5 ms·

> Imagine being called a minority in a place you are the majority and have lived for centuries before occupation. There's lots of criticism I'd have for Chines

> Imagine being called a minority in a place you are the majority and have lived for centuries before occupation. There's lots of criticism I'd have for Chinese policy, but this terminology isn't one of them. It's very common to use the term "minority" to refer to a group that is a minority at the national level, but could still be a majority in some local level. This is true in the American context as well (Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, Mexicans, etc.)

smt88 5y ago
Tibet was a sovereign country foe hundreds of years until it was invaded. It is currently occupied against its will. If someone believes Tibet to still be an occupied country rather than a part of China, it wouldn't be accurate to call Tibetans a minority.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- thereare5lights 5y ago
  > Tibet was a sovereign country foe hundreds of years until it was invaded. It is currently occupied against its will. So's Hawaii, but you don't see anyone giving a damn about that.
- kccqzy 5y ago
  Someone else in the thread has already made the comparison to native Americans but I'll paraphrase your comment in light of that: The Native Americans were sovereign countries for hundreds of years until they were invaded. Their land is currently occupied against their will. If someone believes Native American land to still be an occupied country rather than a part of United States it wouldn't be accurate to call native Americans a minority. The timing matches too: the Chinese ended Tibetan independence in around 1720, around the same time European settlers conquered Native Americans.
ChemSpider 5y ago
Yeah, but they call them a "minority" within their very own country (Tibet, occupied since 1950).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
da_chicken 5y ago
Being a minority is a description of political power as much as sheer demographic statistics. There are cases where minorities are the majority, too. Women make up 51% of the US population, but in virtually every other sense they are a minority. In South Africa during apartheid, the black population could be described as a minority in spite of their actual demographic proportions (over 75%).
- usaar333 5y ago
  True, but that's a very different definition. Also, IMO, a bit of a confused one that leads to confusion. e.g. apartheid is often referred to as "white minority rule" - that is the minority oppressing the majority. Similarly, this gets a little subjective. It's not clear to me in modern liberal democracies that women are a minority politically, because they do in fact have the ability to set policy equally to men (even if they happen to be less present in the political ranks)
lostlogin 5y ago
> There's lots of criticism I'd have for Chinese policy, but this terminology isn't one of them. It's very common to use the term "minority" to refer to a group that is a minority at the national level, but could still be a majority in some local level. No. If a country annexes a smaller nation, they don’t get to call the invaded population ‘a minority’ just because a stroke of their totalitarian pen made the countries one. It is true in the American contexts you cite, but you are there you are talking about the same land - not additional grabs.

smt88 5y ago

Tibet was a sovereign country foe hundreds of years until it was invaded. It is currently occupied against its will. If someone believes Tibet to still be an occupied country rather than a part of China, it wouldn't be accurate to call Tibetans a minority.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
thereare5lights 5y ago
> Tibet was a sovereign country foe hundreds of years until it was invaded. It is currently occupied against its will. So's Hawaii, but you don't see anyone giving a damn about that.
kccqzy 5y ago
Someone else in the thread has already made the comparison to native Americans but I'll paraphrase your comment in light of that: The Native Americans were sovereign countries for hundreds of years until they were invaded. Their land is currently occupied against their will. If someone believes Native American land to still be an occupied country rather than a part of United States it wouldn't be accurate to call native Americans a minority. The timing matches too: the Chinese ended Tibetan independence in around 1720, around the same time European settlers conquered Native Americans.

ChemSpider 5y ago

Yeah, but they call them a "minority" within their very own country (Tibet, occupied since 1950).

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

da_chicken 5y ago

Being a minority is a description of political power as much as sheer demographic statistics. There are cases where minorities are the majority, too. Women make up 51% of the US population, but in virtually every other sense they are a minority. In South Africa during apartheid, the black population could be described as a minority in spite of their actual demographic proportions (over 75%).

usaar333 5y ago
True, but that's a very different definition. Also, IMO, a bit of a confused one that leads to confusion. e.g. apartheid is often referred to as "white minority rule" - that is the minority oppressing the majority. Similarly, this gets a little subjective. It's not clear to me in modern liberal democracies that women are a minority politically, because they do in fact have the ability to set policy equally to men (even if they happen to be less present in the political ranks)

lostlogin 5y ago

> There's lots of criticism I'd have for Chinese policy, but this terminology isn't one of them. It's very common to use the term "minority" to refer to a group that is a minority at the national level, but could still be a majority in some local level. No. If a country annexes a smaller nation, they don’t get to call the invaded population ‘a minority’ just because a stroke of their totalitarian pen made the countries one. It is true in the American contexts you cite, but you are there you are talking about the same land - not additional grabs.