How would you group them?

[Taiji]

This thread filled with anti-India comments and bias. Here is what actual Northeast Indians think about India:
https://www.quora.com/What-do-Northe...of-the-country

Quora? You mean that bastion of Indian nationalists where any opinion that's not of the preference of Indians gets thumbed down and moderated to oblivion?

Even on a site where people who aren't at all supportive of India are attacked non-stop has opinions such as this: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-tha...ate-from-India

If you ask me, yes, I want to be independent from India.

I am from Tripura, Northeast India. As you see, we native people in northeast India have nothing in common with Indians from other places. My skin is lighter than them, I have slanted eyes, my language is Bodo which is a Sino-Tibetan language and it’s nothing similar to Hindi, an Indo-European language. I have far more in common with the Chinese if you ask me.

This is what we look like,

What happened is, the government of India sent many immigrants from other provinces to Northeast India. Most people here are not natives anymore. As a result, if you do an election in Northeast India whether we want to be independent or not, the result would be to stay with India. But if you ask me and people from my ethnicity, we all want to separate and build our own country.

Growing up, I have been discriminated by Indians. People called me chinky, make fun of my facial features. I am treated as a second class citizen in my own country. Someone also wanted to fight me out of nowhere when I was in Delhi, and he told me to go back to China when I was walking with my girlfriend because he was jealous, he thought I was a foreigner.

I am certain that if you ask any Northeast Indian who are natives, meaning that they speak a Sino-Tibetan language, have slanted eyes and lighter skin color, they would want to be independent. We all have been a victim of racism at some point in India.

Downvoted answer here: https://www.quora.com/Does-India-deserve-Northeast

Calling the NE people as "Chinky" (i.e. foreigner) says it all. Imposing AFSPA and curtailing the right to life in NE says it all. Divide-and-rule policy of the Government of India says it all.

India does not deserve the Northeast at all.

India used the military hardwire left behind by the outgoing British to invade and colonize the NE. This NE colony of India is maintained till today through an army of AFSPA-empowered rapists.

This says it all.

Oh and finally, here's a Naga girl's message entitled "Dear India". BTW, this is what's really in their hearts. Don't think for one minute Northeasterners wouldn't fight for their independence and suceed the minute they get their chance. With the help of a stronger power of course


EDIT: The anonymous poster basically confirms what Mingle was saying about Tripura earlier. Some actual cultural and ethnic genocide going on there.

[Taiji]

Northeasterners cannot even enjoy a friendly soccer match without disturbances from these uncivilised idiots. NorthEastUnited Fans suffering the Chennaiyin FC fools.

Just what is it with insecure Indian males and the need to gang up while hitting on girls? Is this their mating strategy or what? That cowardly curry animal truly knows how to pick his victims choosing a few random girls where he knows he's safe to flap his arms like a chicken with the backing of Indians all over the place.

Luckily for him I wasn't there. I'd kick him off the stage. The Hindu Dindu will quickly go from doing the monkey dance to doing the falling dance

[Taiji]

Thank you. That is heartening to hear. I have always wondered how is the rural Chinese community like. I have also wondered when are you going to visit Nepal.

Some day. Not this trip but definitely some day. The Chinese rural community? Do you mean the absolute poorest in the rural regions?

For some, it's like this (Yi children harvesting kelp):http://gongyi.qq.com/original/exist/lostincoast.html

Looking like home yet?

On a lighter side of things, here is a beautiful performance by a Naga girl.


Now I am not sure what your taste in music is. Just that you enjoy music. Hope it brightened your day, Mr. Taiji.

Wow, that was mesmerizing. I've noticed something about Sino-Tibetan/Burman people, singing comes naturally to our race more than other populations except perhaps Italians and Slavics. My guess is it's because we have ancestry from the high mountains so our lungs are especially adapted to sing. And it helps that many actually enjoy it, even among the old uncles and aunties, singing is a very popular tradition among Chinese (including all the minorities).

Either way I'm sure she made her fellow Nagas very proud.

BTW, that sort of music is one of my favorites and coincidentally this is one of my favorite songs. Very meaningful lyrics about poverty every one of us can relate to. Makes me appreciate mom more (used to be a snotty, ungrateful kid but matured to see the bigger picture).

Taiji = very happy man today.

[Taiji]

Not northeast indian, native bangladeshi or nepalese but still a sino-tibeto-burman sibling:


It's mesmerizing, her voice only makes the message even clearer. I don't understand it, but it truly is one of the most beautiful languages I heard.

[Yaglakar]

It makes this monk’s protest much more understandable and provides the historical context to it. So it would seem that the Rohingyas have always been trouble makers and separatists (quite similar to the ETIM in China) while being agents of a foreign country/entity. Literal fifth columns. In the old days, this would be considered treason and it would be reasonable to extinguish the whole group who did this. That's what happened to the Dzungars who were the residents of Xinjiang before the Uighurs moved in.

What is this mysterious ETIM that comprises of several hundred members at most. A few hundred men pose any sort of threat to China?

Very good facts and historical background. That there are more than 20 ethnic minorities there proves that this area changed hands so often, that most groups living there can consider themselves “native”. Modern day Uighurs themselves only came to the area in the 9th century. And only in the Southern part. They moved to the North after the previous occupants, the Oirat Mongols, Dzungar were wiped out of the area.

The name Xinjiang is also misleading. It was originally called Xiyu and was controlled by Han dynasty more than 2000 years ago. The original inhabitants were probably an Iranic type people known as Yuezhi who were later conquered by the Xiongnu.

Of course, the mainstream “non-chinese” view is that the modern day Uighurs are the original owners of the land even if many of them might not even be from that region. It’s quite baffling because it seems to suggest that only Uighurs have a right to be there, while ignoring all other ethnic groups there.
Uighurs and the ETIM are grouped as one; and all Uighurs are portrayed as noble freedom fighters disregarding those that are in fact happy to be in the PRC. Also, they go to great lengths to justify and rebrand acts of terrorism committed by this group. In the 2009 Riots, the Han are the racist villains yet most of the killings were committed by the rioters who uttered genocidal slogans attempting to purge Xinjiang of ALL non Uighurs. Also during tensions in 2008 and beyond, majority of the police officers and civil servants killed are in fact ethnic Uighurs.

It seems you take delight in some Pashtun guy flattering and nodding to everything you say. But folk-history on your and his part needs to addressed, nevertheless.

1. Uyghurs were not given a "false" aka misnomer name. Ethnic consciousness (European concept) began to grow around late 19th century and by early 20th century under the influence of northern Uyghurs, and the old ethnonym was restored. Everything else is speculation and Mingle must provide us an actual order by Soviet Union to start calling inhabitants of Xinjiang as "Uyghurs".

2. Fact number 1, we descend largely from Toquz Oghuz/Old Uighur tribes who lived in Mongolia and NORTHERN XINJIANG/DZUNGARIA. Northern Xinjiang steppe zone has been home various ancient Turkic groups, including the Xiongnu, and probably old Türks who were forcibly moved from Qocho (Gaochang) area to Altai mountains to work as iron smiths. But more importantly northern Xinjiang is home to Toquz Oghuz/Old Uighurs in the later periods. When Uighur Khaganate (by the way those guys were allies of Tang China) collapsed a large portion of tribes migrated to what was in fact was their own land aka Northern Xinjiang. After defeating Tibetans who administered south Tarim Basin, they moved to southern portions as well intermixing with local settled Sakas, Sogdians, Karluks and Yaghma (another Toquz Oghuz tribe).

2. Han Chinese control of Tarim Basin/Xinjiang was always nominal. Xinjiang comprised of semi-independent vassal states/city-states of Indo-Europeans or independent Turkic tribes in Dzungaria. Following the collapse of Uighur Khaganate, old Uighurs established Qocho Kingdom. "Uyghur" started bearing a mark of citizenship and belonging to the state rather than ethnic composition. Qocho Uyghurs did not have to "Turkify" anything because Indo-European languages disappeared 2 centuries prior. People like Tocharians switched to Turkic long ago, but were absorbed into Qocho Uighurs. The same thing happened to Chinese settlers in northern Xinjiang who were there since Han times. They all became Uyghurs. How can Chinese folk-history lay claim to Xinjiang, if those Chinese became Uighurs and identified so. All of the above is recorded. Fortunately our history is rich in documentation and records of our own making.

3. Oirats displaced descendants of Qocho Uighurs around 16th century in Dzungaria, in mid 18th century they were slaughtered by Qing dynasty and northern Uyghurs who were their allies at the time. Following the genocide, Han Chinese began to mass migrate to Dzungaria and its vicinities. The area however has long history of Uighur settlement and city building. Beshbaliq (close to Urumchi) was the summer capital of Qocho Uighurs.

4. Germany has several tens of large various "minorities" from EU and elsewhere. Is it not Germany now? According to you it is not German land because various "minorities" reside within. Very weak argument if you ask me.

Late Uighur Khaganate:



Early Qocho (Gaochang) Uighurs:



Stable borders right up to allying with Genghis Khan:

[Taiji]

What is this mysterious ETIM that comprises of several hundred members at most. A few hundred men pose any sort of threat to China?

They're a terrorist organization. They threaten the lives of chinese citizens of all ethnic backgrounds.

1. Uyghurs were not given a "false" aka misnomer name. Ethnic consciousness (European concept) began to grow around late 19th century and by early 20th century under the influence of northern Uyghurs, and the old ethnonym was restored. Everything else is speculation and Mingle must provide us an actual order by Soviet Union to start calling inhabitants of Xinjiang as "Uyghurs".

Well, apparently the descendents of the original Uyghur Khaganate are called yugur now. Actually I learned that from Mingle. It was interesting to me that modern day uighurs are like rohingyas today and something I didn't know about this. I did hear that some of today's uighurs settled in today's Xinjiang as their ancestors tried to flee purges and persecutions from other turkic and mongolic groups.

When the Han Dynasty established the region as Xiyu, they noted that the 'native' inhabitants were the yuezhi, who were being attacked by the xiongnu in the northeast. This site was a later battleground between the Han Dynasty and xiongnu. All this predates the Uyghur Khaganate to my knowledge.

Germany has several tens of large various "minorities" from EU and elsewhere. Is it not Germany now? According to you it is not German land because various "minorities" reside within. Very weak argument if you ask me.

The difference is that those minorities do not hold any ancestral heritage to those lands and are mostly recent immigrants. The minorities in Xinjiang (uighurs, kazaks, tajiks, hui, han, mongols, manchus, xibe, tatar, daur) all had ancestors who either controlled/formed the majority in the region at some period of time.

A more comparable analogy would be the descendants of swabians, visigoths, franks and vandals all natives to Germany.

BTW, this is the map of the Eastern Han Dynasty. As you can see, it overlapped with the xiongnu territory


You can disregard some of my more condescending posts. In hindsight, it was quite moronic of me.

Now I'm not challenging your right to call yourselves native to Xinjiang or East Turkestan (if that is how you feel about the region). I just don't like how all uighurs are labeled under the ETIM label according to most foreign media I read. Somehow all uighurs are ETIM members/terrorists (sympathizers) according to the media yet my friends from Xinjiang tell me that in reality most uighurs are peaceful people and have a very positive opinion of them (they're han). To be honest, I've met a few now and they're nothing like the knife wielding thug stereotypes that I've now commonly come across on the chinese internet (yeah sucks, really come to hate it).

To be honest, I don't blame you if you hate the han and China these days since I now know that there is some truth (much truth even) to the struggles that uighurs face. If you feel an independent country is what you're after, I won't stop you from feeling that way.

[Yaglakar]

They're a terrorist organization. They threaten the lives of chinese citizens of all ethnic backgrounds.

This was a rhetorical question. Their power and influence is blown out of proportions. They comprise max few hundred men. But your mind has been poisoned by Chinese state propaganda, so you fail to see that few hundred men out of 11 million pose no threat whatsoever.

Well, apparently the descendents of the original Uyghur Khaganate are called yugur now. Actually I learned that from Mingle. It was interesting to me that modern day uighurs are like rohingyas today and something I didn't know about this. I did hear that some of today's uighurs settled in today's Xinjiang as their ancestors tried to flee purges and persecutions from other turkic and mongolic groups. When the Han Dynasty established the region as Xiyu, they noted that the 'native' inhabitants were the yuezhi, who were being attacked by the xiongnu in the northeast. This site was a later battleground between the Han Dynasty and xiongnu. All this predates the Uyghur Khaganate to my knowledge.

Mingle is not a historian or an authority on the matter. Term Uighur did not refer to a particular ethnic group. They were subgrouping of Toquz Oghuz which they in turn led. It was large political alliance of various Oghuz peoples of Mongolia and northern Xinjiang. Numerous modern ethnicities are partly descended from old Uighurs including Tuvans, Yugurs and modern Uyghurs. Partial ancestors of Yugurs established Gansu Kingdom, and partial ancestors Uyghurs established Qocho kingdom. Neither Tuvans, nor Uyghurs or Yugurs constitute and same people of Uighur Khaganate. Gansu kingdom was conquered by Tibeto-Burmese speaking Tanguts and hence assimilated in 11th century. When Qocho Uighurs allied with Genghis Khan, they purged/cleansed Gansu of Tanguts in revenge to what happened to Gansu Kingdom a hundred years earlier and many Mongols settled there, the same way Mongols settled in Xinjiang but in a somewhat less forceful manner. Today, Yugurs don't possess a written language and they just as well lost the old Uighur script, though retained aspects of language. To me it seems bizarre and strange, because medieval Buddhist Uighurs are primarily associated with literacy, documentation, and administrative capabilities. According to scholars at least 1/3 of the population was literate which likely constituted highest literacy rate in the world. But these Buddhist Uighurs are primarily associated with Qocho kingdom who were later Islamicized during Chagataid Khans and became part of the modern Uyghur ethnicity. Nevertheless, I consider Yugurs our brothers.

You seem in kind of cognitive dissonance though not in line with the official PRC historical narrative. "Han China was in Xinjiang before the Uyghurs, and Uyghurs are migrants from Mongolia." If this is not true, than Uyghurs are simply natives of the land who were simply Turkified, which is in fact partly true. The thinking held by majority of Chinese is not in line with historical facts. Chinese control beyond the Gansu corridor was "nominal", Chinese dynasties did not directly administer those areas. Indo-Europeans were there much earlier than any Chinese dynasty, and this local indo-European blood runs through our veins, the same way Chinese blood is in us from the times of Han China. Do you understand that those Chinese settlers who lived in places like Gaochang, mixed with Sogdians, old Uighurs, became medieval Uyghurs and spoke Uyghur and identified so?

The difference is that those minorities do not hold any ancestral heritage to those lands and are mostly recent immigrants. The minorities in Xinjiang (uighurs, kazaks, tajiks, hui, han, mongols, manchus, xibe, tatar, daur) all had ancestors who either controlled/formed the majority in the region at some period of time. A more comparable analogy would be the descendants of swabians, visigoths, franks and vandals all natives to Germany. BTW, this is the map of the Eastern Han Dynasty. As you can see, it overlapped with the xiongnu territory

Again with your folk history. All of aforementioned peoples except Pamiri Tajiks are recent migrants either escaping purges of Russian Empire/Soviet Union (Tatars, Kazakhs) or came with Qing dynasty following Dzungar genocide. You are not being reasonable connecting modern Han who migrated from central China with Han dynasty 2000 years ago. They are not connected or descended from Han dynasty settlers. Can Mongols lay claim to Eurasia because they conquered and administered these vast territories? Those Chinese settlers of ancient world are not connected to proper Han Chinese from the mainland. They mixed with old Uighurs and Sogdians forming a new ethnicity, state linked identity aka medieval Idiqut/Qocho/Gaochang Uighurs.

You can disregard some of my more condescending posts. In hindsight, it was quite moronic of me. Now I'm not challenging your right to call yourselves native to Xinjiang or East Turkestan (if that is how you feel about the region). I just don't like how all uighurs are labeled under the ETIM label according to most foreign media I read. Somehow all uighurs are ETIM members/terrorists (sympathizers) according to the media yet my friends from Xinjiang tell me that in reality most uighurs are peaceful people and have a very positive opinion of them (they're han). To be honest, I've met a few now and they're nothing like the knife wielding thug stereotypes that I've now commonly come across on the chinese internet (yeah sucks, really come to hate it). To be honest, I don't blame you if you hate the han and China these days since I now know that there is some truth (much truth even) to the struggles that uighurs face. If you feel an independent country is what you're after, I won't stop you from feeling that way.

East Turkistan is an artificial term coined by Russian turcologist Bartold, if I recall. Actually I prefer term Xinjiang rather than East Turkistan. Northern Xinjiang was historically refered to as Qocho, Id or Uighuristan and southern Xinjiang as Kashgar or Moghulistan. Why would I hate Han Chinese. Our histories are closely interlinked through trade and cultural interactions. Uyghur culture from music to state traditions is much more East Asian (Chinese) shifted than any of Turkic groups. The meritocratic principles of Qocho Uighurs were likely adopted from Chinese, Uighurs even modified their script (vertical alignment) so it looks more prestigious, but neither Uyghurs nor Tibetans are Chinese in the end.

[Taiji]

This was a rhetorical question. Their power and influence is blown out of proportions. They comprise max few hundred men. But your mind has been poisoned by Chinese state propaganda, so you fail to see that few hundred men out of 11 million pose no threat whatsoever.

You have a good point and I was being ridiculous. Yes, I know that the ETIM doesn't represent uighurs in any way and it was quite silly of me to bring them up. In the end, uighurs aren't so different from any other ethnic group.

Mingle is not a historian or an authority on the matter. Term Uighur did not refer to a particular ethnic group. They were subgrouping of Toquz Oghuz which they in turn led. It was large political alliance of various Oghuz peoples of Mongolia and northern Xinjiang. Numerous modern ethnicities are partly descended from old Uighurs including Tuvans, Yugurs and modern Uyghurs. Partial ancestors of Yugurs established Gansu Kingdom, and partial ancestors Uyghurs established Qocho kingdom. Neither Tuvans, nor Uyghurs or Yugurs constitute and same people of Uighur Khaganate. Gansu kingdom was conquered by Tibeto-Burmese speaking Tanguts and hence assimilated in 11th century. When Qocho Uighurs allied with Genghis Khan, they purged/cleansed Gansu of Tanguts in revenge to what happened to Gansu Kingdom a hundred years earlier and many Mongols settled there, the same way Mongols settled in Xinjiang but in a somewhat less forceful manner. Today, Yugurs don't possess a written language and they just as well lost the old Uighur script, though retained aspects of language. To me it seems bizarre and strange, because medieval Buddhist Uighurs are primarily associated with literacy, documentation, and administrative capabilities. According to scholars at least 1/3 of the population was literate which likely constituted highest literacy rate in the world. But these Buddhist Uighurs are primarily associated with Qocho kingdom who were later Islamicized during Chagataid Khans and became part of the modern Uyghur ethnicity. Nevertheless, I consider Yugurs our brothers.

You seem in kind of cognitive dissonance though not in line with the official PRC historical narrative. "Han China was in Xinjiang before the Uyghurs, and Uyghurs are migrants from Mongolia." If this is not true, than Uyghurs are simply natives of the land who were simply Turkified, which is in fact partly true. The thinking held by majority of Chinese is not in line with historical facts. Chinese control beyond the Gansu corridor was "nominal", Chinese dynasties did not directly administer those areas. Indo-Europeans were there much earlier than any Chinese dynasty, and this local indo-European blood runs through our veins, the same way Chinese blood is in us from the times of Han China. Do you understand that those Chinese settlers who lived in places like Gaochang, mixed with Sogdians, old Uighurs, became medieval Uyghurs and spoke Uyghur and identified so?

Again with your folk history. All of aforementioned peoples except Pamiri Tajiks are recent migrants either escaping purges of Russian Empire/Soviet Union (Tatars, Kazakhs) or came with Qing dynasty following Dzungar genocide. You are not being reasonable connecting modern Han who migrated from central China with Han dynasty 2000 years ago. They are not connected or descended from Han dynasty settlers. Can Mongols lay claim to Eurasia because they conquered and administered these vast territories? Those Chinese settlers of ancient world are not connected to proper Han Chinese from the mainland. They mixed with old Uighurs and Sogdians forming a new ethnicity, state linked identity aka medieval Idiqut/Qocho/Gaochang Uighurs.

Thanks. This was actually very informative and makes a lot of sense, if we look at the present situation in each of these provinces/areas (it matches with the history you have just explained).

East Turkistan is an artificial term coined by Russian turcologist Bartold, if I recall. Actually I prefer term Xinjiang rather than East Turkistan. Northern Xinjiang was historically refered to as Qocho, Id or Uighuristan and southern Xinjiang as Kashgar or Moghulistan. Why would I hate Han Chinese. Our histories are closely interlinked through trade and cultural interactions. Uyghur culture from music to state traditions is much more East Asian (Chinese) shifted than any of Turkic groups.

You're more reasonable than most people. I believe we shared a lot of culture and contributions flowed both ways. Some of our most famous chinese classical instruments such as the pipa, xiqin, erhu came from Central Asia, and others like the yangqin came from Persia.

neither Uyghurs nor Tibetans are Chinese in the end.

You're right. In the end, uighur and tibetan identities are to be decided by uighurs/tibetans and I should respect that. However, the door will always be opened to you since all minorities have some heritage in what is now China. Our histories are intertwined, there were good times and bad times. Unfortunately, in recent times, it has not been for the best.

I really don't know what to say. For the longest time ever, this is the one moment I've always been waiting for. I've never been silenced, and never been schooled till now. I never knew it was such an enlightening experience. Thank you for that.

[zhaoyun]

This was a rhetorical question. Their power and influence is blown out of proportions. They comprise max few hundred men. But your mind has been poisoned by Chinese state propaganda, so you fail to see that few hundred men out of 11 million pose no threat whatsoever.



Mingle is not a historian or an authority on the matter. Term Uighur did not refer to a particular ethnic group. They were subgrouping of Toquz Oghuz which they in turn led. It was large political alliance of various Oghuz peoples of Mongolia and northern Xinjiang. Numerous modern ethnicities are partly descended from old Uighurs including Tuvans, Yugurs and modern Uyghurs. Partial ancestors of Yugurs established Gansu Kingdom, and partial ancestors Uyghurs established Qocho kingdom. Neither Tuvans, nor Uyghurs or Yugurs constitute and same people of Uighur Khaganate. Gansu kingdom was conquered by Tibeto-Burmese speaking Tanguts and hence assimilated in 11th century. When Qocho Uighurs allied with Genghis Khan, they purged/cleansed Gansu of Tanguts in revenge to what happened to Gansu Kingdom a hundred years earlier and many Mongols settled there, the same way Mongols settled in Xinjiang but in a somewhat less forceful manner. Today, Yugurs don't possess a written language and they just as well lost the old Uighur script, though retained aspects of language. To me it seems bizarre and strange, because medieval Buddhist Uighurs are primarily associated with literacy, documentation, and administrative capabilities. According to scholars at least 1/3 of the population was literate which likely constituted highest literacy rate in the world. But these Buddhist Uighurs are primarily associated with Qocho kingdom who were later Islamicized during Chagataid Khans and became part of the modern Uyghur ethnicity. Nevertheless, I consider Yugurs our brothers.

You seem in kind of cognitive dissonance though not in line with the official PRC historical narrative. "Han China was in Xinjiang before the Uyghurs, and Uyghurs are migrants from Mongolia." If this is not true, than Uyghurs are simply natives of the land who were simply Turkified, which is in fact partly true. The thinking held by majority of Chinese is not in line with historical facts. Chinese control beyond the Gansu corridor was "nominal", Chinese dynasties did not directly administer those areas. Indo-Europeans were there much earlier than any Chinese dynasty, and this local indo-European blood runs through our veins, the same way Chinese blood is in us from the times of Han China. Do you understand that those Chinese settlers who lived in places like Gaochang, mixed with Sogdians, old Uighurs, became medieval Uyghurs and spoke Uyghur and identified so?



Again with your folk history. All of aforementioned peoples except Pamiri Tajiks are recent migrants either escaping purges of Russian Empire/Soviet Union (Tatars, Kazakhs) or came with Qing dynasty following Dzungar genocide. You are not being reasonable connecting modern Han who migrated from central China with Han dynasty 2000 years ago. They are not connected or descended from Han dynasty settlers. Can Mongols lay claim to Eurasia because they conquered and administered these vast territories? Those Chinese settlers of ancient world are not connected to proper Han Chinese from the mainland. They mixed with old Uighurs and Sogdians forming a new ethnicity, state linked identity aka medieval Idiqut/Qocho/Gaochang Uighurs.



East Turkistan is an artificial term coined by Russian turcologist Bartold, if I recall. Actually I prefer term Xinjiang rather than East Turkistan. Northern Xinjiang was historically refered to as Qocho, Id or Uighuristan and southern Xinjiang as Kashgar or Moghulistan. Why would I hate Han Chinese. Our histories are closely interlinked through trade and cultural interactions. Uyghur culture from music to state traditions is much more East Asian (Chinese) shifted than any of Turkic groups. The meritocratic principles of Qocho Uighurs were likely adopted from Chinese, Uighurs even modified their script (vertical alignment) so it looks more prestigious, but neither Uyghurs nor Tibetans are Chinese in the end.

Your information is basically correct. I have traveled to Xinjiang before, a long time ago, before things got really bad. When I read news of what is happening there now, it makes me feel depressed. Most Uighurs are good people, even though some of the terrorists did commit evil, however, considering how hard the Chinese govt. is clamping down now will only create blowback in the future.

You are right that the Uighurs and Tibetans are not Chinese. But the Chinese government is intent on making them Chinese.

Xinjiang is also a very vast region, it was not controlled by a single one group in its entirety for much of its history. The Uighurs are native to the region, but the Han Chinese have also been there since over two thousand years ago. In the past, the Hans and the native Indo European peoples mixed freely as they were more united in both culture and a Buddhist religion. But now there are steep ethnic and religious divisions.

[Taiji]

I thought this was very moving. It's about a teacher in Tibet.


What this teacher said about tibetan parents really brings to light the question of tibetan IQ. No, I don't think they have low IQs actually (certainly not less than filipinos, indians and indonesians). That's because tibetans didn't have a culture of learning and many never finished/went to school, unlike indians, indos and filipinos who still happen to have rather low IQs despite full opportunities given to them. The fact that many of her students did not want to leave classes shows a thirst for knowledge and curiosity present in all high IQ populations.

What I found amazing is that her past life is very similar to how yi ethnic currently live in China. The yi are considered the poorest ethnic minority in all of China and in some cases have to climb cliffs and make perilous journeys just to go to school. But change happened with tibetans and they're starting to catch up with the eastern states and live better than ever. My one wish is for all chinese, han and minorities alike to live up to their dreams and no longer have to worry about an empty stomach.