The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewLinh Dinh Archive
Buffaloes and Flies in the South China Sea
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_151138391

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Ignorance is renewed with each newborn, and by the time any man figures out anything, he can almost feel the mortician leaning over his stiff face. Though all lessons are embalmed within history, few care to explore that infinite corpse. Lewis Mumford, “So far from being overwhelmed by the accumulations of history, the fact is that mankind has never consciously carried enough of its past along with it. Hence a tendency to stereotype a few sorry moments of the past, instead of perpetually re-thinking it, re-valuating it, re-living it in the mind.”

Far from learning from history, people tend to distort it to their own ends, and thus during the last commemoration of Russia’s defeat of Germany in World War II, many commentators conveniently forgot that those two countries had collaborated to start the war in the first place. After the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, Nazi Germany invaded Poland and Czechoslovakia, while Soviet Russia poured troops into Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the eastern portion of Romania. Russians massacred 22,000 Poles at Katyn alone, imprisoned 100,000 and deported 1,200,000 to Siberia, Kazakhstan and other places within the Soviet Union. More than half would die.

In the Polish city of Brest-Litovsk, conquering German and Russian troops paraded together on September 22, 1939. On June 22, 1941, Germany invaded Russia itself, however, thus ending that evil alliance. Working from London, what’s left of the Polish government arranged for its citizens in Siberia to be transferred to British controlled Iran, and from there, many of the surviving Polish children could finally consign to posterity their horrific experiences of the Russian Socialist Paradise. In 1981, Irena and Jan Tomasz Gross published a selection of these accounts in their book, War Through Children’s Eyes. Here are three:

DOCUMENT NO. 87
PGC/Box 119
TADEUSZ S. Born 1927
Wilejka county
Wilno voivodeship

When the Soviets invaded us Mommy became frightened daddy was taken into captivity after a sickness lasting a month my mother died When they had made themselves at home in Poland they began to destroy statues crosses and they ordered the people to pray to the rifle because that is also a tool of death. on February 10 1940 at 2 in the morning they came to our apartment and they took us at the point of a rifle they took us without any reason and took us to Russia in the train it was crowded cold people were dying from hunger and cold. at the settlement we worked in the mines 12 hours a day at the mines there was water the clothes we had all rotted in a week after a 12-hour workday we had to stand in line another 12 barefoot in the cold. in the barracks there were bedbugs cockroaches and vermin of all sorts the stoves were busted. After such work people turned into skeletons and when we got the amnesty the people scattered to various places and I with my family went to a kolkhoz at the kolkhoz we worked day and night because it was very hot they gave us practically no food only what we could gather in the fields. with such a diet my brother died with no one to bury him so I buried him myself without a coffin even without a suit because we had only one for the two of us. after such suffering we escaped with my sister because daddy went into the Polish army which was forming then we walked for 200 kilometers on foot through the mountains of course barefoot over sharp stones in 40 degree [Celcius] heat and without water. At the station as we waited for a train we were robbed of everything so that all we had left was a can where there had been milk which we found in the garbage and which we used as a drinking cup.

DOCUMENT NO. 30
PGC/Box120
WLADYSLAW T.
Baranowicze county
Nowogrod voivodeship

My Life in Russia

We were deported to Russia on February 10, 1940. When we arrived we were given very poor housing. There were many bedbugs, lice, and fleas. After a few days they sent the children to school and the older people to work. Children were forced to go to school, and whoever refused was imprisoned in the bathhouse and denied food. When we first got to school we were mocked and beaten—if a Pole said there was a God he was beaten up. Father had to work very hard to earn enough to support the whole family, and not only my father but so did all the Poles who were deported to Russia. For two years we lived in that awful, poor, stupid Russia. After two years the Poles started leaving Russia. Polish people had to get a pass to leave Russia. The trip South was awful. People died of hunger in the train cars and their corpses were thrown out the window along the way. We came to Vologda and were issued food ration cards and bread for the trip. My father was walking toward the car with his bread when a prisoner tried to steal his bread. Fortunately, the police arrested the prisoner and took him away. They would throw the corpses out of the cars and the train would grind the bodies apart on the tracks. From Vologda we left to Chkalov. There, the Polish outpost gave us food and we went all the way to the harbor in pahlevi. The end.

DOCUMENT NO. 31
PGC/Box 120
HENRYK S.
Baranowicze county
Nowogrod voivodeship

It took place in February. The Russians came and did a house search. They were looking for weapons. They took us to the station in country wagons. There were very many people in our freight car. It was cramped and stuffy. When the train started we cried that we would never see our home again. We traveled for four days and nights. They didn’t give food we used snow to make water. In Siberia the barracks were cramped again. I was going to school. They taught us that there was not God. Once I spoke up in Polish and our teacher sent me to the supervisor and he yelled at me. They drilled two holes in the ceiling. The commander would say into one: “Boh, Boh daj pieroh” [God, God, give a dumpling] and nothing would happen. To the other hole he said: Soviet, Soviet daj kanfiet [Soviet, Soviet, give a candy] and candies would fall down. He would laugh that God gave nothing. The Polish children ran away. Dad died of hunger. He swelled up. They wrapped him up in a sheet and threw him into the ground. My brother didn’t have shoes and didn’t go to work they took him to prison for two months. Over thirty people died at the settlement. We would stand on a line for bread from evening till morning. More than once we didn’t have bread for two days in a row. We waited for our pay for a long time, because the paymaster wasn’t there and there was nothing to buy bread with. At first we sold clothes in Russian villages to get bread, but then we ran out of clothes.

Grade 2B.
I am 13.

ORDER IT NOW

Poland was occupied by both Germans and Russians, then just Germans, then just Russians. To a Pole, this plot is all too familiar, for in 1772, Germans and Russians also carved up Poland. Swallowed up by Tsarist Russia, Prussia and Hapsburg Austria, Poland would not regain independence for 123 years. With such a history, Poles are understandably leery of Russia, but according to Russian Andre Vltchek, a prominent voice among the American left, Poles and other Eastern Europeans are nothing but ingrates for turning their backs on Russia, “Many countries that Russia had liberated, betrayed her in the most vulgar manner […] Czechs and Poles desecrated monuments to its soldiers.”

When the Soviet Union collapsed, “the oppressed of the world lost their most powerful guardian,” according to Vltchek, and “‘Russian’ is not only a nationality; it is a verb. It means: to stand against oppression, against Western imperialism, to be building bridges between the countries that are resisting Western imperialist terror.” Think about that for a minute, Russian as a verb meaning to liberate all of the world’s oppressed. Such evangelical fervor is matched only by the American rhetoric of being the shining city on a hill for all of mankind.

Just as each man must look out for number one, so must each nation, and each will disguise its ugliest, most selfish moments with twisted self justification, if not lofty, altruistic language. No one ever invades, massacres or rapes, but intervenes, rescues or most reluctantly reacts in self defense. No one destroys another culture, but only saves it from itself. Had Poland been more dominant than Russia, it might have been the one to kick its neighbor around. From 1605 until 1618, Polish troops made several forays into Russia and even occupied Moscow for two years. A teenaged Polish prince was declared Tsar. When Polish troops swarmed into Smolensk after a 20-month siege, 3,000 Russian soldiers blew themselves up in its cathedral to avoid capture.

While laying waste to much of Asia during World War II, Japan created the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Like other murderous and plundering nations before and since, Japan depicted itself as a savior, but instead of rescuing the other yellow peoples from colonial whites, it killed, starved, tortured and raped them. Beware, I say, of all countries blaring a messianic mission, for beneath their uplifting banner of universal brotherhood, freedom, democracy or international socialism, etc., one will find a rapist of the first order.

Never colonized by whites, Japan even defeated Russia in 1905, so it did serve as a model in East Asia. Many Chinese and Vietnamese nationalists went to Japan to study. A major funder of Japan’s war against Russia was Jacob Schiff, a Jewish banker in New York, and Schiff was also a patron of Leon Trotsky. Hating how Tsarist Russia treated Jews, Schiff was willing to do anything to destroy it. Never leave out race as a factor, for though often disguised, it colors all human actions. The only ones who insist that race doesn’t exist are either so racially smug or so racially threatened, though in the second case, they’re hysterically lying.

When Jews had no homeland, many of them spoke of universal brotherhood and such, but as soon as they had Israel, they started to act as tribally and racist as everybody else. Tribalism or nationalism is still the dominant factor in war and politics, and not ideology, but within this, you also have greedy individuals who are just looting and hoarding for themselves. As soon as the Vietnam War was over, the Vietnamese fought Cambodia then China, two foes they’d gone to war against repeatedly. It didn’t matter that they were all “Communist” on paper. There is no universal anything, just thousands of tribes and hundreds of nations trying to survive. The Vietnamese don’t care for International Communism any more than the Amish or the Jews.

The new rising power in Asia is not Japan but China, and to her citizens, the Middle Kingdom is only regaining her rightful place on the world stage. After being misruled by the feeble Qing Dynasty, drugged and pillaged by the British, carved up by other Western powers and Japan, raped by Japan then subjected to decades of terror by Mao and his gang, the mainland Chinese are finally allowed to catch up with their overseas brethren. With their intelligence, diligence and commercial prowess, the Chinese can succeed anywhere when not held back by an asphyxiating system.

Writing in 1911, Edward Alsworth Ross observed:

It is rash […] to take the observed sterility of the Celestial mind during the period of intercourse with the West as proof of race deficiency. Chinese culture is undergoing a breaking-up process which will release powerful individualities from the spell of the past and of numbers, and stimulate them to high personal achievement. In the Malay States, where the Chinese escape the lifeless atmosphere and the confining social organization of their own land, their ingenuity is already such that unprejudiced white men have come to regard them as our intellectual peers.

Feeling ever more confident, China is ready to shove a weakening United States from its own back yard, and that’s why it’s laying claim to an increasing portion of the Western Pacific. Doing so, it has also come into conflict with Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. Gaining access to oil, natural gas and fishing rights has been cited as the rationale for China’s behavior, but the Chinese are also keenly aware that those who control sea lanes control energy supplies, and the United States is still the preeminent naval power. With its ability to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz or Malacca, the US can certainly cripple any adversary. To gain leverage of its own, China is building a canal in Nicaragua to connect the Pacific with Atlantic, and a Chinese company is also managing both ends of the American-built Panama Canal.

ORDER IT NOW

Most opponents of the American Empire are cheering for China in the South China Sea face-off, but Vietnam, the only country to have fought and defeated outright this empire, is forging closer military ties with the United States, all because of China. To a Vietnamese, the white man will come and go, but China is an eternal shadow menacing his identity and existence. From 111 BC to 938 AD, China occupied Vietnam almost continuously, with only two breaks, of three and 58 years. To gain final independence, Vietnam defeated China in 938 AD at the Battle of Bach Dang. After planting steel tipped stakes in the river, the Vietnamese lured Chinese boats over this watery trap, and at low tide, these boats were pierced and their soldiers killed. In 1288, the Vietnamese repeated the same trick, at the same river, to vanquish the Mongols. One ignores history at one’s peril.

Ngo Quyen and Tran Hung Dao were the leaders of those two battles, and there is hardly a Vietnamese town without streets and schools named after them, and by the Saigon River, there’s a statue of Tran Hung Dao. Every so often, I’m harangued by a Westerner about my flawed reading of Vietnamese history, though his knowledge of the subject doesn’t extend beyond Ho Chi Minh and the Vietnam War. Beyond the racial chauvinism that comes from several centuries of being on top of the world, this attitude also betrays the progressive bias that deems much the past as simply a repository of absurd habits, mistakes and superstitions. Mumford calls it “anti-historic nihilism.” Writing in 1944, he comments, “During the last generation, particularly in the United States, it became popular to say that only contemporary history was important; whereas the truth is that all of history is important because it is contemporary and nothing is perhaps more so than those hidden parts of the past that still survive without our being aware of their daily impact. He who knows only the events of the last generation or the last century knows less than nothing about what is actually happening now or what is about to take place.” In this age of geriatric sex change, Kim Kardashian’s bulbous buttocks and endless porn for everyone, including nuns and tots, your average American doesn’t remember what he half read half an hour ago, much less know anything from another century. He wouldn’t be surprised to be informed that this big, beautiful orb of polluted dirt he’s standing on is only a few thousand years old. Wow, that old?!

While most Americans are only becoming aware of the tension in the South China Sea, Vietnamese know that the trouble started in 1974, when China wrested control of the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam. In that one-day battle, 74 Vietnamese and 18 Chinese died. Though the US 7th Fleet was in the area, it did nothing to intervene and even refused to rescue South Vietnamese sailors. Nixon had visited China in 1972, and so Vietnam, all of it, was becoming superfluous to Uncle Sam. In 1988, China attacked a Vietnamese garrison in the Spratly Islands, and in that one-day battle, 64 Vietnamese and six Chinese died. In the last two years, Chinese ships have rammed Vietnamese ships just off the coast of Vietnam, and they have also rammed Filipino fishing boats or used water canons against them. Boarding some boats, the Chinese have tossed their catch overboard.

On November 1, 2014, there was an official ceremony in Hanoi to honor the 74 South Vietnamese soldiers who died defending the Paracel Islands, and this is remarkable because it’s the only time the Communist government has acknowledged its former South Vietnamese foes as nationalists in any way. As fate would have it, the colonel of the capsized ship is named Ngụy, the same word used to denigrate South Vietnamese troops as “fake.” Equally weird, the site of the most horrific American atrocity against Vietnamese civilians, Mỹ Lai, means “Half American.” The gods are sick.

Odds are high fighting will break out again in the South China Sea. Pushing weapons of mass destruction, Uncle Sam rakes in many coins from all crises, so he has billions of reasons to stoke the flame, but it’s anybody’s guess if he’ll risk his turkey neck when the missiles fly. Though America needs to defend its ebbing hegemony, its manufacturing base has been mostly relocated to China, and China is its biggest creditor. In 2001, a Chinese fighter jet clipped an American spy plane near Hainan Island, and its pilot, Wang Wei, was killed. Forced to land in Hainan, 24 Americans were kept for ten days, then released after the US agreed to a letter expressing “regret and sorrow.” A Chinese demand for a token million dollars in compensation was ignored. Hardly any American remembers this incident, but the Chinese haven’t forgotten, and the next time planes collide, expect a much bigger explosion. In 2014, a Chinese jet swerved within 30 feet of another American spy plane.

All sides in this brewing fiasco have reasons to act the way they are, and though each will cite law or logic to defend their actions, it doesn’t matter who’s right or wrong, only what the winner, if any, can get away with. The Vietnamese have a saying, Nine men, ten opinions. And also, When buffaloes collide, flies die. While leaning militarily on an unreliable United States, East Asian countries continue to be integrated into China’s (and Russia’s) economic sphere. Perhaps they will take their losses and accept being lesser partners in this new world order. As a castrated ex champion, the United States might have to do the same. It’s a good bet, though, she won’t go down so quietly.

Linh Dinh is the author of two books of stories, five of poems, and a novel, Love Like Hate. He’s tracking our deteriorating socialscape through his frequently updated photo blog, State of the Union.

 
Of Related Interest
shutterstock_145003837
A Dangerous Game for Washington
shutterstock_65521447
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
ComingWar-Quad-Approved4
Hide 24 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. I like a man who knows his history and has the moral courage to speak the truth. Good essay.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ltlee
    Apples and oranges. China is not pre WWII USSR and German, Vietnam is not pre-WWII Europe.

    1. China has coexisted peacefully with Vietnam for many years by trades and by shared understanding of principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.

    "...the historical contrast between Europe and Asia also deserves recognition. As noted in a remarkable study of China’s emergence, already some centuries ago “the most important states of East Asia—from Japan, Korea, and China to Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and Kampuchea . . . had all been linked to one another, directly or through the Chinese center, by trade and diplomatic relations and held together by a shared understanding of the principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.... Long periods of peace among the European powers were the exception rather than the rule.... In sharp contrast . . . the national states of the East Asian system were almost uninterruptedly at peace, not for 100 but 300 years.”
    Brzezinski, Zbigniew (2012-01-24). Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power

    2. "From 111 BC to 938 AD, China occupied Vietnam almost continuously, with only two breaks, of three and 58 years. To gain final independence, Vietnam defeated China in 938 AD at the Battle of Bach Dang."

    Before independence Vietnam was part of China just like the US colonies was part of Britain. According to Charles Holcombe's Genesis of East Asia:

    "Until the very end of the period ... [10th century A.D.], there literally was no Vietnam, and
    the territory that is today northern ... Vietnam was merely a remote southern salient of the Chinese empire ... (since Vietnam's own southward expansion is yet another, later story).
    The people who lived there were no less "Chinese" than many of the people who lived elsewhere within the empire, albeit (as was also true of many if not all other parts of the empire) with an undertow of local popular subcultures and languages.
    Even within the southernmost part of the Chinese empire that would eventually become exclusively Vietnamese, there existed simultaneously a considerable range of ethnocultural variation, stretching from the educated local Chinese imperial elite at one extreme to residual tribal minorities at the other.
    Nor should it be supposed that these tribal minorities preserved the essence of some eternally distinctive Vietnamese national identity, since they were themselves internally diverse and scarcely distinguishable from the tribes on what is today the Chinese side of the border.
    In 939, however, local strongmen achieved what turned out to be permanent political independence, and what would eventually (in the 19th and 20th centuries) come to be known as Vietnam was born.
    It is also worth keeping in mind that the southern portions of what is now Vietnam were never part of the Chinese empire and represent a set of quite different cultural influences. There was, after all, a reason why the French called the region "Indo-China," and why Vietnam is also commonly considered to be part of "Southeast Asia."" — Excerpts from Genesis of EA, p. 6, except the final, italicized point, which comes from Professor Holcombe via email communication.
    http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/geography/geo_eastasia.html#3

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /article/buffaloes-and-flies-in-the-south-china-sea/#comment-968350
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. RW says:

    “a Chinese company is also managing both ends of the American-built Panama Canal.”

    This is a piece of misinformation that sprang up 15 years ago and gets repeated from time to time. The Panama Canal is run by the Panamanian government now. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal_Authority

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. A trivial observation but it shows how forgotten history is always with us. I’m always seeing some idiot cigarette smoker or other take a newly bought and unopened pack of cigarettes and bang it madly against a counter, his hand, or some other nearby object. Sometimes the idiot will do this nearly a score of times and/or with exceptional vehemnce. Of course, this has no impact at all on the cigarettes within the pack. The cigarettes are made and packed to carefully engineered standards by incredibly precise machinery. The tobacco within the cigarettes is already packed as tightly as possible within perfectly applied wrapping paper.

    The morons who engage in this behavior are totally unaware that they are reflecting a romanticized image of international leftist warriors from the WW I to WW II era. Back in those days Russian cigarettes were notoriously badly manufactured; a pinch of tobacco in a cardboard tube. It was essential to slam a pack hard on some surface dozens of times to pack the tobacco tightly enough that it would not dribble out and would allow a few puffs before burning out. Someone who slammed his cigarette packs in this way was suggesting that he’d gained familiarity with Russian cigarettes while performing some secret sevice for the Comintern in some exotic locale. Even then, for most this activity was just an affectation but at least one whose meaning was understood.

    So the next time you see some adenoidal, left-end-of-the-bell-curve, loser slamming his newly bought pack of cigarettes against a hard surface think of it as a reminder of the power of forgotten history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Obviously you're not a smoker, all you have to do is go buy 2 packs of cigarettes, slam one of them and leave the other as is. The difference is visible, several millimeters of paper extends past the end of the tobacco on the "slammed" pack. You will also note far less trouble with keeping it burning in windy conditions, and the elimination of the possibility that the cherry will will fall off while flicking ash. There are finer brands that are indeed more tightly stuffed, but they are significantly more expensive than your Marlboros or Winstons.
    Your vitriol, however, indicates that YOU may be pretty tightly packed, so I can understand the confusion. ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:

    As an historian, please do not forget to note that a Chinese Jin class ballistic missile submarine fired a JL-2 ICBM in November 2010 from its underwater position roughly 20 miles or so west of Los Angeles.
    This was lied about by all relevant US Government agencies. Here’s the real story from Wayne Madsen:

    http://www.infowars.com/wayne-madsen-china-fired-missile-seen-in-southern-california/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. KA says:

    America and the RoyalSaudi slave can always unleash the latest version of Mujhaeddin on China.
    Amercian neocon then can try to gain a future home in China by talking about Islamic threat as they tried with Russia by playing both sides over Chechen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Good article.

    It’s amazing how much we ignore history. In modern American culture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. “As a castrated ex champion, the United States…”

    Clever reference to Bruce/”Caitlyn” Jenner here.

    He is now the poster boy/girl for the US.

    Pathetic.

    Everything in this essay is true. Kudos to the author — and to Unz for publishing it here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. fnn says:

    …many commentators conveniently forgot that those two countries had collaborated to start the war in the first place.

    Also, FDR did all that he could to bring about a general European war in 1939:

    http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2012/05/poland-as-pawn-hoover-identifies.html

    http://www.amazon.com/review/R1G7H48SQQAXD8/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1557780218&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=283155&store=books

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. AG says:

    The real footage of 1988 sea battle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Jus' Sayin'...
    A trivial observation but it shows how forgotten history is always with us. I'm always seeing some idiot cigarette smoker or other take a newly bought and unopened pack of cigarettes and bang it madly against a counter, his hand, or some other nearby object. Sometimes the idiot will do this nearly a score of times and/or with exceptional vehemnce. Of course, this has no impact at all on the cigarettes within the pack. The cigarettes are made and packed to carefully engineered standards by incredibly precise machinery. The tobacco within the cigarettes is already packed as tightly as possible within perfectly applied wrapping paper.

    The morons who engage in this behavior are totally unaware that they are reflecting a romanticized image of international leftist warriors from the WW I to WW II era. Back in those days Russian cigarettes were notoriously badly manufactured; a pinch of tobacco in a cardboard tube. It was essential to slam a pack hard on some surface dozens of times to pack the tobacco tightly enough that it would not dribble out and would allow a few puffs before burning out. Someone who slammed his cigarette packs in this way was suggesting that he'd gained familiarity with Russian cigarettes while performing some secret sevice for the Comintern in some exotic locale. Even then, for most this activity was just an affectation but at least one whose meaning was understood.

    So the next time you see some adenoidal, left-end-of-the-bell-curve, loser slamming his newly bought pack of cigarettes against a hard surface think of it as a reminder of the power of forgotten history.

    Obviously you’re not a smoker, all you have to do is go buy 2 packs of cigarettes, slam one of them and leave the other as is. The difference is visible, several millimeters of paper extends past the end of the tobacco on the “slammed” pack. You will also note far less trouble with keeping it burning in windy conditions, and the elimination of the possibility that the cherry will will fall off while flicking ash. There are finer brands that are indeed more tightly stuffed, but they are significantly more expensive than your Marlboros or Winstons.
    Your vitriol, however, indicates that YOU may be pretty tightly packed, so I can understand the confusion. ;-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kiza
    Just sayin' is a pathetic regular troll inhabiting unz.com. But, as a non-smoker, I learned something from your explanation Hazim, thank you.

    This is a good essay of Linh Dinh. Being raised in the US, his 20th Century European history is a little biased by his exposure to the US intellectual establishment of the Polish-Jewish-Anglo ethnicity and bias. That mob writes a new history of the World, backed up by a lot of money. These days, money writes history more than winners write history.

    This essay does not say anything brilliantly new, but it does a fluent criticism of the human natural inclination to dominate, use and abuse other meeker humans (enslave, murder and rape). Not that I disagree with him, but I could summarize the whole Dinh's essay with the old US urban jungle cliche:

    "There are only two types of people in this world - those who use others and those who are used by others, which one do you want to be?"

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website

    The author of the piece evidently never heard of Teschen Region, nor he ever read Correli Barnett or, for that matter, doesn’t understand Munich and surely knows nothing about Litvinov and Collective Security. Other than that, he, I am sure, is a good poet and a fiction writer–and he better stick to that field.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Realist says:

    In the last couple of days the US government has made an accusation that China has hacked their computers. Over the last few years numerous accusations of hacking by China, Russia and North Korea have been made. The US government and the lick spittle media have forwarded these accounts with no sign of shame or embarrassment. If these three countries are so backward and unaccomplished as our government and their media minions would have us believe, how can they break into our ‘top secret’ computers with such ease? Sounds like the government is bullshitting us….again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. “Russian as a verb meaning to liberate all of the world’s oppressed. Such evangelical fervor is matched only by the American rhetoric of being the shining city on a hill for all of mankind.”>/blockquote>

    Yet people from all countries go to great lengths to make America their home…

    Read More
    • Replies: @MisterCharlie
    People go to huge extraordinary lengths to make Sweden, Norway, Australia, New Zealand - and others - their homes. The world is quickly becoming overpopulated, and people are becoming desperate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. The article is pretty good, but not accurate in every detail … and systematically delusional in some respects.

    “Most opponents of the American Empire are cheering for China in the South China Sea faceoff, but Vietnam, the only country to have fought and defeated outright this empire, is forging closer military ties with the United States, all because of China.” Vietnam would like to forge closer military ties with the United States, but has been unable to do so, thanks to the way eurocentric Zbig and buddies have twisted the key neocon principle of the Wolfowitz Doctrine to pretend that Russia (as though still Communist USSR) continues as the premier threat to USA’s global hegemony. What a charade!

    In truth, an alliance between USA and Vietnam has been totally called for in every respect for some years now. However, the eurocentric neocons who still run USA’s NSC ‘global security policy’, continue with the great sell-out to the Animal Farm PRC. the sell-out policy that was established by Kissinger in 1971 – year of the big K’s ‘secret’ trip to Beijing. (Kissinger, for his part, repeats endlessly that the big deal for him is that Europe must be united: that probably indicates that he expects USA-NATO to divide Russia along the Urals between its European and Asian parts – according to a Molotov-Ribbentrop-like secret agreement between what will (after the dismemberment of Russia) be the last two remaining global super-powers, USA and the PRC.

    “While leaning militarily on an unreliable United States, East Asian countries continue to be integrated into China’s (and Russia’s) economic sphere. Perhaps they will take their losses and accept being lesser partners in this new world order. As a castrated ex champion, the United States might have to do the same. It’s a good bet, though, she won’t go down so quietly.”

    Yes, “unreliable United States” is correct! USA cannot even be relied on to represent its own rational self-interests! USA will continue to be manipulated and toyed with by the PRC and other corporatist global money powers until we (USA) finally throw out the neocon apparatchiks and start to act like a real nation again, unashamed to press our own national interests! Just look how a year ago, with promises pending to Vietnam – promises from the US Navy to the Vietnamese Navy (or anyway half-promises) – what happened? USA invited China’s naval fleet (including a state-of-the-art PRC spy ship) into RIMCON 2014. This happened exactly when the Chinese rammed Vietnamese naval and fishing vessels without so much as any kind of apology and absolutely no “by your leave.” Why or how did that loading of insult on top of injury happen? It happened because the ZBig bunch within the NSC neocons just had to prioritize the feckless Ukraine fiasco. To call that crew ridiculously eurocentric hardly begins to cover the extent of their delusional perfidy, and we really have grounds to suspect the eurocentric neocons of collusion with the PRC, up to and including payola into Hong Kong bank accounts. In any event, the question must be asked: Cui bono? (Yet none dare call it treason.)

    However, it’s doubtful that the Obama administration will do anything rash; rather, they will continue to jolly along the fading eurocentric neocons by making life miserable for Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine (Putin has, after all, embarrassed Obama) and, bottom line, prioritize, above all, making a deal with Iran (which requires Russia’s cooperation). Americans at all levels have grown tired of wearing the sole superpower crown: who needs it? Of course, if the PRC wants to push Japan to the breaking point through their sick-ego (inferiority complex) Korean People’s Republic proxy, yes, then it could lead to outright nuclear warfare. But nothing in the history of the PRC or of China indicates anything like that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. @Southfarthing

    "Russian as a verb meaning to liberate all of the world’s oppressed. Such evangelical fervor is matched only by the American rhetoric of being the shining city on a hill for all of mankind.">/blockquote>

    Yet people from all countries go to great lengths to make America their home...

    People go to huge extraordinary lengths to make Sweden, Norway, Australia, New Zealand – and others – their homes. The world is quickly becoming overpopulated, and people are becoming desperate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Kiza says:
    @Anonymous
    Obviously you're not a smoker, all you have to do is go buy 2 packs of cigarettes, slam one of them and leave the other as is. The difference is visible, several millimeters of paper extends past the end of the tobacco on the "slammed" pack. You will also note far less trouble with keeping it burning in windy conditions, and the elimination of the possibility that the cherry will will fall off while flicking ash. There are finer brands that are indeed more tightly stuffed, but they are significantly more expensive than your Marlboros or Winstons.
    Your vitriol, however, indicates that YOU may be pretty tightly packed, so I can understand the confusion. ;-)

    Just sayin’ is a pathetic regular troll inhabiting unz.com. But, as a non-smoker, I learned something from your explanation Hazim, thank you.

    This is a good essay of Linh Dinh. Being raised in the US, his 20th Century European history is a little biased by his exposure to the US intellectual establishment of the Polish-Jewish-Anglo ethnicity and bias. That mob writes a new history of the World, backed up by a lot of money. These days, money writes history more than winners write history.

    This essay does not say anything brilliantly new, but it does a fluent criticism of the human natural inclination to dominate, use and abuse other meeker humans (enslave, murder and rape). Not that I disagree with him, but I could summarize the whole Dinh’s essay with the old US urban jungle cliche:

    “There are only two types of people in this world – those who use others and those who are used by others, which one do you want to be?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. denk says:

    *Feeling ever more confident, China is ready to shove a weakening United States from its own back yard, and that’s why it’s laying claim to an increasing portion of the Western Pacific. Doing so, it has also come into conflict with Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei*

    i’d have thought anyone who isnt addicted to the cnn, wsj etc ought to know that the unitedsnake is instigating proxy war in scs just like what its doing at russia’s doorstep. the snake use ukraine against russia while jp, ph, are its catpaws in scs, vn would be foolish to sup with the devil instead of carrying on its dialog with china.
    malaysia, brunei have excellent relation with china inspite of the snake’s best effort to coerce them into the anti chinese front.

    many astute observers believe that mh370, mh17, followed by the recent helipcopter crash killing several eminent malaysian politicians, are paybacks for the malaysians defiance.

    why is the author mimicking the msm to blame the current mayhem on an *over confident* china trying to *shove the snake from its backyard* ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. ltlee says:
    @Warren peterson
    I like a man who knows his history and has the moral courage to speak the truth. Good essay.

    Apples and oranges. China is not pre WWII USSR and German, Vietnam is not pre-WWII Europe.

    1. China has coexisted peacefully with Vietnam for many years by trades and by shared understanding of principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.

    “…the historical contrast between Europe and Asia also deserves recognition. As noted in a remarkable study of China’s emergence, already some centuries ago “the most important states of East Asia—from Japan, Korea, and China to Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and Kampuchea . . . had all been linked to one another, directly or through the Chinese center, by trade and diplomatic relations and held together by a shared understanding of the principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions…. Long periods of peace among the European powers were the exception rather than the rule…. In sharp contrast . . . the national states of the East Asian system were almost uninterruptedly at peace, not for 100 but 300 years.”
    Brzezinski, Zbigniew (2012-01-24). Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power

    2. “From 111 BC to 938 AD, China occupied Vietnam almost continuously, with only two breaks, of three and 58 years. To gain final independence, Vietnam defeated China in 938 AD at the Battle of Bach Dang.”

    Before independence Vietnam was part of China just like the US colonies was part of Britain. According to Charles Holcombe’s Genesis of East Asia:

    “Until the very end of the period … [10th century A.D.], there literally was no Vietnam, and
    the territory that is today northern … Vietnam was merely a remote southern salient of the Chinese empire … (since Vietnam’s own southward expansion is yet another, later story).
    The people who lived there were no less “Chinese” than many of the people who lived elsewhere within the empire, albeit (as was also true of many if not all other parts of the empire) with an undertow of local popular subcultures and languages.
    Even within the southernmost part of the Chinese empire that would eventually become exclusively Vietnamese, there existed simultaneously a considerable range of ethnocultural variation, stretching from the educated local Chinese imperial elite at one extreme to residual tribal minorities at the other.
    Nor should it be supposed that these tribal minorities preserved the essence of some eternally distinctive Vietnamese national identity, since they were themselves internally diverse and scarcely distinguishable from the tribes on what is today the Chinese side of the border.
    In 939, however, local strongmen achieved what turned out to be permanent political independence, and what would eventually (in the 19th and 20th centuries) come to be known as Vietnam was born.
    It is also worth keeping in mind that the southern portions of what is now Vietnam were never part of the Chinese empire and represent a set of quite different cultural influences. There was, after all, a reason why the French called the region “Indo-China,” and why Vietnam is also commonly considered to be part of “Southeast Asia.”” — Excerpts from Genesis of EA, p. 6, except the final, italicized point, which comes from Professor Holcombe via email communication.

    http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/geography/geo_eastasia.html#3

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kiza
    I find your version of the history of the Vietnamese part of Indochina interesting. Yet, it does not match what I learned travelling and studying Vietnam.

    1) You neglect that today's Vietnamese define themselves in contrast to the Chinese. One could discuss this point till death, are the Vietnamese the Southern Chinese?
    2) The Vietnamese national identity is defined through wars and fighting against the Chinese occupiers, more than through the French War or the American War (Vietnamese war in the US).
    3) The majority of Vietnamese are indistinguishable from the Chinese of Southern China, crossing the border from Vietnam to China, you would not know that you crossed.
    4) The Vietnamese language has 9 tones, more than any Chinese dialect to my knowledge. Some linguists even consider the Vietnamese to be a lingual predecessor of the Chinese, or a branch of an earlier shared East Asian language.

    We have to wait for genetics to add more information to this issue: are the Vietnamese the Southern Han?

    Also, my impression is that you are making too much of a distinction between Northern and Southern Vietnam. If you really wanted to divide Vietnam into parts, you could divide it into Northern, Central and Southern, but this brings as much distinction as the States of the US - not much. Only food is a little different.

    "Indochina" does not split Vietnam in two - this is quite wrong, it splits the peninsula in two instead. The French name Indochine applies to the Chinese cultural influence over Vietnam and Indian cultural influence over Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Burma. The natural separator between these two influences was the Annamite mountain chain which goes along most of the Vietnamese Western border. The famous Ho Chi Minh trail goes on the non-Vietnamese side of these mountains. But because Southern Vietnam and Cambodia are mostly an open marshland plane, this is where the two influences met. The Indian Hindu culture is older than the Chinese Han culture, yet I encountered zero Indian influence in Vietnam, North or South.

    , @Linh Dinh
    To say that there was no Vietnam before the Chinese arrived is equivalent to saying there were no native nations in North America before whites came, or no native nations on the British Isles before the Romans landed. The reason why there's no record of a Vietnamese nation before 111BC is because the Vietnamese had no written language, though they were sophisticated enough to make many bronze drums, the oldest of which is 2,700-years-old. The territory of these bronze drum making people was not confined to present day Vietnam, but that's to be expected. In any case, when the Chinese discovered the Vietnamese, they called them 赤鬼, which translates as "Red Devils," so clearly the Chinese saw these folks as much different, and vice versa. Rebellions against Chinese rule started immediately, with the most notable led by the Trưng Sisters. They defeated the Chinese in 40AD and ruled Vietnam for three years before being killed by the Chinese in battle. In the 5th Century Book of the Later Han, it is recorded that the Trưng Sisters were decapitated and their heads sent to China.

    In 248AD, a 23-year-old woman, Lady Triệu, led a rebellion against the Chinese. As with the Trưng Sisters, her exploits became legendary. In The Birth of Vietnam, Keith W. Taylor writes:

    “Chinese records do not mention Lady Trieu; our knowledge of her comes only from Vietnamese sources. From this it is evident that the events of 248 were remembered differently by the two sides. The Chinese only recorded their success in buying off certain rebel leaders with bribes and promises. The resistance led by Lady Trieu was for them simply a kind of stubborn barbarism that was wiped out as a matter of course and was of no historical interest. On the other hand, the Vietnamese remembered Lady Trieu's uprising as the most important event of the time. Her leadership appealed to strong popular instincts. The traditional image of her as a remarkable yet human leader, throwing her yard-long breasts over her shoulders when going into battle astride an elephant, has been handed down from generation to generation. After Lady Trieu's death, her spirit was worshipped by the Vietnamese. We owe our knowledge of her to the fact that she was remembered by the people.”

    The stories of the Trưng Sisters and Lady Triệu is echoed by that of the Icenic Boudicca.

    In sum, the Chinese saw the Vietnamese as Red Devils. When a 26-year-old Vietnamese general, Trần Bình Thông, was captured by the Chinese in 1285, he refused to yield any information by saying, "I'd rather be a devil of the Southern nation than a king of the Northern nation. Since I'm captured, there's only death, why harass me with questions?" He was killed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Kiza says:
    @ltlee
    Apples and oranges. China is not pre WWII USSR and German, Vietnam is not pre-WWII Europe.

    1. China has coexisted peacefully with Vietnam for many years by trades and by shared understanding of principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.

    "...the historical contrast between Europe and Asia also deserves recognition. As noted in a remarkable study of China’s emergence, already some centuries ago “the most important states of East Asia—from Japan, Korea, and China to Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and Kampuchea . . . had all been linked to one another, directly or through the Chinese center, by trade and diplomatic relations and held together by a shared understanding of the principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.... Long periods of peace among the European powers were the exception rather than the rule.... In sharp contrast . . . the national states of the East Asian system were almost uninterruptedly at peace, not for 100 but 300 years.”
    Brzezinski, Zbigniew (2012-01-24). Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power

    2. "From 111 BC to 938 AD, China occupied Vietnam almost continuously, with only two breaks, of three and 58 years. To gain final independence, Vietnam defeated China in 938 AD at the Battle of Bach Dang."

    Before independence Vietnam was part of China just like the US colonies was part of Britain. According to Charles Holcombe's Genesis of East Asia:

    "Until the very end of the period ... [10th century A.D.], there literally was no Vietnam, and
    the territory that is today northern ... Vietnam was merely a remote southern salient of the Chinese empire ... (since Vietnam's own southward expansion is yet another, later story).
    The people who lived there were no less "Chinese" than many of the people who lived elsewhere within the empire, albeit (as was also true of many if not all other parts of the empire) with an undertow of local popular subcultures and languages.
    Even within the southernmost part of the Chinese empire that would eventually become exclusively Vietnamese, there existed simultaneously a considerable range of ethnocultural variation, stretching from the educated local Chinese imperial elite at one extreme to residual tribal minorities at the other.
    Nor should it be supposed that these tribal minorities preserved the essence of some eternally distinctive Vietnamese national identity, since they were themselves internally diverse and scarcely distinguishable from the tribes on what is today the Chinese side of the border.
    In 939, however, local strongmen achieved what turned out to be permanent political independence, and what would eventually (in the 19th and 20th centuries) come to be known as Vietnam was born.
    It is also worth keeping in mind that the southern portions of what is now Vietnam were never part of the Chinese empire and represent a set of quite different cultural influences. There was, after all, a reason why the French called the region "Indo-China," and why Vietnam is also commonly considered to be part of "Southeast Asia."" — Excerpts from Genesis of EA, p. 6, except the final, italicized point, which comes from Professor Holcombe via email communication.
    http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/geography/geo_eastasia.html#3

    I find your version of the history of the Vietnamese part of Indochina interesting. Yet, it does not match what I learned travelling and studying Vietnam.

    1) You neglect that today’s Vietnamese define themselves in contrast to the Chinese. One could discuss this point till death, are the Vietnamese the Southern Chinese?
    2) The Vietnamese national identity is defined through wars and fighting against the Chinese occupiers, more than through the French War or the American War (Vietnamese war in the US).
    3) The majority of Vietnamese are indistinguishable from the Chinese of Southern China, crossing the border from Vietnam to China, you would not know that you crossed.
    4) The Vietnamese language has 9 tones, more than any Chinese dialect to my knowledge. Some linguists even consider the Vietnamese to be a lingual predecessor of the Chinese, or a branch of an earlier shared East Asian language.

    We have to wait for genetics to add more information to this issue: are the Vietnamese the Southern Han?

    Also, my impression is that you are making too much of a distinction between Northern and Southern Vietnam. If you really wanted to divide Vietnam into parts, you could divide it into Northern, Central and Southern, but this brings as much distinction as the States of the US – not much. Only food is a little different.

    “Indochina” does not split Vietnam in two – this is quite wrong, it splits the peninsula in two instead. The French name Indochine applies to the Chinese cultural influence over Vietnam and Indian cultural influence over Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Burma. The natural separator between these two influences was the Annamite mountain chain which goes along most of the Vietnamese Western border. The famous Ho Chi Minh trail goes on the non-Vietnamese side of these mountains. But because Southern Vietnam and Cambodia are mostly an open marshland plane, this is where the two influences met. The Indian Hindu culture is older than the Chinese Han culture, yet I encountered zero Indian influence in Vietnam, North or South.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Linh Dinh says: • Website
    @ltlee
    Apples and oranges. China is not pre WWII USSR and German, Vietnam is not pre-WWII Europe.

    1. China has coexisted peacefully with Vietnam for many years by trades and by shared understanding of principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.

    "...the historical contrast between Europe and Asia also deserves recognition. As noted in a remarkable study of China’s emergence, already some centuries ago “the most important states of East Asia—from Japan, Korea, and China to Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, and Kampuchea . . . had all been linked to one another, directly or through the Chinese center, by trade and diplomatic relations and held together by a shared understanding of the principles, norms, and rules that regulated their mutual interactions.... Long periods of peace among the European powers were the exception rather than the rule.... In sharp contrast . . . the national states of the East Asian system were almost uninterruptedly at peace, not for 100 but 300 years.”
    Brzezinski, Zbigniew (2012-01-24). Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power

    2. "From 111 BC to 938 AD, China occupied Vietnam almost continuously, with only two breaks, of three and 58 years. To gain final independence, Vietnam defeated China in 938 AD at the Battle of Bach Dang."

    Before independence Vietnam was part of China just like the US colonies was part of Britain. According to Charles Holcombe's Genesis of East Asia:

    "Until the very end of the period ... [10th century A.D.], there literally was no Vietnam, and
    the territory that is today northern ... Vietnam was merely a remote southern salient of the Chinese empire ... (since Vietnam's own southward expansion is yet another, later story).
    The people who lived there were no less "Chinese" than many of the people who lived elsewhere within the empire, albeit (as was also true of many if not all other parts of the empire) with an undertow of local popular subcultures and languages.
    Even within the southernmost part of the Chinese empire that would eventually become exclusively Vietnamese, there existed simultaneously a considerable range of ethnocultural variation, stretching from the educated local Chinese imperial elite at one extreme to residual tribal minorities at the other.
    Nor should it be supposed that these tribal minorities preserved the essence of some eternally distinctive Vietnamese national identity, since they were themselves internally diverse and scarcely distinguishable from the tribes on what is today the Chinese side of the border.
    In 939, however, local strongmen achieved what turned out to be permanent political independence, and what would eventually (in the 19th and 20th centuries) come to be known as Vietnam was born.
    It is also worth keeping in mind that the southern portions of what is now Vietnam were never part of the Chinese empire and represent a set of quite different cultural influences. There was, after all, a reason why the French called the region "Indo-China," and why Vietnam is also commonly considered to be part of "Southeast Asia."" — Excerpts from Genesis of EA, p. 6, except the final, italicized point, which comes from Professor Holcombe via email communication.
    http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/geography/geo_eastasia.html#3

    To say that there was no Vietnam before the Chinese arrived is equivalent to saying there were no native nations in North America before whites came, or no native nations on the British Isles before the Romans landed. The reason why there’s no record of a Vietnamese nation before 111BC is because the Vietnamese had no written language, though they were sophisticated enough to make many bronze drums, the oldest of which is 2,700-years-old. The territory of these bronze drum making people was not confined to present day Vietnam, but that’s to be expected. In any case, when the Chinese discovered the Vietnamese, they called them 赤鬼, which translates as “Red Devils,” so clearly the Chinese saw these folks as much different, and vice versa. Rebellions against Chinese rule started immediately, with the most notable led by the Trưng Sisters. They defeated the Chinese in 40AD and ruled Vietnam for three years before being killed by the Chinese in battle. In the 5th Century Book of the Later Han, it is recorded that the Trưng Sisters were decapitated and their heads sent to China.

    In 248AD, a 23-year-old woman, Lady Triệu, led a rebellion against the Chinese. As with the Trưng Sisters, her exploits became legendary. In The Birth of Vietnam, Keith W. Taylor writes:

    “Chinese records do not mention Lady Trieu; our knowledge of her comes only from Vietnamese sources. From this it is evident that the events of 248 were remembered differently by the two sides. The Chinese only recorded their success in buying off certain rebel leaders with bribes and promises. The resistance led by Lady Trieu was for them simply a kind of stubborn barbarism that was wiped out as a matter of course and was of no historical interest. On the other hand, the Vietnamese remembered Lady Trieu’s uprising as the most important event of the time. Her leadership appealed to strong popular instincts. The traditional image of her as a remarkable yet human leader, throwing her yard-long breasts over her shoulders when going into battle astride an elephant, has been handed down from generation to generation. After Lady Trieu’s death, her spirit was worshipped by the Vietnamese. We owe our knowledge of her to the fact that she was remembered by the people.”

    The stories of the Trưng Sisters and Lady Triệu is echoed by that of the Icenic Boudicca.

    In sum, the Chinese saw the Vietnamese as Red Devils. When a 26-year-old Vietnamese general, Trần Bình Thông, was captured by the Chinese in 1285, he refused to yield any information by saying, “I’d rather be a devil of the Southern nation than a king of the Northern nation. Since I’m captured, there’s only death, why harass me with questions?” He was killed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @A4
    @Linh Dinh, You are totally wrong about this whole "Red Devil" thing. ( Xích Quỷ in Vietnamese, 赤鬼/Chi Gui in Chinese) . Kinh Dương Vương called his country 'Red Devil", which probably had a different connotation then.

    From time immemorial, modern northern Vietnam and southern China were peopled by many races. Lộc Tục (c. 2919 – 2794 BC) succeeded his predecessor as tribal chief and made the first attempts to incorporate all tribes around 2879 BC. As he succeeded in grouping all the vassal states within his territory, a convocation of the subdued tribes proclaimed him King Kinh Dương Vương, as the leader of the unified ancient Vietnamese nation. Kinh Dương Vương called his newly born country Xích Quỷ and reigned over the confederacy that occupied the Red River Delta in present-day Northern Vietnam and part of southeastern China, seeing the beginnings of nationhood for Vietnam under one supreme ruler, the Hùng king, also starting the Hồng Bàng period.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Vietnam

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. A4 says:
    @Linh Dinh
    To say that there was no Vietnam before the Chinese arrived is equivalent to saying there were no native nations in North America before whites came, or no native nations on the British Isles before the Romans landed. The reason why there's no record of a Vietnamese nation before 111BC is because the Vietnamese had no written language, though they were sophisticated enough to make many bronze drums, the oldest of which is 2,700-years-old. The territory of these bronze drum making people was not confined to present day Vietnam, but that's to be expected. In any case, when the Chinese discovered the Vietnamese, they called them 赤鬼, which translates as "Red Devils," so clearly the Chinese saw these folks as much different, and vice versa. Rebellions against Chinese rule started immediately, with the most notable led by the Trưng Sisters. They defeated the Chinese in 40AD and ruled Vietnam for three years before being killed by the Chinese in battle. In the 5th Century Book of the Later Han, it is recorded that the Trưng Sisters were decapitated and their heads sent to China.

    In 248AD, a 23-year-old woman, Lady Triệu, led a rebellion against the Chinese. As with the Trưng Sisters, her exploits became legendary. In The Birth of Vietnam, Keith W. Taylor writes:

    “Chinese records do not mention Lady Trieu; our knowledge of her comes only from Vietnamese sources. From this it is evident that the events of 248 were remembered differently by the two sides. The Chinese only recorded their success in buying off certain rebel leaders with bribes and promises. The resistance led by Lady Trieu was for them simply a kind of stubborn barbarism that was wiped out as a matter of course and was of no historical interest. On the other hand, the Vietnamese remembered Lady Trieu's uprising as the most important event of the time. Her leadership appealed to strong popular instincts. The traditional image of her as a remarkable yet human leader, throwing her yard-long breasts over her shoulders when going into battle astride an elephant, has been handed down from generation to generation. After Lady Trieu's death, her spirit was worshipped by the Vietnamese. We owe our knowledge of her to the fact that she was remembered by the people.”

    The stories of the Trưng Sisters and Lady Triệu is echoed by that of the Icenic Boudicca.

    In sum, the Chinese saw the Vietnamese as Red Devils. When a 26-year-old Vietnamese general, Trần Bình Thông, was captured by the Chinese in 1285, he refused to yield any information by saying, "I'd rather be a devil of the Southern nation than a king of the Northern nation. Since I'm captured, there's only death, why harass me with questions?" He was killed.

    , You are totally wrong about this whole “Red Devil” thing. ( Xích Quỷ in Vietnamese, 赤鬼/Chi Gui in Chinese) . Kinh Dương Vương called his country ‘Red Devil”, which probably had a different connotation then.

    From time immemorial, modern northern Vietnam and southern China were peopled by many races. Lộc Tục (c. 2919 – 2794 BC) succeeded his predecessor as tribal chief and made the first attempts to incorporate all tribes around 2879 BC. As he succeeded in grouping all the vassal states within his territory, a convocation of the subdued tribes proclaimed him King Kinh Dương Vương, as the leader of the unified ancient Vietnamese nation. Kinh Dương Vương called his newly born country Xích Quỷ and reigned over the confederacy that occupied the Red River Delta in present-day Northern Vietnam and part of southeastern China, seeing the beginnings of nationhood for Vietnam under one supreme ruler, the Hùng king, also starting the Hồng Bàng period.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Vietnam

    Read More
    • Replies: @Linh Dinh
    No, I'm not totally wrong on this. Kinh Dương Vương is a legendary figure, and the Hùng Vương Dynasty is also mythical. Hùng Vương merely means "Brave King," and there were supposedly 18 Hùng Vương Kings spanning 2,621 years. You do the math. It doesn't make sense. None of the kings have proper names. They're all called Hùng Vương, meaning "Brave King." Such is the stuff of fables and legends.

    Like I said, the Vietnamese had no written history before the Chinese came, and so the earliest Vietnamese individuals were recorded by the Chinese, as is the name 赤鬼, "Red Devils." The Chinese tend to call foreigners devils, and so the Vietnamese were the red devils.

    Vietnamese will claim they have 4,000 years of history, which is nonsense. They will also say that they descend from a dragon and a fairy that gave birth to 100 eggs that hatched into 100 boys.

    Kinh Dương Vương supposedly ruled from 2879 to 2794 BC. The earliest surviving record of him dates from the 大越史記全書 (Complete Annals of Đại Việt), which was completed by Ngô Sĩ Liên in 1479AD, 4,273 years after the end of Kinh Dương Vương's supposed reign. If you want to believe that, then I really don't know what to say.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Linh Dinh says: • Website
    @A4
    @Linh Dinh, You are totally wrong about this whole "Red Devil" thing. ( Xích Quỷ in Vietnamese, 赤鬼/Chi Gui in Chinese) . Kinh Dương Vương called his country 'Red Devil", which probably had a different connotation then.

    From time immemorial, modern northern Vietnam and southern China were peopled by many races. Lộc Tục (c. 2919 – 2794 BC) succeeded his predecessor as tribal chief and made the first attempts to incorporate all tribes around 2879 BC. As he succeeded in grouping all the vassal states within his territory, a convocation of the subdued tribes proclaimed him King Kinh Dương Vương, as the leader of the unified ancient Vietnamese nation. Kinh Dương Vương called his newly born country Xích Quỷ and reigned over the confederacy that occupied the Red River Delta in present-day Northern Vietnam and part of southeastern China, seeing the beginnings of nationhood for Vietnam under one supreme ruler, the Hùng king, also starting the Hồng Bàng period.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Vietnam

    No, I’m not totally wrong on this. Kinh Dương Vương is a legendary figure, and the Hùng Vương Dynasty is also mythical. Hùng Vương merely means “Brave King,” and there were supposedly 18 Hùng Vương Kings spanning 2,621 years. You do the math. It doesn’t make sense. None of the kings have proper names. They’re all called Hùng Vương, meaning “Brave King.” Such is the stuff of fables and legends.

    Like I said, the Vietnamese had no written history before the Chinese came, and so the earliest Vietnamese individuals were recorded by the Chinese, as is the name 赤鬼, “Red Devils.” The Chinese tend to call foreigners devils, and so the Vietnamese were the red devils.

    Vietnamese will claim they have 4,000 years of history, which is nonsense. They will also say that they descend from a dragon and a fairy that gave birth to 100 eggs that hatched into 100 boys.

    Kinh Dương Vương supposedly ruled from 2879 to 2794 BC. The earliest surviving record of him dates from the 大越史記全書 (Complete Annals of Đại Việt), which was completed by Ngô Sĩ Liên in 1479AD, 4,273 years after the end of Kinh Dương Vương’s supposed reign. If you want to believe that, then I really don’t know what to say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Ray says:

    The problem with taking a little part of history to make a political statement can be deceiving. I will try my best to give an unbiased and abridged version on the relationship between China and Vietnam here and let you be the judge. During the Spring Autumn period (770 BC until 476 BC) there is this powerful state called Yue in southern China. At this time although China is technically under the Zhou dynasty, the Zhou king is no longer in charge and his vassals have declared themselves independent. Another little known fact, is that it is the Zhou kingdom that first started calling itself the “central state” which was badly translated as “middle kingdom” today. The so-called Chinese people actually spoke many different dialect and wrote in related but different script and at that time are divided into as many as 148 states. Confucius, Laozi, Mencius etc live in this period. As the boundaries of state kept changing Chinese people simply called the country where they live as “under heaven”. The term central state(middle kingdom) came into wide usage only in the late 19th century or late 20th century when China need to deal with foreign state under “modern international standard”.

    The name “Yue” was applied indiscriminately to many southern Chinese peoples throughout classical Chinese texts. After the fall of Yue, the ruling family moved south to what is now northern Fujian and set up the Minyue kingdom. This successor state lasted until around 150 BC, when it miscalculated an alliance with the Han Dynasty and was absorbed. In 207 BC, Zhao Tuo (Triệu Đà) who has served in the Qin army founded a state called Nanyue (Nam Việt). This started the close interaction between the so-called Chinese and Vietnamese people. Technically, this is the birth of modern VietNam which is a state who incorporates the cultural and linguistic tradition of people in this region.

    Subsequent Chinese dynasty like the Han, Tang, Ming etc would annex this region but would pretty much stop expanding here as they considered this the southern most region of Chinese territory. Vietnam actually means “Yue South” in Chinese. In fact, today the Chinese province of Guangdong is still officially called Yue. However, in Chinese view, Vietnam did not cease being Chinese territory until after the first tributary relationship was set up with the Later Le dynasty in 1428. Nevertheless, as a protectorate of Vietnam, China consistently intervened when there is political upheaval in Vietnam. For example, when the Tran dynasty in Vietnam was overthrown its survivors seek help from Ming China to reclaim its throne. Ming China would then be caught initially in a civil war between Vietnamese factions and eventually a strong Vietnamese faction would emerge and force China out. This pattern would be repeated. In modern, time when the French invaded Qing China would send troop to help. During Vietnam’s civil wars PR of China would help the northern faction until unification.

    Vietnam’s relationship with China would thus be quite complicated. So technically the Vietnamese are not Chinese but have exactly the same surname as the Chinese. All Vietnamese name can be written in Han script. Many Vietnamese dynasty would hail from China but would eventually become Vietnamese. For example, the Tran dynasty hailed from Fujian province of China. Modern Mandarin Chinese pronounces Tran as Chen. However, in Fujian Min dialect it is pronounced somewhat as Tan.

    Linguistically, someone mentioned Vietnamese has 9 tones but so does Cantonese which is a Yue language group in China. The Vietnamese also share some peculiarity with the Min dialect. In both language the phrase “grandson” and “nephew” is the same word. A usage not found in other Chinese dialect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kiza
    A nice historical outline about Vietnam from the Chinese point of view. The Chinese sources may be biased about Vietnam, but they would still be a little more reliable than the Vietnamese because China was better established than Vietnam.

    One point though - the Cantonese dialect of the Chinese language does not really have nine tone contours. The linguists recognize only six in Hong Kong and seven in Guangzhou, although the non-linguists recognize nine (confusion between what is a tone and what is a combination of sounds). Perhaps it may be said that the reduction in the number of tones was the direction of the progress of the Chinese language.

    The modern Vietnamese appears to have only six tones in the North and five tones in the South.

    Only ethnogenetics could help understand who the Vietnamese really are.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Kiza says:
    @Ray
    The problem with taking a little part of history to make a political statement can be deceiving. I will try my best to give an unbiased and abridged version on the relationship between China and Vietnam here and let you be the judge. During the Spring Autumn period (770 BC until 476 BC) there is this powerful state called Yue in southern China. At this time although China is technically under the Zhou dynasty, the Zhou king is no longer in charge and his vassals have declared themselves independent. Another little known fact, is that it is the Zhou kingdom that first started calling itself the “central state” which was badly translated as “middle kingdom” today. The so-called Chinese people actually spoke many different dialect and wrote in related but different script and at that time are divided into as many as 148 states. Confucius, Laozi, Mencius etc live in this period. As the boundaries of state kept changing Chinese people simply called the country where they live as “under heaven”. The term central state(middle kingdom) came into wide usage only in the late 19th century or late 20th century when China need to deal with foreign state under “modern international standard”.

    The name "Yue" was applied indiscriminately to many southern Chinese peoples throughout classical Chinese texts. After the fall of Yue, the ruling family moved south to what is now northern Fujian and set up the Minyue kingdom. This successor state lasted until around 150 BC, when it miscalculated an alliance with the Han Dynasty and was absorbed. In 207 BC, Zhao Tuo (Triệu Đà) who has served in the Qin army founded a state called Nanyue (Nam Việt). This started the close interaction between the so-called Chinese and Vietnamese people. Technically, this is the birth of modern VietNam which is a state who incorporates the cultural and linguistic tradition of people in this region.

    Subsequent Chinese dynasty like the Han, Tang, Ming etc would annex this region but would pretty much stop expanding here as they considered this the southern most region of Chinese territory. Vietnam actually means “Yue South” in Chinese. In fact, today the Chinese province of Guangdong is still officially called Yue. However, in Chinese view, Vietnam did not cease being Chinese territory until after the first tributary relationship was set up with the Later Le dynasty in 1428. Nevertheless, as a protectorate of Vietnam, China consistently intervened when there is political upheaval in Vietnam. For example, when the Tran dynasty in Vietnam was overthrown its survivors seek help from Ming China to reclaim its throne. Ming China would then be caught initially in a civil war between Vietnamese factions and eventually a strong Vietnamese faction would emerge and force China out. This pattern would be repeated. In modern, time when the French invaded Qing China would send troop to help. During Vietnam's civil wars PR of China would help the northern faction until unification.

    Vietnam's relationship with China would thus be quite complicated. So technically the Vietnamese are not Chinese but have exactly the same surname as the Chinese. All Vietnamese name can be written in Han script. Many Vietnamese dynasty would hail from China but would eventually become Vietnamese. For example, the Tran dynasty hailed from Fujian province of China. Modern Mandarin Chinese pronounces Tran as Chen. However, in Fujian Min dialect it is pronounced somewhat as Tan.

    Linguistically, someone mentioned Vietnamese has 9 tones but so does Cantonese which is a Yue language group in China. The Vietnamese also share some peculiarity with the Min dialect. In both language the phrase “grandson” and “nephew” is the same word. A usage not found in other Chinese dialect.

    A nice historical outline about Vietnam from the Chinese point of view. The Chinese sources may be biased about Vietnam, but they would still be a little more reliable than the Vietnamese because China was better established than Vietnam.

    One point though – the Cantonese dialect of the Chinese language does not really have nine tone contours. The linguists recognize only six in Hong Kong and seven in Guangzhou, although the non-linguists recognize nine (confusion between what is a tone and what is a combination of sounds). Perhaps it may be said that the reduction in the number of tones was the direction of the progress of the Chinese language.

    The modern Vietnamese appears to have only six tones in the North and five tones in the South.

    Only ethnogenetics could help understand who the Vietnamese really are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS