Michael, you can actually download the entire paper here. It's worth a read.

http://www.crisisstates.com/download/wp/wp68.pdf

Hola:
Acabo de ver tu blog.
Espero que visites mis blogs, son fotos de mi pueblo, de España y de Italia y Francia:

http://blog.iespana.es/jfmmzorita

http://blog.iespana.es/jfmm1

http://blog.iespana.es/jfmarcelo

donde encontrarás los enlaces de todos los blogs.
UN SALUDO.

Nice post Michael.

There has been similar tension in East Turkestan (i.e. Xinjiang) between Hui and Uyghurs since way back. It is interesting to note that some Uyghurs also regard Huis as watchdogs for Han Chinese. There is a saying that goes "Tungganlar Xitayni körse xéyimiz bir, Uyghurni körse dinimiz bir deydu", which can be roughly translated as "Huis say we wear similar shoes when they see Han Chinese, but when they see Uyghurs they say we are religious brethren", meaning that they act as chameleon.

@ Heverci: I am intrigued by this little "poverb": "Tungganlar Xitayni körse xéyimiz bir, Uyghurni körse dinimiz bir deydu."

Not wanting to sound obtuse but could you clarify something for me:

"Huis say we wear similar shoes when they see Han Chinese..."

Are you trying to say that the Hui believe the Uighurs are more obsequious (or similar) toward the Han?

Perhaps next time the Dalai Lama visits Beverly Hills, the Chinese government should send in a busload of Palestinian Muslims.

re: above post @Tom: mopne shouldnt confuse and conflate 'all' Muslims under a single banner. The Hui have along history of interaction with Tibetans along the Qinghai-gansu/amdo borderlands;and more recently within the TAR itself. Tibetan attitudes to Hui/Tungan shouldnt be exported to all Muslims.

An article by Andrew Forbes on the Hui - China's most loyal Muslims:

http://www.cpamedia.com/politics/hui_muslims_in_china/

Michael,

There were a lot of fightings between Huis (who are NOT ethnic Han as this article claimed, but rather Arabs and Persians who came alone with Mongol)and Tibetans back in early 1900s. Of course, Tibetan tribes also fought big time between themselves. At that time, Tibetans considered Hans as brethren as the proverb said "Tibetan and Han are family and Hui are assholes." General Ma also kept 14th Dalai as a ransom until Lhasa asked Central Government of Nanjing for intervene. The Tibetan areas in Gansu were asked out of Qinghai to get away from Ma. So when CCP came after Ma, you can expect how Tibetans feel.

As Heverci probably knew, that Hui army ran over the first ETR in Hotian and Kashi.

Right now, many of Arab business, especially Saudis, are hiring Huis as they still speak Arabs. Now you have Hindu and European/American behind Tibetans, and you will find all Jihadists behind Huis. If Han stands aside, there would be a BIG ethnic war going on with all hell broken.

@Jing

Thanks for the link to Andrew Fischer's paper. It's very informative read.

@Sha

"If Han stands aside, there would be a BIG ethnic war going on with all hell broken."

Don't confuse PRC with a Han state. Even though PRC's population is predominantly Han, it's a multi-ethnic state, a legacy of Qing empire.

Just as it would be incorrect to called United States a White state even thought Whites still comprise of the majority in US.

What happened in 1920s thru 40s in Qinghai was the result of the collapse of a central authority.

It was a classic case of

"Center could not hold, things fell apart."

I suggest that you read the Fischer article following Jing's link.

One mafia rule is definitely preferable to many small mafia factions fighting for control.

To remain creditable, the state must monopolize violence.

PRC would not stand aside.

Many bloggers here probably would rather prefer the collapse of PRC's centralized rule. I doubt they really care about the bloody after mess. It's not like they genuinely concerned about the welfare of little people.

@ Jimba:

Quote: " 'Huis say we wear similar shoes when they see Han Chinese...'

Are you trying to say that the Hui believe the Uighurs are more obsequious (or similar) toward the Han? "

Of course not and sorry for the confusion. The correct writing should be like this:

Huis say, "we [i.e. Hui and Han Chinese] wear similar shoes" when they meet Han Chinese, but when they meet Uyghurs they say, "we [Hui and Uyghurs] are religious brethren".

This saying basically indicate a belief, among some Uyghurs, that Huis are more obsequious toward the Han and have a flip-flop character ...

@Heverci
"...belief, among some Uyghurs, that Huis are more obsequious toward the Han and have a flip-flop character ..."

Some Uyghurs, huh? Don't you mean you?

Thanks for clarifying that for me Heverci. It's an apt little saying. Maybe I will use it in my research, thank you. ha.

@CMD

the article is by Andrew Forbes. I posted it and I am not Jing. Are you totally with it? The way soem one like you who speaks so authoritatively about history deals with facts is of soem concern and evidenced here by your slap dash approach to things.

Also, this issue of central authority breaking down you mention seems to me to be assumed. That is, when was there central authority before the 1930s. How far back does one have to go to find a centrally governed "China" in that period? The Taiping rebellion? The Muslim Rebellions" How about the 60 million dead in the late 19th c.?

Also, this issue of the PRC and Han nation is blurred by you. Multi-ethnicity is better looked upon as foreigners ruling Han rather than Han and other ethnic groups all getting along harmoniously together. This would have to be an anachronism of the party line I believe. Interrogation of history will show that these ethnic groups, even the Yi, have striven to free themselves of Han, then Manchu hegemony since, well, lets pick a date. How far back do you wish to go?? Please, please, not the Han dynasty Please. You are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to history sir, but one must remember history is always open to interpretation and your facts are not set in stone. There are many ways to read the facts - yours is basically an official PRC version of the one big hapy family tale told with a little twist of hip English vernacular cleverly but awkwardly thrown in for effect, but basically a very familiar (and unbelievable) story to any one in the West who has really studied and pondered this thing you and others like to authoritatively call chinese 'history'.

@CMD

my apologies for the first part of last post there was a post by jing and an article and it is good. I was mistaken and also guilty of hastiness. Still please consider the last 4/5ths of my previous.

@spec

I said
"Don't confuse PRC with a Han state."

You said
"Also, this issue of the PRC and Han nation is blurred by you."

and you said
"Multi-ethnicity is better looked upon as foreigners ruling Han rather than Han and other ethnic groups all getting along harmoniously together."

Huh? Say what? You have heck of a way of divine other people's thoughts, don't ya?

Here is my "Urban" impression:

Don't you talk to me, like you know me, okay?

"How far back does one have to go to find a centrally governed "China" in that period?"

Have you heard of High Qing? Kangxi, Qianlong?

Btw The Taiping rebellion and the Muslim Rebellions are the perfect examples of decline and collapse of central authority of Qing empire.

The process wasn't reversed until 1949.

Yes, Mao is a**hole but he is a**hole who united China.

"yours is basically an official PRC version of the one big hapy family tale"

Again, don't you ever put words in my mouth, you hear?

I don't know why I waste my time with you. Go read some Jonathan Spence or something.

@Jing

I will learn from you. From now on , I will also try to keep my comments short and pithy. I don't have time for this sh*t!

CMD

thanks for your comments. You seem quite enraged. Sorry. But i have some things to adress. Firstly we all talk to everybody online like we know them. Are you a cyber-misogynist; a misanthrope of the web? God what a statement.

Re:

"Have you heard of High Qing? Kangxi, Qianlong?"

that was exactly my point: it was a long time from the warlord period of the 1930s back until then. You are the one who said this warlord period happened because of a breakdown in central authority. My point was, Taiping rebellions, Muslim rebellions etc led up to the new century's chaos and lack of cohesion. So how far back do we have to go to find a period of 'central control', whatever that means anyway???? Is it not also an imaginary thing when dealing with any period of Chinese history except as you point out the glorious present? Central Control, hmm, very interesting concept. But its reality. It is aterm staright out of a PRC history book it seems to me or that school of western historiography which borrowed those sinocentric ideas and trued to teach it the west. Nonetheless, You have given the answer for when, if it did exist: a longtime before the 1930s - Qianlong, Kangxi, cripes, thats bloody centuries before! what are you on about? Thats why you may be so pissed off, your pseudo historical tale is exposed. That wasnt my object. I was merely asking a question from the 'facts'. Your statement was highly inaccurate. Even Spence could have told you that. Please no more wiki links to Ban Chao etc. and we wont get into the multi-ethnic stuff, its very embarrassing I know. But really I wasnt putting words in your mouth - you are the one who made the claim of the multi-ethnic state, and then, now deny it and rant and rave all over the net like you are important and everybody wants to know you for some weird reason. Eating words is hard eh! Perhaps you should study Mao's version of history again and see just how close you are to that arsehole. I dont use **** for naughty words. You sure you aint American? Thanks for your answer- very revealing.

@spec

Hahaha... I changed my mind about you. I thought you were serious. You are an funny chap. Gotta catch some waves, Ciao!

Spec,

Here is the danger and stupid idea of "The Great Tibet" lays. At 1911, Lhasa government tried that but was lost between fights with Hui warlord Ma in Qinghai and Han warlord Liu in Sichuan. Many of Tibetan exiles still hope one day China falls apart, they can do that, but I would say history will repeat.

Damn good movie, tough to find, but i highly recommend it. I got to meet the director and the actor who got caught in the quicksand when they screened it here in DC

What seems obvious from the above posts and the obfuscations of the respondents to various historical questions is simply that CMDs post was in error because his post inferred that "central control" was normative in Chinese history which was very clever of him, and a ploy used by politicians world wide: make a false statement and hope the dopey public swallow it and then you go on to build on the false premise from there; when in fact before the 1930s no such thing existed until at least as far back as Qianlong's reign we are told by the same contributor. In other words for a very brief time under the grandiosely termed 'High Qing" which we can interpret as a Manchurian rule over Han China. Of course the degree of central control which existed then can also be debated by historians. The 1759 Qing Imperial conquest and annexation of the Zhungar vassal territories of course gave the PRC its present (colonial) borders and territories (do they still claim all of Mongolia?)and Turkestan, Tibet and Mongolia then came under Manchurian rule. How centrally governed these aquisitions were under Qian long is open to debate. But more probably, the idea of a centrally controlled China say from anywhere between 1800-1930 is a non sequiter based on CMD's erroneous inference in his above post. China was in dissaray for a good century or so before the 5 Ma warlord era. The big implication here is that modern China is in fact a construct inherited from a colonial period of Qing imperialism when many of the present territories were up for grabs. An ailing Manchu power structure undermined by early Han nationalists just managed to grab those territories and proclaim them part of China. These are the same territories which still resent and resist Han hegemony even under its present artificial 'centrally controlled' dictatorship.

@Roebuck

You are actually pretty humorous for an ardent supporter of Osama Bin Laden.

@Cao MD:

Quote: "Roebuck: You are actually pretty humorous for an ardent supporter of Osama Bin Laden."

You ARE pretty humorous in supporting the communist regime. How funny of you for accusing somebody as a a supporter of Bin Laden just for questioning the legitimacy of your Han-chauvinistic/大汉族主义 world view? You are just a typical, brainwashed child of CCP.

To Sha: "There were a lot of fightings between Huis (who are NOT ethnic Han as this article claimed, but rather Arabs and Persians who came alone with Mongol)".

As a matter of fact, racial-wise Hui are very much Han. When Mongol conquered China some thousand years ago, many Han converted themselves to Muslim to avoid racial discrimination of Yuan.

In fact, ROC of KMT didn't officially recognize Hui as an ethnic.

Regards.

@gpit

Race is as much a construct of politics and culture as genetics. Obama is the product of a Kenyan black man and an American white woman. He self-identify with African-American and is considered black in America.

Hui almost universally claim patrilinear Arab/Persian heritage. They also acknowledge many generations of inter-marriages with Han where Hui men take on Han wifes (with proper conversion to Islam of course).

I don't know if genetic tests have been done. But this claim of Arab/Persian ancestry should be easy to verify. If a Hui man has the Y chromosome with Middle Eastern markers then he is a direct descendant of a Arab or Persian male.

I suspect that in addition to Arab/Persian, many Hui are probably descended from people of Central Asian and Turkic stock that had converted to Islam prior to arrival in China.

"When Mongol conquered China some thousand years ago, many Han converted themselves to Muslim to avoid racial discrimination of Yuan."

Do you have source/reference for this?

"In fact, ROC of KMT didn't officially recognize Hui as an ethnic."

Well, KMT racial ideology also claim that everybody, Han, Mongols, Manchu, Tibetans and Turkic Muslims (Uyghurs and Kazaks) are all descended from Huang Di, which is highly unlikely unless Huang Di was a prolific African chief before the homo sapien migration out of Africa.

"When Mongol conquered China some thousand years ago..."

Not to nitpick or anything, but Mongol conquest of China is less than 800 years old.

@Heverci,

I would like to respond to you but I really have to get back to oppress Uyghurs and other minorities...

CMD said: "Don't confuse PRC with a Han state. Even though PRC's population is predominantly Han, it's a multi-ethnic state, a legacy of Qing empire."

Not so in my view. China’s multi-ethnicity is more a legacy of Confucian doctrine than of Qing annexation or expansionist policy. Yep, the five relations does not aim to address the relationship between majority and minority, but in a broader cultural sense, with its emphasis on family, minorities are seen as younger brothers, sometimes as disobedient ones. I believe the dominant framework of Confucian multi-ethnicity was its Yi-Xia doctrine, extrapolated by Mencius, Fang Xiaoru, and by the lesser known Confucian scholar Hao Jin (Yuan Dynasty).

For those who don’t know – and excuse me for those who do - in the Confucian order, Xia (Han Chinese, or Zhongyuan) is the ruler while Yi (barbarians, outsiders, or minorities) is subject; Xia is center, while Yi is the peripheries; Xia consists of insiders and fellow countrymen, while Yi consists of outsiders and strangers; and Xia is superior, while Yi is subordinate. The idea of Yi-Xia presupposes the Middle Kingdom and the central power of China. Such a concept has dealt with the multi-ethnic question since before the Qing.

I found this quote by Herber, who reinforces my understanding: “Confucianism, the ideology of the state throughout all Chinese dynasties, despised these so-called ‘barbarians,’ but called for a policy of non-violent assimilation through the imposition of Han-Chinese values rather than through a policy of extermination . . . The court’s policy was not to conquer and occupy them, but rather to have them administer themselves. . . .”

I believe the ‘barbarians’ could administer themselves under the official native “Tusi” system, whereby approved national minority headmen would handle minority affairs. I also know this practice occurred in the Yuan, Ming and the Qing dynasties. Sure, Emperor Yongzheng’s unitary “Guiliu” policies ended “Tusi”, and further assimilated minorities into Han culture through the opening of Confucian schools and the encouragement of minorities to take examinations for official office, but this was not the beginning of the present day PRC ‘multi-ethnic’ state.

Present and past policies on the minzu question, such as Hu Jintao’s “Harmonious Society” or Emperor Qianlong’s tax exemption of the minority Guizhou area, are not a result of either economic or military expansionism but a proven legacy of Confucian doctrine, it would seem.

@ Heverci

thats right CMDs approach is this: when he cannot answer or is exposed as a fabricator of historical illusions in the guise of an authoritative voice he attcks either the personality or allegiances of those he cannot honestly answer- very childish - like a school yard brat, and in fact an example of what Jimba correctly termed the 'ad hominen' approach: attack the commentator to draw attention away from his/her argument. But lo and behold it doesnt work, the same as CCP historiography and noveau-maoist world view (for Mao is in fact the father of CCP historiography) does not and will never wash with an intelligent and thoughtful audience. For the record, and thank you Heverci, I have never anywhere or any place acknowledged support of Bin Laden- 'ad hominen' indeed and total crap as well.

@roebuck

You are right, I verbally assaulted you because you are a big Dork and not too bright one at that.

Although I don't support Tibet's independence pursuit, i somehow can understand their frustrations to Hui. I like the Uigure saying about Huis. Han people have sayings like this too. One is 老回回的饭吃得,老回回的话听不得. There must be some truth to it.

Interesting that the Tibetans you were watching Kekexili with did enjoy the film.
I had heard that the non-Tibetan director was egregiously portraying Tibetans in the worst minority film traditions (as in new takes on orientalist!).
Maybe I will give the film a chance after all.

"@roebuck

You are right, I verbally assaulted you because you are a big Dork and not too bright one at that. "

After again having nothing to say of any value CMD once more proves his intellectual retardation, and inability to say antything that is not framed within a Maoist concept of 'China's history by reverting to such peurile name calling. You notice there is no adress to anything to do with what was formerly posted about his approach to Chinese history and his methods of deception employed. In fact, he proves the point made Jimba about mindless 'ad hominen' argument; and also proves himself a master of the 'ad hominen' approach to non-debate. Keep it up CMD for all to see. No one is fooled.

Smash a restaurant just because it serves a dish with a piece of bone? Uncivilized unruly mobs!

I just keep wondering whether or not Chinese laws are being enforced in western China. I watched the March Lhasa riot videos. It seemed no police intervention was there to stop those criminals from smash street shops and innocent passers-by.

I hope next time police officers will not restrain their use of coersion just because they are handling violent minority law-breakers.

Police, load your guns and shoot.

gpit,

Mongol back in Yuan were multi-religious. They did start to be converted to Tibetan Buddhism. Why you think Buddhist Hans need to covert to Muslim to have a better chance? Mongol divided people into Mongol, Semu(colored eyes), Hans (includes Khitan, Jurchan, Korean, etc.) and Southerners. Have nothing to do with religion.

CMD,

According to DNA, majority of Ningxia Huis were from Iran/Turkemanistan area.

Huolong,

Ethnic issue is ultra sensitive in China and local authorities don't have rights to decide how to deal with riots. That is why those riots are causing many death and injuries in Cops and other innocents. But you have to consider many of in crowds are fanned in by rumors and ring leaders. Those people are not deserved to be shot at the spot. But when Central Government makes the decision, the payback will square all accounts.

Sha,

Interesting. I had believed Hui most likely descended from Sogdians (in modern day Uzbekistan) who were much more prevalent in China.

Then I found this article titled "A genome-based study of the Muslim Hui community and the Han population of Liaoning Province, PR China":

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_200112/ai_n9017785/pg_2?tag=artBody;col1

What's interesting is the following find:

"
The AMOVA results suggest a firm genetic basis for the separate historical origins of the Hui and Han paternal ancestries.

However, in attempting to further define the possible male ancestries of the Hui, a conflict between historical and genetic evidence was apparent. As shown in Figures lA-C, Hui males clustered more closely with Eastern Asian groups than with the Central Asian group, casting in doubt the assumed Central Asian origins of the Hui.
"

Another piece of gem

"
The results of the present study suggest that the Han of Liaoning may be more of a political construct than a homogenous population.

Conflicting results were obtained where...

On these grounds, it appears that there is some form of population substructure within the Han of Liaoning, possibly arising from earlier admixture with the Manchu.
"

I recalled a recent DNA tests sponsored by National Geographic Research, carried out by Lebanese geneticist Dr Pierre Zalloua that shown today's Lebanese, the Phoenicians, and the Canaanites before them are all the same people. Haplogroup J2 (M172) is used as reference. Its distribution, centered in West Asia and Southeastern Europe which include southern Italians, Greeks, Turks, Spaniards, Sephardic Jews as well as Ashkenazi Jews and people of Levant.

Which led me to this map of Human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup distribution:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Y-Haplogroups-1500AD-World-Map.GIF

Not surprisingly considering the history of Central Asia, Uyghurs and Uzbeks are shown to have a diverse lineage of Y-chromosome haplogroups.

While overwhelming number of Chinese, Southeast Asians and half of Japanese population share descent from Haplogroup O (M175).

Before people started to arrive at the Japanese descended from Chinese conclusion, I must point out that among Haplogroup O grouping,both Haplogroup O1 and Haplogroup O3 are prototypical Chinese patrilines whereas Haplogroup O2 is more prevalent among Japanese and Koreans.

While Haplogroup O2b1* comes close to being the modal Y-chromosome haplogroup in Korea, a subclade of Haplogroup O2b1, namely Haplogroup O2b1a (47z), is found at a fairly high frequency among the Japanese-Ryukyuan population.

However, the parent haplogroup, O2b1*, is found among Japanese at a relatively low frequency of approximately 4% to 7% whereas haplogroup O2b1a is either completely absent from or found at only extremely low frequency (which could represent historical Japanese admixture) among samples of modern Koreans.

Which suggest modern Korean and modern Japanese share common paternal ancestors who spread from Korea to Japan but the the subgroup O2b1a subsequently evolving separately within the proto-Japanese-Ryukyuan population.

Hmm... Interesting stuff.

I know Gladney has done a lot of research on the Hui, albeit with a religohistoric focus. I wonder if you know, CDM or Sha, if he has discussed the biological Hui question? Also, I know Tyler, in his book the Wild Wild West, took some time to discuss the decent of Xinjiang inhabitants (although I don't have the book handy atm). Thanks.

@ Sha

So, the law enforcement is the job of the central government. Hui communities in Beijing are known as a place where other people should not argue with their members. Otherwise, you will be really hurt, physically, because they will not hesitate to attack you at the drop of a hat.

Jimba & CMD,

Huis itself is a diversified group that even includes early Nestronians. Some of Yunnan and Hainan Huis are actually from Cham who driving out by Buddhists.

Also since Northern Han Chinese are fully of HU bloods (Central Asian, Turkic), any comparasion based on that are not convincing.

Of significant presence among modern Uyghur population are Haplogroup R1b, Haplogroup R1a, Haplogroup O and Haplogroup J.

Haplogroup O is most prevalent among East Asian population.

Haplogroup J arise in near east and is spread among mediterranean popluation including Jews and Arab, also present in Iranian population

Haplogroup R1a is associated with eastern branch of the Indo-Europeans. Likely arise in Ukraine, most prevalent among Central and Eastern Europeans , Central Asians and Indians, also spread as far west as Ireland. The gene has proven to be a "diagnostic Indo-Iranian marker", probably reflect assimilation of ancient Scythians among Xinjiang popluation.

Haplogroup R1b is found in highest frequency among Western Europeans. Its' significant presence seem to support that Uyghurs are also partially descend from ancient Tocharians of the Tarim basin who shared ver close cultural traits with Celts of Western Europe.

Some Uyghurs also have Haplogroup C which is associated with Northern Asian (prevalent among Mongolian, Buryiat and Kazaks) While few other Uyghurs have Haplogroup R2 which come from India.

Tarim basin has long served as crossroad of commerce and culture and now it seems gene as well.

Victor Mair noted in the DNA analysis of Tarim
Mummies that astonishing thing is without revealing the source of the mummies, just by looking at DNA evidence alone, it's easy to conclude that the sample come from a modern cosmopolitan city with diverse populations.

Sha,

I agree that Hui come from a diverse source. Hui used to denoted all Muslim. Modern PRC classification could be arbitrary sometimes.

"Also since Northern Han Chinese are fully of HU bloods (Central Asian, Turkic)"

DNA evidence suggest otherwise. Patrilineage of Southern Han do not differ significantly from Northern Han. Mitochondrial DNA however, show great diversity and divergence among Nothern Han and Southern Han.

In other words, we are all brothas from different mothas.

No doubt various Turko-mongol groups have contribute their gene to the Han gene pool. But their contribution of Y-chromosome is limited.

Presence of haplogroup C (northern Asian, prevalent among Mongols and Kazaks) is very limited among Han population. And its distribution show no significant difference between Northern or Southern Han.

But the limitation of modern genetics means we could only reliably trace our father's father's father etc and mother's mother's mother etc with the big gap in between (your Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA tells you nothing about your maternal grandfather or paternal grandmother).

Also Northern and Southern depends on one's perspective.

My mom is from Sichuan and my Dad is from Zhejiang, center of Jian Nan (south of the river). As far as I could trace my genealogy, my family have always been south of the traditional Qin-lin and Huai river North-South divide.

I had subconscious ingrained the idea that we are culturally and physically different from those uncouth Northerners!

Imagine my shock when a Hong Kong person referred to me as a Northerner.

The it dawn on me that to a Cantonese speakers, everybody else is a Northerners!

@ Huolong

all the footage you saw was taken after the security forces had beaten and attacked peaceful demonstrations. Are you so controlled by what the media feeds the population, you dont realize that what is shown is selective propaganda? Be more critical of what you see and hear, especially from state sponsored television.

@ "Mummies that astonishing thing is without revealing the source of the mummies, just by looking at DNA evidence alone, it's easy to conclude that the sample come from a modern cosmopolitan city with diverse populations."

Really? like it isnt as clear as dog's balls that teh ancient Tarim basin oases were multi-cultural. But of course this argument is used by you aand other sino-dominanace/propagandists to prove the Han have always lived in Xinjiang, right? Im sure taht Charchan man and his cohort had a real lot to do wit your east asians.

@ CMD
\
the Cantonese arent Han, look at them, and they know it; They are an assimilated southern indigenouis group. Then again what is a NORTHERN Han but 3/4 Tatar. 'Scratch a Russian find a Tatar' also has a broader application here.

Spec, could you argue in a more reasonable way?

Ok. Leo.

Was I arguing?

I found this comment by Barry Sautmen (1997) in, "Racial nationalism and China's external behavior" interesting.

Literal ties of blood between Han and minority people are asserted. A study of the hemoglobin of 220,000 persons in northwest China was conducted in part to supply information on the blood relationships between China's different nationalities. Genetic similarities between the Tibetans and Han have been purportedly adduced and allegedly contrast with sharp differences between the leucocytic antigen of the white blood cells of Tibetans and the white blood cell antigen of neighboring Nepalese and Indians.(127) Genetic markers indicate, however, that there is a great diversity among the Han and minority populations, so much so that geneticists believe that it is "difficult to make valid comparisons of the Chinese as a group with other ethnic groups."(128) Both Han and Tibetans are genetically heterogeneous and overlapping.(129) The two peoples are thus neither racially alike nor racially distinct.

In terms of Patrilinear descent, a significant group of Tibetans share Y Haplogroup O with majority of Han Chinese, but even more Tibetans has Y Haplogroup D esp. among Khampas.

"
Haplogroup R1b, the most typical Western European haplogroup,has been found at low frequencies among Manchus, Koreans, Chinese, Native Americans, and inhabitants of the Malay Archipelago and Polynesia.

The occurrence of Haplogroup R1b in populations of Indonesia, the Philippines, Polynesia, and Native Americans might reflect recent admixture from European colonial populations, but its limited presence in Manchuria, Korea, and China is more ambiguous, especially since contact with Russians or Indo-Aryans should have introduced the typically Eastern European Haplogroup R1a rather than the typically Western European Haplogroup R1b. "

It seems small amount of "Hu" did left a genetic footprint in terms of Y-chromosome, but they don't make up significant numbers.

I was checking out the footage of the Guizhou riots and I couldn't help but think that if they happened in Xinjiang those rioters would all be accused of "terrorism," or something with similar irrationality.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ll_7e3_1214820246

yes, yes, yes but isnt 'ethnicity' a condition created by culture and state as much as by this thing we call 'blood'?

BTW

it was a stroke of CMD genius to take the discussion back to this Hui thing a as a means of avoiding certain historical questions posed to him earlier in this post. His 'dork' attack was his only response, a whitewash. This genetic stdff is all interesting but basically a discussion dictated by CMD manipulation.

Ahh, those peaceful Tibetans. Maybe if Tibetan men got off their arses and did some work instead of leaving it all to their women they might actually get somewhere. And don't get me started about those monks.

BJD: The Guizhuo riots had nothing to do with Tibet, "lazy Tibetans" or mad monks. For more read on..

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-07/01/content_8469872.htm

@Huolomng & BJD

what say you now to the sight of rioting Han in the streets burning, bashing, looting. Should they also be shot dead in the streets like you suggest for those vile minorities who protest against injustice, incompetence and corruption?

Who said anything about 'mad monks' and why am I be ing quoted as saying 'lazy Tibetans'? Neither did I say anyone should be shot. You people on her are so far up your own fucking arses you don't have a clue what's going on. The fact you make these conclusions shows what a bunch of wankers most of you are.
Now feed on that.

yum, yum oh thats nice shit. The post was directed to you and one other fuckwit, named Huo long. cant you fucken read slime hole!

@ Cao Meng De

Do not try to pretend you know better than me.

Where's the footage that shows police are beating up the peaceful demonstrators?

@ Jimba

Any violent rioters will be treated the same way by governments around the world.

What if i say rubber bullets are loaded?

@ Huolong

The point is the protests were peaceful until tibetans were attacked by governemrent forces. It got nasty after that. What would you do if your brother and sister were arrested and beaten and possibly killed by fascist thugs? Probabaly nothing right?

Should the Han demonstrators been killed in the streets of Guizhou recently when they protested?? Answer? Come on...we are waiting...