I think you are still too invested in the notion that barbarism has a Chinese origin. Barbarism is the common motif of human societies throughout history; only occasionally have people ever been able to rise above it - the modern age being one such occasion, though it is itself slipping.

To this end, the recent history of China is both barbaric and tragic, but is it really a matter of "sinking so low?" You speak of Mao's Cultural Revolution and China's oppression of Uyghurs and Tibetans, yet should I remind you that the greatest period of destruction, in recent history, occurred during the World Wars, which were started by the most advanced nations of the time? That these same nations were engaged in worldwide oppression and, in certain cases, genocide? You speak well of the West, today, but forget how barbaric it was at the height of its power. It seems that only in "decline" do people turn to peace; or perhaps, peace is itself a symptom of "decline."

As for Vietnam, neighbors inevitably have to interact with one another at various levels, but that does not make them dependent. I personally believe that Vietnam can determine its own destiny, and I think that Vietnam has demonstrated, at various times, that it can. I question, therefore, whether you are not too unrealistic in your demands for "true independence." No man, or nation, is an island onto himself. Interests have always collided, but to draw from this the idea that countries and people are unable to make their own decisions and are therefore not responsible for their own history is a bit much, don't you think? After all, China can make the same argument - that all that it did, it did because of threats from the northern nomads, to which the northern nomads will respond by saying that all that they did, they did because of threats from the climate. In which case, who can be blamed but nature?

Barbarism is not uncommon in the world through out the ages. Although, however, the premise is that Chinese claimed to be "civilized" people and they "civilized" Southerners (Yueh). That is what I am disagreeing with. The notion that Chinese claimed that southerners were barbarians and that they "civilized" them.What does it means to be civilized? To be civilized implies that most "functional" form of behavior, are action that promote the physical well being of an organism, the species, the communities. All China did was spread lie, steal, rob, rape, and kill. So really, who were/are the barbarian? And to have Chinese coming in here calling us "nanman" or barbarian is very hypocritical and yet insulting. No Chinese seem to correct those individuals but yet they're bothering me, so I am assuming that Chinese implicitly support such action.

Yes, world war one and world war two took a told of tremendous human lives and there were lots of barbaric acts going on--no doubt. BUT the Chinese are still engaging in barbaric behavior, yet, claimed that they're civilized. Which I disagreed. Civilized people do not shoot monks, oppress minorities based on their skin color, religion, or whatever. I believe Chinese know what's justice it but they chose to ignore it because they don't want to lose the privilege that they're born into from thousand years of rob, loot, and rape. Therefore, they chose barbarism, they chose to make excuses and see things differently to keep these privileges.

Politic is a game: when it comes to Vietnam and China's relationship, the game is interdependent. Vietnam is a small but yet powerful, but China is a greater power in the peripheral. China cannot totally dominate Vietnam(although it tried to many times), but at all time has great influences. Vietnam cannot be independent because China wants to influence Vietnam and that is the simple fact. I've said it , and again, history confirmed this. Whether you like to admit this fact or not, its up to you.

Just a reminder now the thread is bit sidetracked.

You can call chinese barbaric, or whatever, but you still wants to practice chinese philosophy, customs and imitates building and everything,

then you have to pay loyalty fee. No free lunch in the world. Just because you badmouth it, doesn't mean you don't have to pay

This is hypocritical, kind of like yelling smoking is bad, sucks but at the same time keep on smoking. LOL.

If you don't know, this is what we are proving:





If it besides the point, we won't bother with it and only talk about the key points and everything you say only confirms it:



You even contradict yourself namely the bold parts:

The key point that you were making was that China was out to help Viet Nam has been proven idiotic in the extreme. You second point was Viet paid because we wanted to keep the relation positive and we wanted China's help not because we were forced to pay to keep the barbarism, rapes and looting away is the same as first point, also idiotic. Because Viet Nam won all the major wars and still felt it need to pay is all the proof not because we were wealthy or we felt sorry for China but we wanted China to stay away; we don't want foolish and barbaric things from China and we gather pay to keep it all away even when we won all the major wars. If anything Viet Nam should demand payments from China because it won all the major wars as you have said. Nor can you deny the raping, murdering, and robbing from China for a thousand years. Again, no fools believe China went to wars against Viet Nam was only to help Viet Nam, idiotic in the extreme.

As I said, it is too stupid now and everything you just said again only confirms my points.

Between the two cultures, given that you pointed out Viet Nam won all the major wars when she only a small country only proves my point of which culture is stronger and thus who was influencing on whom in terms of culture, ethics, morality. Again, when this influence was cut, China became free fall to its cultural revolution and draged the rest of the region with it. It even funded Pol Pot to have war with Viet Nam and tried to punish Viet Nam for this as well. Any fools believe China did this to help Viet?

China has always exerted it politics on Viet Nam and other nations in the region not because of brotherhood, but because of greed and barbarism and selfish desires. And China has been proven to be stupid and barbaric and corrupt as history has shown and when Viet Nam is no longer strong as in the past nothing to stop China from being foolish again.

You are forgiven if you can't understand this.

I do hope that China can help us and China be the culture and moral centre, but what are the chances that it won't be foolish and barbaric again?

Well, thekey, my conclusion in all this is that I think you twist the logic to fit your interpretation, and won't entertain any alternative views. It's odd that you admit Vietnam won the major wars and yet tribute was to keep China from robbing Vietnam. If China didn't have the means (ie military conquest) to rob Vietnam, why would Vietnam pay tribute to prevent it? Only a weak nation pays tribute to keep itself safe, and if Vietnam was not a weak nation, then there's no incentive in paying tribute for that purpose.

You also have the odd idea that the Cultural Revolution was somehow tied to China "shutting off its influence from Vietnam." This is ridiculous and about as accurate as saying that it rained today because you posted this message. There were many reasons behind the Cultural Revolution and the decline of the Qing Dynasty, but Vietnam figured very little in all of them. Anyways, there's no point continuing this discussion while there exists such an irreconcilable discrepancy in our respective logic, so I'll just leave it at that.

Well, at least you are no longer trying to say China went to wars was to help Viet Nam. China due to its size was and is always a threat and Viets paid to keep this barbaric threat away even when it won all the major wars and did not even demand payment from China because Viets didnot want China to sink further into desperation and barbarism. Did it help? Sometimes, most time China decided to go to wars (to help Viet Nam so you say?). So we paid to help keeping her off us. It was a matter of time before China regroup and attack again if it become too desperate and barbaric. But even this point is too difficult for you.

So again which culture was stronger and therefore who was influencing whom? And without this influence, what happened with China? It's gone free fall.

Yeah, if Vietnam is so strong now, then it can take China one on one nowday, it wouldn't have to hide behind ASEAN, or try to be a b!tch , open the legs and seduce Uncle Sam for help.

There's a simple reason for the contradiction. The Chinese claim that the Vietnamese are uncivilized; the Vietnamese claim that the Chinese are uncivilized. The West claims that the East is uncivilized; the East turns around and claims that the West is uncivilized. What does this tell you? What it tells me is that the criteria for being civilized is relative, and usually refers to whether someone is "like you." As long as people do not agree on what "civilized" means, it is a meaningless insult.



Again, when I speak of independence, I speak of degrees. At some level, everyone in the world is dependent on everyone else. But that does not mean independence does not exist. To this end, compare the case of Tibet to Vietnam. They are not the same.

Like I said, there's nothing more to be gained from this discussion. You insist on seeing the tributary relationship as Vietnam paying China to avoid being attacked, even though most of China's tributaries were never in any danger of being attacked (see, for example, Joseon Korea, a Ming ally yet also tributary, and Japan, which paid tribute but was never threatened; hell, even Russia, the UK, and Portugal paid "tribute" to the Qing). The tribute system cannot be used as evidence that China forced other countries to pay or be attacked. It was largely a formality required under the Confucian system.

Again, you insist that China went to wars and Viet's payments to keep wars from us was China help is too stupid. People paid so that when China regrouped it would think twice before attack. But China always attacked, and Viet won most of it and still paid trying to keep these wars from happening. Most of the time China never learned, much the same as you evidently.

Again, because Viets won all the major wars, so which culture was stronger and who was influencing whom? And without this influence, what happened, free fall.

I never said that China went to wars to help Vietnam. I said that China did not force countries to pay tribute or be invaded. The evidence here is obvious. There's no way China could've invaded most of its tributaries. There's no proof that it did. The threat is immaterial. It was not the point of the tribute system.

Also, please stop pretending that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot or is incapable of learning. It makes conversation with you rather unpleasant, and is unbecoming for someone who claims to hold the key to "civilized" behavior.

I hope you're not suggesting that military might determines cultural strength. If so, I have sorely misjudged your idea of what civilization means, as it would imply that the Mongols were more civilized than all the peoples they killed.

So you can't deny that China wars were to rape and rob Viet Nam? And China regrouped and attacked again and again did not have anything to do with tribute payments? Just too stupid.

No, tribute payments to a large country who attacked and regrouped and attacked again and again were not forced payments? Not too stupid?

And as you said, who won most the wars and therefore who was trying to influence whom even though they never learn. Viet Nam was out numbered 1 to 10 and still won most of the wars time and time again is all the proof of which culture was stronger.

Stop changing the argument. China's tribute system was not a threat to pay up or be invaded. That's what I'm saying.

If you want to use that measure as a gauge of cultural strength, fine, but if so, please drop the whole compassion and peace angle, since it's clearly not what you care about.



Tribute payments were made to China from countries that were never attacked by China or in danger of being attacked by China.

So, no, tribute payments were not in and of themselves forced payments for peace; indeed, they were rather poor guarantees of peace since, as you said, China attacked again and again - the tributes didn't help. So, knowing this, why would Vietnam have continued to pay them if they were for the purpose of peace?

So now you admit tribute payments to a large country that attacked and attacked were forced payments?

When Viet won all the major wars and still paid China this was what we were trying to teach, teach China to live in peace and not wars and barbarism. But China never learned, and it attacked and attacked and still we paid and tried to teach that it is better to live in peace than wars and barbarism that wars brought. Again and again China did not learn same as you.

Again, there is no guarantees when persuading and teaching a barbaric. May be you don't know this. But Viet must try to teach and hope that barbarism won't occur.

Funny conversation have not much to do with confucian culture or whatever,

Btw compare chinese culture with vietnamese culture there is also a fact to consider; while china has fought countless wars during her history, no matter for which reason (defence or attack) or which outcome (winning or losing), most of her enemies were always assimiliated and absorbed into the chinese civilization, and thats one of the reason why china has become so big and was most likely the dominant power in east asia. While china has also fought many wars with vietnam (which i would admit that mostly they werent in defensive nature) and vietnam was able to stay independent was indeed a quite remarkable achievement, however its undeniable that large part of vietnamese culture still got influenced by the chinese.

*sigh*

It's clear that I can't change your mind, but let me pose this simple question to you: if Vietnam's goal, all along, was to "teach China that it is better to live in peace," why did it fight so many wars of expansion against its southern neighbor, Champa? Vietnam's behavior towards its southern neighbors completely shatters your argument.

Plagarism

Citadel in Hue.

? teach your big neighbours that its better to live in peace while teach your smaller neighbours that its better to live in submission seems to be pretty logical to me.

Again, as I said, you ask any southerners do they belong to Khmer or China, none will say they belong or long for any of that. The expansion was natural and peaceful as it could possibly be.

If you don't get this point, fine. Learn this at least:



Again, there is no guarantees that people will learn least the barbaric. It seems you at least are learning some of it. Good day.

Why Khmer or China? They had their own kingdom, didn't they? The expansion was peaceful?

The wars between Vietnam and Champa were anything but peaceful. During the sacking of Vijaya, the capital of Champa, in 1471, some 60,000 Cham people were killed and 30,000 were taken as slaves by the Vietnamese army. The capital was razed. This triggered the first major flight of the Cham into Cambodia and Malacca. They certainly did not want to be under Vietnam. But history being what it is, Vietnam emerged in control of those territories, and gradually the natives assimilated (or fled).

No one blames modern Vietnamese for any of these things, but in trying to characterize Vietnam, one should not ignore its history of expansion and intervention in its own neighbors' affairs.

Well, obviously it was a hard sod to get you to agree even a simplest point about forced tribute payments. So I won't try to teach you much more.

But I will leave this for you to learn. Not only did China constantly attack Viet Nam but also its neighbors, surrounded, and much of this attacks were directly influenced by China politics as you mentioned other countries were paying submission to China and you can see it as recently as Pol Pot as China influence.

If you can't understand this, fine. You are forgiven. But at least understand that China forced tribute payments then the rest of the points will start to follow through. Because if it can force even when it lost all the major wars as you said, then it can force everything more when it's even a bit stronger.

Simple, and again good day and good luck.

^Many cambodians hate your guts. you can ask preahvihear more info on that in case you are awared.

When they are barbaric to themselves, they will be barbaric to others (Pol Pot's killing field as China wise influence). Same with China or anyone else.

I am a southerner; therefore, they should love me, but they don't love themselves. So what more do we expect. As I said, China's problem has always been materialism without compassion and culture.

LOL, I-D-I-O-T.

WHy don't you ask them if they love you , get them cambodian signature and then get back to me.

Remember, all the power without compassion will turn you into a barbaric. This has always been China's problem.

Barbarian >>> Idiot

Conan Da Barbarian





What's worst, being a Barbarian or stealing & plagaring Barbarian philosophy, culture and arts?

There are no guarantees that you can understand this.



But there might be some guarantees with Age. Good luck.

Actually no, no Vietnamese ever recorded that Chinese were barbarians. The northern Yueh were brainwashed and actually though that they were indeed barbarians and eagerly to adopt Chinese ways of life to be "civilized". This is on going propaganda spread by Chinese for thousand of years. I only want to make clear to Vietnamese, at least, that China is the real barbarians that need to be civilized. It is good to have direction and purpose in life


Such vagueness, if you're not being specific you're throwing your credibility out the window. Not to mention those that speak vaguely often has something to hide.

I believe Tibet was what Vietnamese similarly went through. And ever since Independence Vietnam and China relationship is interdependent(game theory). But go ahead and deny it, those that study Vietnamese and Chinese history should agree with me.

This is more realistic;



and billions of them

What game theory is this? I only heard about domino theory and with this theory I proved that China dragged everyone with it once the moral and ethical strings were cut, free fall.

The reason for China barbarism was and is simple: Materialism without compassion or truth, just rape and rob and rape and rob. And when the compassion string was cut, free fall for China to its cultural revolution.

The worse thing is when people can't learn, then they become barbaric, then you will have another cultural revolution, rape and rob, rape and rob, and learn nothing.

If viets could learn how come your country is backward? much more backward than China.

You are backward and in the dumpster, therefore,you have no rights to speak.

wait till your average GDP above $3000 , then you can talk.

You good at proving that you can't learn.



As I said, there is no guarantees that you can. May be another person can?

"YOU" want to tell, and you are a Viet LOSER? When the Chinese travelers first found your Viet ancestors, your ancestors were just "savage naked tatooted people who spoke like birds and drank from noses and jumped and leaped like monkeys". The Chinese took compassion on your Viet ancestors and they taught your to wear clothes, to have rituals, to have education, to appreciate beauty, to appreciate organization, to under the order and the existence of things, to have words to think with, and so on and so forth. In other words, the Chinese turned your naked Viet ancestors into what human beings should be. Viets will always get owned when it comes to Chinese because if all the Chinese influences are to be removed from the Viets, then the Viets will eventually regress back to them tribal people trying to hide from the modern world. Go to youtube video on French colonial Vietnam and you will see that the Viets were made to bow and lay flat on the ground before the French. And the worst part is that the Viets did it willingly perhaps because they still had the "uncivilized savage origin" in them.

Strange, how the barbaric sees others as barbaric even when they were constantly being beaten back? How come primitive Viet ancestors beat China at most of the major wars as pointed out by Age? Can't be so primitive as China then, and because of this:



This is definitive, is it not?

Remember that our ancestors paid China to keep China away, not because we had plenty, but also we wanted to teach you to live in peace. China has always been a great critical mass that drags everyone. Japan is so lucky it is far away from China.

Your stupidity never ceased to amaze me.

History is written by the victor: history is filled with lairs. Even savages can becomes nobles and claimed to "civilized" others because he wrote his own history and it becomes the "truth." Ming Mang were on a mission to "civilized" the Khmer people. He made fun of your culture, degraded you, and killed your people. He called them savages and barbarians when he was the one that's engaging in these behaviors. If he succeeded, his world view would have been the "truth"--and he would've become the hero. I don't think you appreciate Ming Mang's behavior, but since, you supported the Chinese barbaric behavior you're implicitly supporting Ming Mang's view.

I hope that help, my Afrocentric friend. Stupidity and barbarism has ruined history. So stop acting like a dumbass barbarian.

and remember that, "those who plots the destruction of others often perish in the attempt" --Thomas Jefferson. This is certainly true for the Khmer Empire.

Some said 'revenge is profitable,' but how is that working out for you?

One more thing: Annam was FOUNDED aka ESTABLISHED by not the Viets, but by A CHINESE GENERAL. So Vietnam was a CREATION of a CHINESE. Truth hurts! Even the name "Viet Nam" had to be approved by the Chinese Emperor. What is my point again!Lol.

Often, but not always the case. US war on Viet is the case for this.

This is the truth because no one can criticize it.

I didn't care to read what a descendant of the savages and land thieves had to say. All I know is that you and your family members are all practitioners of the great Chinese customs and culture. End of the discussion. Case is closed because if anyone will try to remove a Viet from his "culture", he will end up being a "naked tatooed savage" all over again.

Dark scambodian preahvihear speaks as if he wanted his Khmerland to be sinicized as well.

Stop acting like a barbarian.

If all you wanted to know is one thing, that is proof that you can't learn, and therefore a barbaric. A barbaric is simply a person who can't learn or does not want to.

It's fine--you have the right to be ignorant.

That is nothing new.

Urhhh, the whole world is already OWNED by the Chinese as we speak. I know all of your food items are made of Chinese food ingredients. Lol. Actually, the Chinese of the past classified the ancient Cambodia as "unique country with its own culture and customs". I think it means that the Chinese show their respect for the Cambodian. In fact, if you don't believe me, there was such a thing called "The Institute of Khmer music" established by the Chinese Emperor himself.

Oh wait, if the Vietnamese are all practitioners of the great Chinese customs and culture... shouldn't that make them great as well since the Chinese customs and culture are "great"? According to your logic then Vietnamese cannot be descendant of savages and thieves because they are the inheritor of the "great" Chinese customs and culture. In fact, it is you that are the savages and thieves since you did not inherit the great Chinese customs and culture.