8 ms·
While this debate is very interesting from an academic level, it should also be noted that it exists as a part of a nationalistic Chinese history of claiming a
by orange_joe 5y ago
While this debate is very interesting from an academic level, it should also be noted that it exists as a part of a nationalistic Chinese history of claiming a unique anthropological history of the Han as emerging from a separate course of evolution. [1] In some case scholars have gone as far as claiming an “out-of-asia” theory as opposed to the broadly accepted African origin of humanity [1]. Whereas these fossils could very well represent a new species of “Dragon Man” (note the mythical/national connection in the name) these claims need to be understood within the social and political framework of their originating nation.
[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-china-is-rewriting-the-book-on-human-origins/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-china-is-rewr...
- tablespoon 5y ago> In some case scholars have gone as far as claiming an “out-of-asia” theory as opposed to the broadly accepted African origin of humanity My favorite over-the-top example of this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/mandarin-chinese-english-shakespeare-world-civilization-research-association-a9097926.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/mandarin-chine... tl;dr: some Chinese "scholars" claim English is a Mandarin dialect and Europe had no history before the 15th century (and Greece, Rome, etc. were fabricated in imitation of Chinese history).
- jeromegv 5y agoWe had our fair share of scholars in the west thinking there was no civilization in North America before Columbus.
- Dylan16807 5y agoWe do? I've never even heard of this idea. Just debates about exactly how many thousands of years ago people got here. ...unless you mean "civilization" in terms of "not savages" which is totally unrelated kind of dumbness.
- cperciva 5y agoCivilization has at its root the concept of cities, so by that standard it's fair to say that large parts of North America had no civilizations. Whether this is particularly important is open to debate; I prefer to think that it is relevant (cities allow for specialization) but should not be considered a sign of sophistication.
- AlotOfReading 5y agoMost archaeologists and anthropologists don't like the term 'civilization' as a whole because it's overloaded with these outdated connotations that reflect the biases of the speaker rather than anything meaningful about the society under discussion. You can repeat the first sentence to any Americanist you like and see if they agree with the spirit of what it says.
- adventured 5y agoClaiming outdated connotations would just be another way for some archaeologists and anthropologists to attempt to desperately run away from the fact that there were very few cities in North America. When people have a non-science-based agenda and a fact of history doesn't fit that agenda, they start attempting to label inconvenient facts away, for example by pretending they're "outdated." And they'll always use threatening mob tactics, like argument from intimidation, by claiming that some N number supports their position, so thus it is that a fact no longer matters, because the mob said so. It's a very old collectivist premise, they're always so wildly irrational they believe that if you just get large enough numbers in your mob you can subjectively alter the facts of reality, and will your preferred subjectivism to be true instead. And if you go against that mob, they'll isolate you from the field, get you cancelled, and make sure you can never challenge them again with your nasty facts.
- PhasmaFelis 5y ago> some archaeologists and anthropologists to attempt to desperately run away from the fact that there were very few cities in North America. What on Earth are you talking about?
- PhasmaFelis 5y agoHow many of them in the last (conservatively) 100 years? This "the entire history of western civilization is China fanfic" deal is from 2019.
- hungryhobo 5y agoehh no one in china takes these claims seriously
- w-ll 5y agoif i've learned anything in the last year... there might actually be a sizeable amount of people (who you might not interact with on daily basis) that actually deeply believe it
- justicezyx 5y agoIf you are taking about relative importance, then these people's voice will be negaliable compared to main stream views. If you are talking about absolute number, then of course it could be substantial, but that's true for any situation, I.e., there are just more people there.
- void_mint 5y agoHaven't we learned anything when looking at America over the past 5 years? "Nobody important actually thinks that" becomes legitimate nationalistic pride.
- justicezyx 5y agoWell, that's one thing I now point out often to American people (I was born and raised in China), American nationalism is not same as Chinese one. To some degree, Chinese nationalism went beyond the narrow view point already in the Mao era. Chinese people nowadays are very sensitive to nationalism topics, but they are also rational. I never saw Chinese people disapprove facts for national pride. It's that Chinese people have a conviction that they can do whatever other people can do, and probably can do some better. That's one benefit of tight propaganda control, as the CCP knows very well how powerful and uncontrollable the nationalism can be. So they are relatively adept in managing the sentiment.
- 5y ago
- petre 5y agoWe have our share of crackpots like those in our country as well. No one takes them seriously. Most of them do not even have a history on anthropology degree. They're the laughing stock of younger history majors.
- xabotage 5y agoThe thing about crackpots with wildly unsubstantiated self-aggrandizing anthropological theories is that they often wield disproportionate power and influence. Take the Mormon church for example: they believe Native Americans were white Jews who were cursed with dark skin and it was god's will they be wiped out by European settlers. It's horrifically racist and there's zero evidence to support the origin story. And yet, the church holds over $100 billion in their investment portfolio alone and nearly had one of their own elected as US president. It's hard to laugh at.
- petre 5y agoThe US is just crazy. This is especially after I've seen the people who've stormed the Capitol with Qanon t-shirts. We're practicaly neighbours with the Mormon mission here but they seem all right. Friendly, very clean, tall. It's true that they're all white.
- jonathankoren 5y agoReligion fundamentalists the world over very angrily push their myths as literal facts, and often politicians have to at least somewhat indulge them. While multiple US examples are probably well known here, I’d like to suggest one from India from circa 2008, the controversy over the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal. India wanted to dig a “canal” (more like dredge a shipping channel) in the waters between India and Sri Lanka. Religious fundamentalists opposed this because it would involve cutting a natural rock formation. What so special about these rocks? Well they were placed there by Lord Ram and his army of monkeys as chronicled in the Ramayana. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sethusamudram_Shipping_Canal_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sethusamudram_Shipping_Canal_P...
- random314 5y agoI guess the out of India theory has competition! All hail nationalism comedy! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Aryanism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Aryanism
- justicezyx 5y agoIf you actually read the scientific American article cited, you can see that the title is click baiting. The only direct statement for the point of the title: """ Some Western researchers suggest that there is a hint of nationalism in Chinese palaeontologists' support for continuity. “The Chinese — they do not accept the idea that H. sapiens evolved in Africa,” says one researcher. “They want everything to come from China.” Chinese researchers reject such allegations. “This has nothing to do with nationalism,” says Wu. It's all about the evidence — the transitional fossils and archaeological artefacts, he says. “Everything points to continuous evolution in China from H. erectus to modern human.” """ And the rest of the article enumerates many evidences that prove the evidences uncovered in China and many other Asian countries pose a lot of questions of the established theory. I don't think it's fair to put nationalism at the center of the discussion. Edit: I would not expected down voting on this comment if this was in before 2016 (just rough impression). Now I fully prepared to it. The lack of inter exchange is killing the vitality of this forum. Hope this idea becomes more evident here. After all, there are so many pther places to not engage in serious discussion, this forum is most valuable when it predominantly values facts.
- jasonwatkinspdx 5y agoNo, the nationalism is a real issue, though it's not a majority view among Chinese researchers. What Wu claims above is directly and unambiguously contradicted by genetic evidence. Han are overwhelmingly O-M122 (sometimes written as O2 or O3) which absolutely goes back to the common African ancestor. You can look up the lineage yourself on the wikipage for haplogroups. What's true is they're a fairly recent split off the "spine" This is a settled matter, not one where HN is somehow censoring evidence based debate. The argument is fundamentally dishonest vs the evidence in total. Edit: Just to follow up with more useful information: What we are learning that's overturning some conventional views from recent digs in India and across Asia is about how technology/culture diffused amongst modern humans once they were resigning there. We're finding it was more of a web than a linear diffusion as previously thought. But that's all, again, among modern humans, not evidence of independent evolution of the Han people from homo erectus.
- 5y ago
- webmobdev 5y agoThis was the first thought that came to my mind too - how much politics is involved in this issue as the Chinese are very much obsessed, like the right-wing in India, about their past glories and origins. (Shows how politically good a job these colonials did in breaking our self-esteem and making us feel inferior even today). Yes, many of us asians have a great and wonderful history, but aggrandising them creates a false sense of superiority that still stems from the insecurity within.
- wombatmobile 5y ago> as the Chinese are very much obsessed When you say “the Chinese” who do you mean? Chinese anthropologists? The government of China? The citizens of China? Ethnically Chinese people everywhere? A subset of one or more of the above cohorts? It’s important for you to be specific when you accuse someone or some people of “aggrandising” because that’s an insult when applied to individuals who are not guilty of it.
- ganzuul 5y agoSeems like self-identification answers these questions. Nation-building is a fairly new concept.
- webmobdev 5y agoAnd the kind of upstaging we see in the name of nationalism is also quite understandable as imperialism was often justified by the "superiority" of the white man's culture and religion. Revisionist history in the colonies was one of the political tool used to keep them subjugated.
- SongOfSeikilos 5y agoThis belief is really niche, globally- and reacting like it’s a morally correct perspective is weirdly a form of cultural imperialism. Few people in China would object to the framing of “the Chinese”
- webmobdev 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- powerapple 5y agoWhy a debate needs to be understood within social and political framework? A debate should be based on evidence, nothing else. If a Trump supporter has some evidence to support his claim, you shouldn't discard his opinion because he is in the different political camp.