but the Tibetian and Eastern Turkics cultures are I think to strong.

Time will tell I guess. I think it is a good idea for Tibetans and Uyghurs to maintain their own distinct identities, they were never really good candidates for assimilation anyway, due to the completely different forms of agriculture and their isolated locations.

Plus, diversity is interesting.

 

[Developereo]

Preference for lighter skin seems to be almost universal across cultures and continents. I suspect it is because of two factors:

- Except for extremely dark people, most people have lighter skin at birth which gets darker with age. Lighter skin, then, is considered an indicator of youth.
- Affluent people tend to stay indoors, while poorer people work outdoors in the sun, getting darker. Lighter skin is considered an indicator of socio-economic status.

Also, in colonial times and in slavery, the (white) masters tended to prefer lighter skin subjects (house n*gro) to work in the house with the kids, cooking etc. and to relegate the darker skinned people (field n*gro) to field work. Again, lighter skin equated to better socio-economic conditions, relatively speaking.

I admit this is a somewhat simplistic theory and, needless to say, the modern preference for tanned (olive) skin over either extreme is a relatively new concept.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Time will tell I guess. I think it is a good idea for Tibetans and Uyghurs to maintain their own distinct identities, they were never really good candidates for assimilation anyway, due to the completely different forms of agriculture and their isolated locations.

Plus, diversity is interesting.

Diversity can lead to separatist movements. Secession not good. Its better to have one core identity..

 

[LaBong]

Diversity can lead to separatist movements.

Not necessarily, people apparently of same stock fought for years among each other without much reasons.

Just consider the case of China and Taiwan.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Diversity can lead to separatist movements. Secession not good. Its better to have one core identity..

China currently has no active armed insurgencies. Here is the strategy we are using to reduce separatist sentiment:

Urumqi, Xinjiang province:

Basically, pump in the economic development.

Give them a stake in China's ascension, they certainly deserve it. They have historically been very patriotic.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

China currently has no active armed insurgencies. Here is the strategy we are using to reduce separatist sentiment:

Urumqi, Xinjiang province:

Basically, pump in the economic development.

Give them a stake in China's ascension, they certainly deserve it. They have historically been very patriotic.

It's the obvious model India and many other nations need to copy. In 20-40 years we will see.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Not necessarily, people apparently of same stock fought for years among each other without much reasons.

Just consider the case of China and Taiwan.

True. Civil wars are the most horrific thing, with brothers killing brothers, and sisters killing sisters.

The closer you are, the more painful it is.

 

[Developereo]

@SMC, Omar etc.

The origin of this article is Pakistan, the author is a Pakistani (Karin Brulliard). The correspondent however is an Indian in new Delhi. Is that clear enough?

archive | Staff | washingtonpost.com
archive | Staff | washingtonpost.com

You can stop assuming now.

Do you have trouble with English comprehension?

Neither of these people are Pakistani. The former is a foreign correspondent stationed in Pakistan; the latter is an Indian.

 

[Dalai Lama]

Do you have trouble with English comprehension?

Neither of these people are Pakistani. The former is a foreign correspondent stationed in Pakistan; the latter is an Indian.

Do you enjoy trolling so much that you conveniently missed my two later posts in which I have clarified that? never miss a chance to insult an Indian do you?

 

[jayron]

Preference for lighter skin seems to be almost universal across cultures and continents. I suspect it is because of two factors:

- Except for extremely dark people, most people have lighter skin at birth which gets darker with age. Lighter skin, then, is considered an indicator of youth.
- Affluent people tend to stay indoors, while poorer people work outdoors in the sun, getting darker. Lighter skin is considered an indicator of socio-economic status.

Also, in colonial times and in slavery, the (white) masters tended to prefer lighter skin subjects (house n*gro) to work in the house with the kids, cooking etc. and to relegate the darker skinned people (field n*gro) to field work. Again, lighter skin equated to better socio-economic conditions, relatively speaking.

I admit this is a somewhat simplistic theory and, needless to say, the modern preference for tanned (olive) skin over either extreme is a relatively new concept.

In ancient South India dark skin was preferred. People used oils to darken their skin. This has been recorded by Marco Polo too.

 

[Developereo]

Do you enjoy trolling so much that you conveniently missed my two later posts in which I have clarified that? never miss a chance to insult an Indian do you?

Sorry, I didn't realize you were one of those foot-in-mouth types who shoots from the hip and then has to backtrack. Kind of.

Even your subsequent post is deliberately ambiguous in response to my claim that the issue of skin color was brough up by Indians, not Pakistanis.

It's written by the Pakistani correspondent for Washington Post.

In ancient South India dark skin was preferred. People used oils to darken their skin. This has been recorded by Marco Polo too.

True. The opposite situation also exists, but I think it is rarer.

 

[Dalai Lama]

Sorry, I didn't realize you were one of those foot-in-mouth types who shoots from the hip and then has to backtrack. Kind of.

Even your subsequent post is deliberately ambiguous in response to my claim that the issue of skin color was brough up by Indians, not Pakistanis.

Sigh! And you were lecturing me on my English comprehension skills.

I believe these were my words: "It's written by the Pakistani correspondent for Washington Post."

"the" NOT "a". I hope you understand the difference here.

An earlier post of mine:

Okay, slight correction. We can't be sure about the nationality of the authors as that information isn't available to us. However they are the respective correspondents for either countries for Washington Post and that will have to do you. You can't get a Pakistani source for each and every article. However the origin of the article is still Lahore, Pakistan.