Youtube comments of K ` (@user-jt3dw6vv4x).
-
1200
-
892
-
740
-
328
-
Buddhism, Hinduism and other Eastern religions are deeply intertwined. The prevalence of Hindu-derived deity worship in various parts of Buddhist Asia is because of the Hindu influence. Phra Phrom (Thai depiction of Brahma) as featured in the video at 10:52 cannot be tied to Buddhism but more broadly to the general Dharmic/Indic culture that exists in Thailand. Thai people also popularly worship Ganesha, a deity that does not exist in Buddhist cosmology and Thai people also visit Hindu temples in Thailand. Some of the largest Ganesha statues outside of India are located in Thailand. Phra Phrom in Thai-style is also worshipped by ethnic Chinese across Southeast Asia and southern China. In Hong Kong, there is a famous Phra Phrom statue that is frequented by Chinese people. In Japan, there are Japanese versions of Ganesha, Shiva and Skanda and in Sri Lanka, you will find Buddhist people worshipping local folk gods as well as Hindu gods inside some Buddhist temples like Seema Malaka. The same thing applies to other Buddhist groups in Asia.
So correlating it to Buddhism is incorrect because some of these devas don't even exist in Buddhism. The reason people worship them in Asia is because of the pre-existing Hindu influence and the general overlap that Eastern religions share with one another. Thailand was previously a Hindu nation, these Hindu practices were simply carried over after Theravada Buddhism was brought to the country from Sri Lanka. There is no restriction to how people must practice Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism etc. so people mix them together.
301
-
300
-
295
-
214
-
176
-
169
-
160
-
158
-
145
-
Just some extra information for anybody interested: Sri Lankan Malays are one of the main ethnic groups of Sri Lanka and they've contributed significantly to the development of Sri Lankan culture. So much in Sri Lankan culture derives from Indonesian influences like the sarong, the rebana, the outrigger canoe, batik, redde hatte dress and most prominently, cuisine (sambal, Malay pickle, yellow rice/nasi kuning, satay, babath, nasi goreng, seenakku/cheena kueh, wattalapan, dodol, fried noodles and so on). Indonesian cultural influences are one of the main sources of cultural influence on Sri Lankan culture. Sri Lankan culture would not be Sri Lankan culture without the Indonesian cultural influences.
In regards to the people, the Sri Lankan Malays trace their ancestry mostly to Indonesia where they descend from the Javanese, Ambonese, Peranakan Baba-Nyonya Chinese, Balinese, Malays and Bandanese. They have all mixed together to create the Sri Lankan Malay identity. They are known as "Malays" because they spoke a dialect of Malay that developed into Bahasa Sri Lanka Melayu and the British called them "Malays" once they colonised Sri Lanka. In the ancient times, there was a wave of Javanese and Malay migrants to Sri Lanka during the era of King Chandrabhanu. So there are other Sri Lankans who have some Malay ancestry. Sinhalese people with Malay-like features are believed to have some distant Malay ancestry. I myself did a DNA test and part of it came back as "Indonesian".
137
-
127
-
115
-
112
-
107
-
104
-
101
-
96
-
93
-
85
-
81
-
73
-
73
-
72
-
68
-
66
-
64
-
63
-
61
-
54
-
53
-
Terrible to see and I feel sorry for them because the Rohingyas once had Burmese citizenship and Rohingya politicians had been voted into parliament (such as Rohingya activist Wai Wai Nu's father). That all changed with the ascension of the Tatmadaw to power.
What must be noted is that all Asian countries, doesn't matter if rich or poor, are reluctant in accepting refugees and many have not signed the 1951 Refugee Convention. Bangladesh was kind to provide them housing for 5 years and India, Thailand and others in the region also accepted refugees but for the case of India (and others), government policies do not support the permanent resettlement of refugees. Asia has helped its own in times of need, the Indochina refugee crisis, the Rohingya genocide, persecution of minorities in various Asian countries but permanent resettlement is not often on the cards and if there are any opportunities of permanent resettlement (e.g. Japan's decision to accept Indochina refugees or give asylum to select numbers of Rohingyas), there is a meticulous procedure and most do not, unfortunately, get asylum.
52
-
52
-
52
-
50
-
50
-
The case of Sri Lanka is quite peculiar because this is a country that had everything going for it. This country could have harnessed what it had in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s but decided to go down the route of ethnic disharmony and violence. The leaders of yesteryear were more interested in fuelling their egos and righting the wrongs of the past instead of moving on. Despite the end of the war in 2009 and the hallmarks of a new economic miracle, the situation did not improve because the country was fractured along ethnic lines and there was no effort to create some sort of peace and acknowledgement of the past. With high economic growth rates of 9% in the early 2010s, Sri Lanka eventually peaked as an upper middle income nation in 2019. Sri Lankans, at one point, enjoyed a per capita national income that was higher than all other South Asian countries except for the Maldives, along with a longer life expectancy as a result of strong social services such as healthcare and education. Sri Lankans began living longer and longer to the point that the country has now become one of the fastest aging societies in the world and began to recruit migrant workers from India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar to combat its shrinking workforce (problems that high income nations face, not developing ones but it's a testament to Sri Lanka's successful efforts in boosting the quality of life for its people). Sri Lanka's last beacon of success was in 2020 when the country was successfully able to control COVID-19 by pursuing a Zero COVID policy using contact tracing and harnessing its good healthcare system bringing cases down to 0. It performed so well that it was ranked #10 in the world among countries that were most successful in controlling the spread of COVID-19 by the Lowy Institute. What we see now is the beginning of civilisational collapse. All civilisations peak and decline. What a shame to see everything they achieved and what they could have achieved go down the drain. You will never get far if you continue to divide and conquer people. Sri Lanka now pays the price for everything wrong that its leaders, past and present, did to the country and its people.
49
-
48
-
46
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
38
-
37
-
37
-
35
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
The Tatmadaw has wrecked havoc in Myanmar by persecuting minority groups, including Rohingyas, Shan, Kachin, Karen and Rakhine among many others. It also staged a coup in 2021 which became a wake up call for many Bamar people who suddenly understood and now sympathise with minority groups like the Rohingyas. The Rohingya genocide led to the largest movement of people in the Asia-Pacific in 2017 since the Vietnam War when more than 1 million Rohingyas migrated to Bangladesh, India, Thailand and other parts of South and Southeast Asia. While Myanmar and its diaspora continues to suffer, there are certain countries in the Asian region (China, India, Japan, Singapore) that refuse to criticise and cut ties with the Tatmadaw. There is only one Asian nation that has been the most vocal against not only the genocide but also the 2021 coup, that is Indonesia.
20
-
She's an AMERICAN, an INDIAN AMERICAN not an Indian. Indian media is obsessed with claiming this person and that person as "Indian origin". There is a reason why people like Indian Americans but not Indians from India. Indian Americans are hardworking people, they are overrepresented in the STEM fields, pioneers in new inventions in the US, dominate the academic sector (alongside other Asian Americans) and contribute so much to the US economy. While I am not quick to use IQ to define groups, a study of 10 year old American kids found those with Indian heritage collectively had one of the highest IQs in the study. These are elite people, no wonder Trump is so fond of them.
Indian Americans are not the same as Indians from India. Indians from India are instead trying to enter the US illegally via the Mexico border en masse, they are the face of all of the anti-Indian hate that exists on social media, they are associated with scam calls - "WHY DID YOU REDEEM" (iterally the biggest anti-Indian meme on TikTok in 2024 and their male immigrants are wrecking havoc in the USA's northern neighbour of Canada (Brampton ring a bell?). When people say, "Indians are hardworking, great people", they're talking about the Indian Americans. Don't think for one second, that people think Indian Americans are the same as Indians from India.
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
The French didn't support miscegenation with others the way Spanish or other European colonial groups did like the Portuguese, Dutch and British. Look at France's ex-colonies, there are no sizeable mixed race populations in any of them. Take Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos - all three nations should have sizeable, distinct and influential Eurasian groups the same way Indonesia, Hong Kong, Macau, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and India have but they don't have any.
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
@sendakan666 In my opinion, none of this would have been needed if the Sri Lankan government treated all ethnic groups equally. If Sri Lanka never descended into ethnic disharmony, Sri Lanka could have eventually adopted a similar system to Singapore's CMIO model. Sri Lanka only has a small population living on a small island where ethnic groups aren't exactly separated by provinces because everybody lives everywhere. Sri Lanka could have easily recognised the idea that Sri Lanka has 5 main ethnic groups (Sinhalese, Tamils, Moors, Malays and Burghers/Eurasians), an idea that already exists among the general Sri Lankan public, and modelled it after Singapore's CMIO (Chinese, Malay, Indian, Other) model at a national level. Sri Lanka began cracking when the government enforced the Sinhala Only Act. Many people speak of the Tamils but the situation of the Burghers/Eurasians is worthy to note because they also felt disenfranchised. It's no surprise that many Burghers/Eurasians ended up migrating to Australia where they and their descendants now form a sizeable portion of the Australian-Sri Lankan community.
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
@PissMenn It's about money, capital. The reality is that China is now the most powerful nation in Asia and so its influence has risen across the region. China has money it can offer to other countries, which is why its influence has risen in South Asia and other parts of Asia.
Also, it's worth pointing out that Chinese influence in other parts of Asia outside of East Asia is not a new thing. Many parts of South Asia (Nepal, Sri Lanka, Assam, Bengal etc.), Southeast Asia and Central Asia (Tajikistan, Afghanistan etc.) were tributary states of different Chinese imperial dynasties (e.g. Ming, Qing etc.) during the ancient days. So modern Chinese influence shouldn't be viewed as abnormal, China has always been a major player in the region like India was in the ancient days.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
Firstly, they're all temporary migrants. Nobody is going to be allowed to stay forever. They work for a number of years and then leave, replaced with new temporary migrants. Secondly, all of these foreigners are from select Asian countries only like Vietnam, Philippines, Nepal, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Cambodia, Myanmar etc., basically countries that are culturally compatible with Japan. Most of these countries are predominantly Buddhist and/or influenced by Eastern cultural heritage. "Race/DNA" has no role in selection but for those Westerners who focus so much on genetics, most of these countries are predominantly descendants of ESEA lineages (just like the Japanese) or for some countries are partially descended from another Ancient East Eurasian ancestral lineage (which is distantly shared with the Jomon and modern Japanese). So you can stop the pearl clutching. Finally, the Japanese government has for decades signed special visa agreements with these countries since the 1980s. It's not anything new. Japan follows the same pattern that other Asian countries like Singapore, South Korea and Malaysia follow.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
This situation has arisen primarily in the US where there is a need to categorise people based on appearance as a result of the country's history fraught with poor race relations. In the US, "Asian" means East Asian and so other Asians who don't fit that image are excuded. This definition also exists in many other Western countries such as Australia and Canada. However, there is much greater awareness that despite looking physically different, Indians and other South Asians are still "Asian" just not the type of "Asian" people immediately think of. In the UK, it's the complete opposite where South Asians are seen as the default Asian.
For South Asians, however, we are aware of the sheer diversity of our community. I am of ethnic Sri Lankan descent and anybody aware of Sri Lanka's diversity will know there are a variety of ethnic groups (Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay, Eurasian, Vedda, Chinese etc.) on the island. For other people of Sri Lankan descent, they know I am Sri Lankan but for many non-Sri Lankans or non-Asians there is a struggle in understanding certain characteristics of my appearance. I have epicanthic folds (or as understood in a Sri Lankan context, "Malay eyes" or what some may call "almond eyes"). As a result, I have had people assume I belong to other groups are mixed with Southeast Asian groups. People think that almond eyes or East Asian features only exist in East Asia or Southeast Asia but that's not the case. On "South Asian TikTok", I see South Asians who look stereotypically "South Asian", East Asian, Southeast Asian and West Asian. Our features are so diverse.
The idea one is "Asian" based on how they look like doesn't make sense to me and it doesn't make sense to my Southeast Asian friends either. I have Southeast Asian friends who are diverse. One of my SEA friends could be mistaken for "Indian" and I knew a Timorese girl who had dark brown skin and round eyes. A Thai girl on Quora went viral on the platform for encapsulating SEA diversity in one sentence, "There is no other place in the world where you will find Chinese-looking people using their right hand to eat rice or Indian-looking people eating noodles with chopsticks". Asia is a diverse place. The concept of "Asian" is simply about geography and that is how it is understood in Asia. The reason why "Asian" becomes a term to describe appearance outside of Asia is because Asian ethnic groups are minorities. It's a trivial issue to focus on.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
L Yeah I'm not from India but I like Indian culture and history. It's a very interesting country. Tbh, the CCP is really problematic and their behaviour in the Asia-Pacific towards India, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, Japan and Australia is very concerning. What they did last year is very concerning, it shows that they aren't going to stop. They're so antagonistic and I don't like that all. The CCP supporters on the internet are also very loud, problematic and extremely irritating. I can't even speak to my friend, who lives in mainland China, because the CCP became even more controlling last year with internet access.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
People often speak about Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Myanmar or maybe Malaysia when it comes to China's influence in modern Asia but there is no country in Asia that has been so greatly influenced by China in the modern era than Laos. Laos is representative of modern Chinese influence in Asia. Boten is one place where the Laotian kip and Chinese yuan are both accepted but even more interesting is the Golden Triangle Special Economic Zone (GTSEZ), while not tied specifically to the Chinese government, it's being run by a Chinese kingpin. Chinese cultural influence is widespread in the zone as Chinese people, including traders and investors have contributed to the development of the zone. The GTSEZ is inhabited by Laotians, Chinese, Thais, Burmese, Indians and Vietnamese who are engaged in business in the area.
Like it or not, China is the dominant power in Asia today.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@yvysflores5876 Sorry I'm talking about GDP (nominal) per capita income as in the gross national income of a nation that indicates quality of life of a nation. You are talking about GDP (nominal) as in the market value of all final goods and services from a nation in a given year. US, China, Japan, Germany and India are the top 5 countries for GDP (nominal) that you are talking about but I'm not talking about that. In 2022, Sri Lanka's national income is $3,699 and the Philippines is $3,687 - that places both countries in the lower middle income bracket. However, in 2019 - which is what the OP is talking about - Sri Lanka's national income was $4,068 (placing it into the upper middle income bracket) while the Philippines' national income was $3,104 - a lower middle income nation. For comparison, Singapore in 2022 has a national income of $79,576 while the US has a national income of $76,027 - this places both countries in the high income developed bracket. China has a national income of $14,096 and the Maldives has a national income of $14,078 - this places both countries in the upper middle income bracket but they're very close to becoming high income developed nations - might even be this year when the new data is released in mid-2022. This is all data gathered from the IMF.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@kookoo9235 It's literally right wing populism though. The Rohingya genocide and other forms of violence towards ethnic minorities in Myanmar is the result of Bamar nationalism that supports the traditional idea of Bamar hegemony over Myanmar and this idea that Bamar identity must be protected.
Bamar nationalism shares ties with other right wing nationalist movements in Asia like in Sri Lanka and Thailand. They also believe Asian Buddhists face an existential crisis because the fertility rates of Buddhist women across Asia are very low (particularly in Japan, South Korea, China, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and Vietnam) and data shows that Buddhists will be the only major religious group to not grow in absolute numbers over the next couple of decades. Their anger is directed towards Islam because Muslim women have a much higher fertility rate and historically speaking, large parts of South and Southeast Asia that were once followers of Buddhism are now Muslim-majority, coupled with the way Islam was introduced into South Asia, it's generated anger among right wing nationalists in different parts of the region.
Their ethnic and cultural identity is tied with Buddhism. Buddhism is a part of their cultural heritage, they may not even understand the basic teachings of the Buddha but still identify as "Buddhist". So when they see their low fertility rates, they fear that they will go extinct. Their anger and violence comes from a place of ethnonationalism and the desire to maintain control. It all stems from right wing beliefs that contrast with the Bamar Buddhists who want to make Myanmar a country for all Burmese people, not just Bamar.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@Dand40 No South Asians don't. India had a big impact on the rest of Asia. Indian influence permeates South and Southeast Asia and also had an impact on East Asia via the spread of Buddhism. Most of South and Southeast Asia fall within the Indian cultural sphere with Indic culture being the root of Thai, Nepali, Sri Lankan, Cambodian, Burmese, Indonesian and Lao culture among others. Certain Japanese and Chinese dieties are of Hindu origin. For example, Chinese diety Wei Tuo and Japanese diety Benzaiten are of Hindu origin. Wei Tuo is known as Murugan by Tamils in India, Sri Lanka, Singapore and Malaysia. Benzaiten is known as Saraswati in India and Nepal. There are multiple other elements of Indian influence in other South, Southeast and East Asian cultures but there is too much to list. Thing is people think that just because most South Asians look different from East Asians or Southeast Asians it means they are culturally very different, they're not.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@fortpark-wd9sx Arakanese people are different to Arakanese Muslims. Arakanese people are Buddhists and they are ethnically very similar to the majority Bamar people of Myanmar. Rohingyas are Arakanese Muslims. Arakanese Buddhists (Rakhine) are absolutely not Rohingyas and nobody would ever confuse the two.
As I said in my second comment, Burmese people are diverse. Rohingyas look very similar to most Bangladeshi and in a way it can be hard to tell the difference but the same can be said of other Burmese groups like Kaman and Maramagyi Buddhists, both of whom are native to Myanmar and yet look more similar to most Bangladeshis than most Burmese.
I'm confused as to what you mean by "Bangladeshi features". If you think I'm confused, what do you think Rohingyas look like? Do you think they look drastically different to Bangladeshis that nobody should be able to confuse the two? Sorry, I'm trying to understand why you think this way.
As I explained before, there are people in the majority Bamar community who, to foreigners, would look more similar to typical Bangladeshis than to most other Burmese like Major General Soe Naing Oo or Burmese actor, Hugo Naing. There are Rohingyas who look more similar to most other Burmese like Wai Wai Nu and there are some Bangladeshis that look closer to most Burmese. That entire region of Asia is a mix of Indo-Aryan, AASI, Tibeto-Burman and Austroasiatic groups.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Nobody teaches this in Australian schools, you only learn this by reading but Thursday Island and other areas of northern Australia like Broome were home to many Asians of Chinese, Malay, Filipino, Japanese and Sri Lankan (Ceylonese) descent. They were pearl divers, gem traders and other workers that were brought by the Australian government to power the economy in the north. Many Australians in the north descend from these Asian groups. You can still see the Asian influence in various parts of northern Australia like Broome. The Chinatowns of that time in this part of Australia were actually "Asiatowns" as they were the place of residence and business of not just the Chinese but the Japanese, Malays, Filipinos and Sri Lankans. These communities are a very big part of Asian Australian history and identity, including the Chinese, Malays, Indians and Cocos Malays of Christmas Island and Cocos (Keeling) Islands - the only two territories in Australia where Asian Australians form the majority.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Modern India is exactly that. Each of its states are separated along the lines of ethnicity, language and culture. For example, the Tamils predominantly live in Tamil Nadu, the Marathis in Maharashtra, the Biharis in Bihar, the Harayanvis in Harayana, Rajasthanis in Rajasthan, Assamese in Assam, Meitei in Manipur, Nagas in Nagaland, Kashmiris in Kashmir, Ladakhis in Ladakh, Odias in Odisha, Punjabis in Punjab and so on.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
The only people who speak of historic, genetic, cultural and linguistic relations are Indians who believe the rest of South Asia belongs to India. Sri Lanka is its own thing. Sri Lankans are mostly Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay and Burgher - those are the five main groups. Sri Lanka has had a close historical relationship with China, not as close as India but still significant. Sri Lanka was once a tributary state of Ming China, it was visited by the Chinese monk Faxian and was settled by ethnic Chinese immigrants who created Sri Lankan-style Chinese cuisine, which is very popular on the island, and introduced noodles and stir frying to the island's inhabitants. Every restaurant in Sri Lanka features noodle dishes and every Sri Lankan mother knows how to cook the highly popular Sri Lankan egg noodles. Go overseas and every Sri Lankan restaurant will feature some type of noodle dish whether it's fried noodles or a Sri Lankan-Chinese noodle dish. For office lunch packets that are served to office workers, if it's not a rice and curry packet, then it's a rice with soy sauce packet. On top of that, at least 100,000 Chinese people have settled in Sri Lanka since 2000 and you can see their cultural influence in Colombo, especially in Kollupititya.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@raibhansjadhavrsj6352 Indians getting called terrorists mainly involve Sikhs and that's because they wear turbans. Additionally, this whole thing about Indians/Sikhs being called terrorists only happens in the US because people are very informed about the world around them. Additionally, Indian stereotypes (e.g. model minority, tech worker etc.) are never applied to Arabs anywhere in the West. Also, let's not forget the fact that Pakistanis are stereotyped as terrorists and people in the US can't tell the difference between North Indians and Pakistanis. Arabs and Indians are very different.
Arab culture and Indian culture are on the whole very different. Indians have more in common with other South Asians than they do with Arabs. Additionally, India is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere alongside South and Southeast Asia. Middle East is part of a totally different cultural region. In fact, Arabs have more in common with Europeans through their shared history (Mediterranean civilisation, Helenic world, Abrahmic religions). India is totally different and is part of the Dharmic/Indic world (which also had a big impact on East Asia). Chinese philosopher, Hu Shi famously said, "“India conquered and dominated China culturally for 20 centuries without ever having to send a single soldier across her border”.
Just google "effeminate Bengali man" and read about this whole situation instead ofdeflecting. There are many books written by Indians about this topic. Facts over feelings.
BTW, not having facial hair doesn't make anybody less of a man. 💀
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It's because India's shine has now disappeared. It's not just China, it's very much the whole of Asia and really the whole world that thinks the same way. The reality is that the glory days of India when Indic culture was spread across Asia is now long gone. What people see is a shell of what India once was and it's just shocking to see how India which gave the world Buddhism, meditation, yoga and all these other aspects is in the state that it is in today, where people do not respect it. There are so many issues present in India today like the mistreatment of women and girls, open defecation, undeveloped infrastructure, unhygienic practices used in preparing street food, high infant mortality rate and so on. So many videos have gone viral on international social media like TikTok and Twitter showcasing very shocking aspects of Indian society that has sadly ruined the reputation of India and its people over the course of 2023. These practices were once common in other Asian countries as far recent as the 1970s but now not anymore. The reality is that India is still very far behind. I used to think India was following China's trajectory and I thought modern India was currently somewhere where China was back in the 1990s/early 2000s so it was developing very well but after seeing all those videos last year, my perspective changed and so did millions of others. It seems like there are areas of India, especially in the north, that are like they're still stuck in the 1940s. I don't know why Modi doesn't use the money India generates to improve these regions.
I don't know, I think it's going to take India a very, very long time to change people's perspectives of the country. It's sad, really.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The fertility rates of Singapore's three main ethnic groups look like this: Chinese - 0.94, Indian - 0.97 and Malay - 1.83. The Chinese and Indians have the lowest in Singapore and the Chinese and Indians have been living in Singapore for many generations before the modern nations of China and India were even formed. Chinese, Indians and Malays they all share Singaporean culture. Thus, they are far removed from the cultural psyche of China and India respectively and cannot be compared to places like Canada. It would be like comparing French-Quebec Canadians with French in France. The report you quoted is from 2010 and there are several factors as to why that is now outdated, one of which is that the fertility rate for South Asian women would've declined for natural reasons, it would've been low to begin with considering the people in question would've been of a higher status and thus having probably 2 kids while Chinese immigrants came from a One-Child Policy era China and were used to being an only sibling and thus would've only had 1 kid. Additionally, when we look at the fertility rates in India which now stands at 2 and everywhere else in South Asia, except for Pakistan, it's below replacement level so the idea that the fertility rate of South Asian women in Canada, even with new immigrants, wouldn't have decreased doesn't make sense. It would've decreased and regardless, the difference would've likely been 1 between the two groups anyway. We're talking about higher quality immigrants and then their first generation offspring, who are adapted to the local culture.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@sriharshacv7760 Okay but size is not the question, Sri Lanka is culturally, ethnically and historically distinct as explained in the video. Sri Lankan society is a mix of Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay and Burgher cultural elements. It's evident in the cuisine, the languages (Sinhalese, Tamil, Sri Lankan Malay) and the culture. Sri Lanka and Sri Lankan people are "Sri Lankan" because of the cultural interaction between the Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malays and Burghers.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
There are a few things here I think are worth pointing out.
Gautam Adani was the first person from Asia to place so high up on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, peaking at #2. White tech billionaires have traditionally dominated the list so to see an Asian person rise so high up and so quickly was unseen until last year. Adani is known to be close to Modi (a polarising figure to those in the West). Adani Group is also linked to several sectors that Modi has listed as sectors of growth that he wants to invest in as part of India's economic growth. Adani isn't just a billionaire, he's visibly linked to India's booming corporate and IT sectors or what is described as "India Inc." and has clearly said he is interested in investing in the country's development (it is Adani that announced a complete redevelopment of Dharavi, one of Asia's largest slums).
So it's no surprise that fervent nationalists in India have reacted in a way in which they field like they have been attacked. Have they been attacked? I don't know. Apparently lawyers are going to be involved but India's rise hasn't sat well with everybody. The 2022 Ukraine War led to a much more neutral India that refused to bend over to the USA's demands (it angered the US so much that Biden mulled sanctioning India at one point). It also led to a sort of revival of BRICS (a Global South-dominated bloc that includes India) and the SCO (an Asian-dominated bloc led by China and of which India is a part of). It has led to anti-American sentiment to rise in India much to the excitement of China, a 2023 survey revealed 22% of Indians fear the US is India's greatest threat (only behind China). Arch-nemesis Pakistan is no longer a concern to many of them. India has also begun using other forms of currency to make purchases with other countries without US dollars. There is talk of India, China and Russia using a gold-backed currency to make transactions with each other (of which Saudi Arabia has expressed interest). India is projected to become the third biggest economy by 2027, right behind the US whereas China is expected to rise to #1.It currently has the strongest economic growth rate and has an official plan of reaching high income status by 2047. None of this is good news for the US.
As Japan generated fear among Americans in the 1980s, China became the prime fear of the US in the 2010s and 2020s and now it seems India has finally joined that rank. Chinese state media for the past decade has continuously spoken about how India will face the same treatment as China is currently facing from the US once it ascends to a position where it holds more influence. The Indians never listened but if Adani's demise is anything to go by, it's that the US doesn't like a rising India controlled by Modi and those close to him. What has happened to China since the beginning of the 21st century is beginning to happen to India. Mind you, the US has never liked India they tried to attack it at one point because India tried to prevent the Bangladesh Genocide of 1971. You know who they have consistently supported however? India's arch-nemesis Pakistan, yes even after 9/11 and hiding Bin Laden, the Americans still maintain stronger ties with Pakistan than they do with India. Something to think about.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@raibhansjadhavrsj6352
Firstly, I'm not going to comment on you talking about the sizes of your private areas with your friends. Not sure why you're airing out such private details on a public platform. Like I said, you and your friends don't represent 1 billion people. Go look at the size of [redacted] world map and tell me what you see, this is where the stereotype comes from.
Secondly, why Arabs? Arabs are not the same as South Asians, they're completely different. They look different, they have different cultures, everything about them is different. They have nothing to do with this and are viewed differently in Western countries.
Finally, you can google it because I can't go into detail (otherwise this is going to be a very long comment and you're not going to read it). During the Age of Exploration, the Orient was feminised by the Europeans and Asian cultures and people were seen as more effeminate than Europe. The British imperialists created a trope that there was the "manly Englishman" (who was tall and big bodied) and the effeminate Bengali man (who was short and had a small body). In discussin the effeminate nature of Indian men, Thomas Babington Macaulay, a British historian of the time, had said, "The dark, slender, and timid Hindu shrank from a conflict with the strong muscle and resolute spirit of the fair race (British), which dwelt beyond the passes".
This is why South Asian actors in Hollwyood are trying to break these stereotypes by portraying roles that depict South Asian men in more masculine roles. Dev Patel has increasingly been cited as an attractive man breaking existing stereotypes through the roles he has played.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@annegracyliberal7327 The Japanese people generally don't want that. However, with a shrinking workforce, rapidly aging population and declining fertility, the Japanese government has had no choice but to bring people in. However, they're selective of who comes in and they gravitate towards accepting people from other Asian countries due to the cultural similarities. That's why the largest foreign groups in Japan are all Asian (Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Filipino, Nepali). The Japanese government signs agreements with other Asian countries like Nepal, the Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar and some other South and Southeast Asian countries to allow temporary migration where people temporarily come to work and then go back to their home countries. Generally speaking, Asian countries that allow this form of temporary migration (e.g. Japan, Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan) tend to accept people from other Asian countries.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@goeast12 Chinese, Malays and Indians are all from different cultures. The idea that Singapore is not diverse because most people are from different Asian groups is wrong because you're implying that they are all basically the same. Asia is a diverse place. You are only saying this because in the US, many European-descended people (excluding those of Italian and other Mediterranean and eastern European people) have lost touch with their ancestral heritage and so now they're just a mish-mash of different European groups with no unified cultural heritage.
It may be news to you but local Chinese, Malays and Indians find more in common culturally with Malaysians (who are composed of the same racial makeup, with the same ethnic subgroups and share pretty much the same culture) than they do with people that come from mainland China or India. There is extreme xenophobia and racism directed towards people from mainland China and India in Singapore. So saying "it's not diverse" doesn't make sense. Singapore actually has a lot of temporary immigrants from other parts of Asia as well as PR from other parts of Asia. It is very much diverse, just not in the way you're used to. Local Singaporeans of diverse origins alongside foreign workers and expats from Malaysia, India, China, Philippines, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Myanmar among other places. It's diverse even beyond its own local population. If it wasn't diverse, anti-immigrant sentiment and the whole "Singapore for Singaporean" mentality wouldn't exist and be a contentious issue.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
自干五小粉红☭ Yeah China has been very aggressive lately sinking Vietnamese boats, encroaching Malaysian territory, building on Bhutanese land, agitating India, threatening Taiwan, bullying Australia, entering Natuna Sea in Indonesia, bullying the Philippines, refusing to condemn and punish the Burmese military, housing and training terrorists/insurgents from India and Myanmar in Yunnan province such as Paresh Baruah who lives in Yunnan and receives funding and patronage from the Ministry of State Security of China, allowing the human trafficking of women and girls from Myanmar, Vietnam, Pakistan, Nepal, Cambodia and Laos into China because single Chinese men can't find Chinese women to marry them because China implemented one child policy that led to the abandonment of innocent babies who were girls, transforming and destroying statues of Buddhist figures and temples in Tibet such as Guanyin, Uyghur cultural genocide and the list goes on. This crazy idea that China has done nothing wrong is a filthy lie, an abomination. This is why China's reputation is at such an all time low that the CCP is doing everything it can to reconstruct its image by sending its broken vaccines around the world. Such a disaster that Indonesia and Thailand decided that they can't rely on Chinese vaccines and Singapore announced it won't include Sinovac in its vaccine tally.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Harz604 Nepalese constitute the sixth largest foreign group in Japan with a total population of 125,798. Conversely, there are 291,066 Filipinos in Japan, 83, 169 Indonesians in Japan and 54, 618 Thais in Japan per data from 2022. The Chinese population stands at 744,551, Vietnamese at 476,346 and Korean at 412,340.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@xlr8695 Singapore is the most successful multicultural country in Asia. There are laws in place to maintain harmony. There are three main ethnic groups in the country (Chinese, Malays and Indians) and it is by law for every housing development to have the same percentage of Chinese, Malays and Indians as there are nationally. The three ethnic groups have intermixed with each other so much that they can speak each other's languages, they've mixed their cuisines together (that's why Chinese have curry mee (mix of Chinese and Indian influences) and Indians have mee goreng (mix of Indian, Malay and Chinese influences)), they wear each other's clothing, they have their own unique creole language called Singlish that is a mix of Hokkien, English, Malay, Tamil and other languages, they celebrate each other's festivals and the list goes on. When Singapore became independent, it was a Tamil politician that created Singapore's policy on multiculturalism and the country promoted meritocracy, meaning anybody of any race could succeed in Singapore regardless of their race because it's based on merit, not your race. Singapore is a model for all other multiethnic Asian countries.
You can't compare you experience and claim all Singaporean are racist. India is diverse but it doesn't mean its racially harmonious. There is so much discrimination between different Indian ethnic groups like widespread racism towards Biharis and Northeast Indians, racism towards Tamils, Malayalis and other South Indians, racism towards Punjabis, racism towards Bengalis (they're called Bongs), racism towards Kashmiris, discrimination towards scheduled castes, discrimination against religious minorities and the list goes on. Many North Indians don't even know about other parts of India. That's why they call Northeast Indians "Chinese" and "Nepali" without realising that Northeast Indians are native to India. That's why North Indians were describing that viral Sri Lankan song "South Indian" when it's literally a song from another country and spoken in a language that is not even spoken in India but they thought it was Tamil or another South Indian language. That's why North Indians got upset when foreign media praised Kerala at the start of the pandemic because Kerala had controlled the first wave of the virus. Let's also not forget the fact that Black African students have been attacked and racially stereotyped in India. As beautiful as India is, there is a lot of racism and discrimination. If you can't see that then you must be from the Hindi-speaking majority.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jeremyjones8258 Major Asian players in global geopolitics abstained, that's the point here. You're focusing on pedantic and trivial details that don't matter at all. Not all countries in the world are heavyweights with agency in global geopolitics. The fact that only Japan, South Korea and Singapore have been the most vocal about condemning Russia whilst, India and China say nothing is a significant detail to focus on. You need to remember that Japan, India and China are the main geopolitical powers in most of Asia. Most Asian countries fall somewhere within the line of these countries when it comes to geopolitics as well as economics.
You also need to remember that this is geopolitics and there are different definitions. It's often described and viewed that the Asia-Pacific (everything east or and including Pakistan) is one geopolitical region and the Middle East (West Asia+Egypt) is considered a separate region. The major geopolitical players of the Middle East (Iran and Saudi Arabia) do not have much impact, if anything at all, on what happens in the Asia-Pacific. In the Asia-Pacific, it's Japan, India, China and Australia that are the major players. So you can't blame her for focusing on the Asian countries of the Asia-Pacific becuase those are the countries that are interconnected politically and economically and like I said before, they all fall in line somewhere with Japan, India and China.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nomastersnogods9303 Myanmar is not homogenous, it has always been home to hundreds of different ethnic groups. Idk where you got this idea that Myanmar is homogenous, it's not and never has been. Myanmar is so diverse that the country has officially recognised 135 different ethnic groups but there are many other minority groups who are not recognised. The largest ethnic group are the Bamar and there are hundreds of other indigenous minorities in the other states of Myanmar such as the Mon (the first inhabitants of Myanmar), Shan, Rakhine, Karen, Kachin, Wa, Kaman, Maramagyi, Daingnet etc. This is why Myanmar has for so long dealt with separatist movements from minority groups. On top of that, there are non-indigenous minorities, many of whom came during the colonial era, such as the Burmese Indians and Burmese Chinese (who now after several generations and also through facing systematic racism have become Burmanised). Myanmar is far from homogenous and the Tatmadaw has, like the CCP in China, engaged in a process known as Burmanisation. This is why you will be able to find many Burmese Muslims (such as Bamar Muslims) who are only Muslim by religion as their culture, mentality, style of dress, food etc. is "Bamar Buddhist". In fact, it is generally accepted that for a Burmese Muslim, the more "Bamar" you are the more accepted you will be in society. Myanmar is a heterogenous country.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@divineflu34567 Southeast Asia (except for Vietnam) was not influenced by Chinese beauty standards. The root of most Southeast Asian cultures is Indic. Everything from clothing, architecture, music, language, scripts, literature, art, etiquette, mannerism and so on are of Indian origin. Look at their beauty standards. Do you know what traditional Southeast Asian beauty looks like? It's not Chinese-looking. It's typical Southeast Asian looking with often pale or lightly tan skin. It's much more in line with Indian beauty than Chinese beauty. Look at the traditional Khmer apsara dancers of Cambodia or the Balinese dancers of Indonesia, they're all traditional Southeast Asian beauty with Indian influenced ornaments, jewellery and clothing.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It's happening all over Asia. The fertility rates in Thailand, Singapore, Philippines, Vietnam, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives, North Korea, India, Iran and Bangladesh are all below replacement level.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Sri Lanka had all of the right ingredients and failed because of Sinhalese nationalists, history should remember what those people did. It's too late for that country to achieve high income status. Why do I say that? Sri Lanka was already dealing with a low fertility rate and a rapidly aging population before the economic crisis. Now, after the crisis, the fertility rate has dropped even further because not only do people not want to have children at all now, many young people left to go work overseas. So the young population which was already getting smaller before 2022, just got even more smaller. You know who's left in Sri Lanka? The growing elderly population.
The only prediction about Sri Lanka that will come true is that Sri Lanka will face population decline by 2037. This prediction was made 10 years ago but considering what's happened, I'm sure population decline will come sooner for them than later. Sri Lanka, today, is the worst case version of what Thailand is today: both are poor, both have rapidly aging populations, both will face population decline in the next 10-15 years, both have low fertility rates and both will reach peak working age population by 2027. The difference, Sri Lanka is a lower middle income country where the average income is a third lower than Thailand.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Well Asian's not a race anyway and Indians aren't Caucasian either. Genetically speaking, Indians are "mixed race". The first inhabitants of India were an East Eurasian people who are genetically closer to East Asians known as the AASI. Adivasi tribal people in India are comparatively closer to East Asians than most other Indians as they carry the most amount of indigenous South Asian (East Eurasian) ancestry. Most other Indians, on the other hand, carry higher levels of West Eurasian ancestry (which is related to Europeans and Middle Easterners). So in conclusion, Indians are a separate race. They can't be placed into "Caucasoid", "Mongoloid" etc.
India's cultural output is also different. They culturally influenced most of Asia. Most of South Asia (India, Nepal etc.) and Southeast Asia (Thailand, Indonesia etc.) is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere and the spread of Buddhism across Asia transported Indian ideas to East Asia. Imperial Japan tried to colonise India during WW2 and unite it within "Greater East Asia" due to this very fact of cultural commonalities.
Europeans tried to divide and conquer Asia one time and that led to Imperial Japan, they're trying to do it again and now we're having China talk about "Asia for the Asians" all over again. Trying to designate them as a separate entity doesn't do anything, geographically India is in Asia. Asia is just geography, that is all.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@physicsonline8853 China has a tremendous ethnic diversity, that's the thing. A Uyghur, Russian, Kazakh, Tibetan, Dai, Manchu, Mongol, Korean, Hakka, Yi, Nakhi, Teochew, Blang, Hui, Tajik, Wa and Zhuang are bound by Mandarin even though they have their own indigenous languages. Walk around Urumqi, the Uyghur heartland or Jilin, the Korean heartland and you'll be able to see signage in Mandarin and the local language. Walk around Chennai or Kinnaur and you'll only find the local language(s).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The case of Sri Lanka is quite peculiar because this country could have followed the path of success but it went down the route of ethnic disharmony and violence. The leaders of yesteryear were more interested in fuelling their egos and righting the wrongs of the past instead of moving on. Despite the end of the war in 2009 and the hallmarks of a new economic miracle, the situation did not improve because the country was fractured along ethnic lines. With high economic growth rates of 9% in the early 2010s, Sri Lanka eventually peaked as an upper middle income nation in 2019. Sri Lankans, at one point, enjoyed a per capita national income that was higher than all other South Asian countries except for the Maldives, along with a longer life expectancy as a result of strong social services such as healthcare and education. Sri Lankans began living longer and longer to the point that the country has now become one of the fastest aging societies in the world and began to recruit migrant workers from India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar to combat its shrinking workforce (problems that high income nations face, not developing ones but it's a testament to Sri Lanka's successful efforts in boosting the quality of life for its people). Sri Lanka's last beacon of success was in 2020 when the country was successfully able to control COVID-19 by pursuing a Zero COVID policy using contact tracing and harnessing its good healthcare system bringing cases down to 0. Performing so well that it ranked #10 in the world among countries that were most successful in controlling the spread of COVID-19 by the Lowy Institute in early 2021. What we see now is civilisational collapse. All civilisations peak and decline. What a shame to see everything they achieved and what they could have achieved go down the drain. Sri Lanka now pays the price for everything wrong that its leaders, past and present, did to the country and its people. I hope in due time that the lives of the innocent people become better and that they can take control of their country from the Rajapaksas and other corrupt politicians as well as the nationalists and rebuild their country.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Oh Sri Lanka is unique, your assessment about its culture and claiming it's very similar to Kerala is wrong. There are similarities but that's not all. Sri Lankan culture is a mix of Sinhalese, Sri Lankan Tamil, Moor, Malay and Eurasian cultures. There is nowhere in India where those five groups are present. As a result a lot of the culture present in Sri Lanka is not found in India. Nobody in India eats lamprais for example, nobody eats sambal, nobody makes batik, nobody wears redde hatte, nobody eats seaweed, nobody wears tubular sarong, nobody listens to baila, nobody speaks Sinhalese, nobody speaks Sri Lankan Malay, nobody eats seenakku, nobody eats achcharu, nobody eats nasi goreng, nobody plays the rabana, nobody creates Kandyan masks, nobody wears the traditional Kandyan chieftain attire and I could go on and on. All of that is found in Sri Lanka, not in India.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MiguelDLewis Filipino citizens in Singapore are not Singaporeans, they are foreigners living in Singapore. I think you are under the impression that Singapore is some super diverse pan-Asian nation but it's not, not in the sense of citizenship and identity. Singaporean people, culture and identity are based around the CMIO people which stands for Chinese, Malay, Indian, Other (which basically means Eurasian, Peranakan). Singaporean food, Singaporean customs, Singlish language, Singaporean society as a whole is centred around the ethnic Chinese, Malay and Indians that have been living in Singapore for generations. Singapore is most similar ethnically and culturally to Malaysians, who themselves are a mix of Chinese, Malay and Indian. Foreign citizens are not part of Singaporean identity. You're conflating migrant workers and expats with citizens. Foreign citizens don't have the same rights as citizens because they are not citizens.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jameschristophercirujano6650 Yes it's definitely part of SEA cultures, it's not "Indian" but the fact is that India is culturally related to most of Southeast Asia. They're not a world apart. To infer India is not culturally Asian is to infer the base of SEA cultures is not "Asian".
You are also Filipino which is quite different to other SEA (especially mainland SEA) if we're being pedantic. I'm not Indian but I'm ethnically South Asian (Sri Lankan Buddhist) and when we celebrate Songkran at the temple in my country (Australia) we have Thai, Cambodian, Burmese and Malaysian Chinese celebrate with us. Upon finding out I was of ethnic Sri Lankan descent, my Cambodian co-worker began speaking about our similarities as a way to relate to me as I am also a lot younger than him. He also happens to be of ethnic Chinese descent.
I think you, as a Filipino, will find it hard as the Indic influence in the Philippines has rather faded away from modern Filipino society (nobody uses Baybayin for example and those SA/SEA-style shawls you see in old photos are now a thing of the past). I can't speak for Indians but at least for the South Asian Buddhists or those that were historically influenced by Buddhism (Sri Lankan, Nepalese, some Northeast Indians), I can see the similarities we share with both the mainland Indian Hindus and Southeast Asians. Appearance could play a role overseas in the West but see, I have epicanthic folds which has made people think I'm mixed with some Southeast Asian group (and maybe because Sri Lankan Malays exist - I have to do a DNA test to find out) but for me it doesn't affect my view, maybe because South Asians are already very diverse and many SEA are diverse too (I have seen southern Thai and Khmer who look more Indianish than typical SEA).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@WastedBananas The stats are available out there. More Singaporean-Indian women date White men compared to Singaporean-Indian men that date White women, same thing in Malaysia. This is not about Chinese people, so idk why you're bringing up Chinese women. There is even a term in M'sia and S'pore to describe Chinese, Malay or Indian women that go after White men. Tabitha Nauser, Sofia Dendroff, Amelia Henderson (she's not Indian but her mum is Ceylonese Tamil who are ethnically similar to the Indian Tamils), Stephen Langdown and there are models who have competed for different Miss Malaysia pageants. Neotenous features are what women have, not men! I'm talking about WOMEN, not men. Men don't have neotenous features. There are many Indian women that have neotenous features and it's because they have more AASI (East Eurasian) ancestry, it's different to the West Eurasian (so called "Caucasoid") ancestry that prevails among most Indians, especially the North Indians. They have sharp features and such. Neotenous features make women look more "cuter" according to science.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Not far fetched tbh, India has a nationalist faction known as RSS who believe that India is a lot larger than it actually is. They believe Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tibet, Qinghai and parts of Sichuan, Yunnan and Gansu (provinces of China) belong to India. They publish maps of "Akhand Bharat" and teach young children about how India was once a very large country in Asia - exactly the same thing the CCP does in China.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The rise of Korean pop culture on the world stage is clearly a sign of the projected Asian Century. For decades, aspects of Asian cultures have entered the mainstream conscience in the rest of the world, particularly the West. We saw the rise in popularity of Buddhism, meditation and Karma (popularised in the West by John Lennon's single "Instant Karma") in the 1970s and the decades after we saw Asian wellness culture (yoga, mindfulness, acupuncture and other traditional Chinese medicine, cupping, gua sha, Thai massage) gain mainstream popularity. In general, we also saw the popularity of symbols and ideas of Eastern religions and a general interest in Eastern spirituality (dating to the 1970s) as well as the rise in popularity of manga and anime. Now, we've entered a new phase in which content in Asian languages have become popular (as seen with the rise of Kpop and Kdramas). Half a decade ago, I never thought Kpop or Kdramas would become popular in the West simply because they are not in English but it really shows how much times have changed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@agonnoga6100 Tamil inscriptions are found on monuments in Cambodia. I know you are not very fond of what I am saying but this is the reality. I am of ethnic Sri Lankan descent and a Buddhist and in my country (Australia), the Sri Lankan, Cambodian, Thai and Burmese communities share close socio-religious ties. When we all gather together and celebrate festivals like the April 14 New Year at the Buddhist temple, I can see the visible impact Tamil culture has had on our communities. When it came to the spread of Indian culture to Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia, the Tamils (and Odia) played a very significant role. There are common dishes eaten by Sri Lankans and Southeast Asians that is of Indian Tamil origin like Puttu and Tamil style roti. We don't eat paratha or naan for example which are associated with North Indian food but you will find all Southeast Asian and Sri Lankan cultures have a version of roti that is traced back to Tamil traders from India. We wrap our food in banana leaves (just like Tamils in India) and the Odia celebrate a festival called Bali Jatra at the end of each year which is about a journey to the Indonesian island of Bali. On the same day, Odia people celebrate Bali Jatra, Thai, Cambodian, Burmese, Lao and Sri Lankan Buddhists also celebrate a festival associated with the full moon. Sinhalese Buddhist and Southeast Asian cultures are closely related to Tamil/South Indian cultures.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@agonnoga6100 Well I mentioned the scripts, so that's a similarity. Architecture is another similarity. Certain elements of different SEA cuisines include Tamil influences. You can read more about this in "George Yeo on Bonsai, Banyan and the Tao", it's a book by Singaporean author, George Yeo and he talks about the Tamil influence on Southeast Asia. Anyway, I don't see how this is something to argue about. Tamils, Indo-Gangetic people, Bengalis etc. are Indians. Nobody is saying Indo-Gangetic influences did not influence Southeast Asia, they did, but this idea that Tamil and Odia influence is a lot less is a complete denial of history. India influenced Southeast Asia, why must one feel the need to analyse this to an extent that it results in Indian group vs Indian group. You're all Indians. Why cause division?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@fernbedek6302 This is more just geography. You need to let go of this idea of proximity and look at things for what they are. Germany has no sort of significant influence on the affairs of Central Asia, it is not a major political or economic player in the region, let alone the rest of Asia. Thinking Germany is part of the same "region" is a naive thing to believe. This is about geopolitics. Japan is a major player in Asian geopolitics alongside China and India. Japan has a history of providing grants and aid to Afghanistan. In 2017, it provided a $3.6 million grant to be invested in education, procurement and infrastructure projects. Japan, like China and India, has a history of doing these sorts of things in other Asian countries. It's all about political, ecomomic and social clout. It needs to be understood that Asian and Pacific countries trade more between themselves than they do with anybody else outside of it. The region, as a result, has on a broad scale uplifted itself by itself through the support of the different countries in the region. The Asia and Pacific regions are deeply interconnected economically. What happens in one part of Asia can affect another part of the region due to how connected the region is. So this is why Japan has every right to speak about this because it affects them, it affects their region and it affects their interests. Germany and France have nothing to do with this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@iamgreat1234 No, I'm 100% correct. If you actually understand Singaporean culture you'll know it's a mix of Chinese, Malay, Indian and Eurasian influences. Stop bringing up percentages and telling me I'm wrong. Look at Singaporean culture as the most basic level, the cuisine is a mix of Chinese, Malay and Indian influences. The dishes you find in Singapore are similar to those found in Malaysia which is a mix of the same three ethnic groups. In what area outside of Southeast Asia are you going to find dishes that blend Chinese, Malay and Indian techniques and ingredients? Nowhere. The colloquial language known as Singlish (spoken by all Singaporeans) is a mix of Chinese languages like Hokkien, Teochew along with English, Malay, Tamil and other influences from other Asian and Western languages. The very value system that Lee Kuan Yew propagated in the 1990s as part of his initiative in strengthening ties between Singapore's ethnic groups draws Confucian elements that are valued in not only the Chinese community but the Malay and Indian communities. I have seen you before saying these things. Please, read about Singapore. This is so wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mkayou Sri Lankan people are mostly Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay, Burgher and Vedda. The main native languages in Sri Lanka are Sinhalese, Tamil and Sri Lankan Malay. The main foreign language is English. The culture of Sri Lanka is a mix of Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay and Eurasian elements. Remove one of those elements and you lose what Sri Lankan culture is. Sri Lanka is Sri Lanka, it can never be a part of India because its culture is completely different. Lamprais is a major traditional Sri Lankan dish that was created by the Eurasian Burghers who combined culinary elements from the Burgher, Sinhalese, Tamil and Malay communities. In what universe would the Sri Lankan dish lamprais be considered an Indian dish??? Stop saying such silly things.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mkayou Like I told you, Sri Lankan culture and society is a mix of Sinhalese, Tamil, Moor, Malay and Burgher elements. Are you aware of the fact that Indonesian culture has played a big role in developing Sri Lankan culture? Sri Lankan cuisine would be completely different if there was no Indonesian influence. There would be no sambal, dodol, nasi goreng, nasi kuning, seenakku, achcharu, wattalapan, fried noodles or any of that stuff let alone other cultural elements like traditional clothing (sarong, redde hatte) or batik if it weren't for the Indonesian influences that came with the Sri Lankan Malays. How is any of that Indian????
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@crate249 No, that's cultural diffusion. Cultural diffusion and cultural appropriation are very different. Cultural diffusion is what we saw in the ancient days and what we continue see today. The spread of customs, traditions, languages, scripts, music, literature, food, architecture, clothing, belief systems, philosophical beliefs among others are all part of cultural diffusion. Cultural appropriation is very different and is nothing like cultural diffusion.
It's controversial to adopt traits from a minority group because the group is marginalised or judged from the dominant society's perspective. For example, if Black American women are continued to be asked to have straight hair and use hair relaxers to abide by the standards of US society in corporate positions and other white collar positions yet a White American woman is allowed to adopt hair styles suited to Afro textured hair without any penalty then that's problematic. It isn't fair for society to continue to ask Black American women to straighten their hair or wear wigs to be "professional" yet allow White American women a pass because it's "exotic" or "trendy". There's no fairness in that. That's why cultural appropriation, in this context, is problematic. These days it seems like everybody calls everything "cultural appropriation" but there are specific details as to what constitutes cultural appropriation. This is an example. I hope you understand the difference now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sandhopper599 I'm not splitting hairs, the fact is "Sri Lankan" is not a race. There are many different ethnic groups in the country like Sinhalese, Tamils, Moors, Malays, Burghers/Eurasians, Veddas and much smaller groups like Chinese and Bhoras.
That man came from the Moor ethnic group, a distinct minority ethnic group in Sri Lanka and yes he was radicalised in New Zealand by Syrian and Iraqi people.
It needs to be understood that the form of Islam practiced in Sri Lanka by Moors is actually considered "heretic" by Middle Eastern Muslims. In fact, the type of Islam traditionally practiced across South and Southeast Asia is very liberal. That's why, until recently, South/Southeast Asian Muslim women didn't even cover their hair because they were still very much "Eastern" in their way of thinking. It's only after these Muslims started travelling to the Dubai, Qatar and other Middle East locations that they were exposed to the stricter branch of Islam.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What Indians in India should understand is that Trump only loves the INDIAN AMERICANS. He is fond of the HINDU AMERICANS. Indian Americans are hardworking people, they are overrepresented in the STEM fields, pioneers in new inventions in the US, dominate the academic sector (alongside other Asian Americans) and contribute so much to the US economy. While I am not quick to use IQ to define groups, a study of 10 year old American kids found those with Indian heritage collectively had one of the highest IQs in the study. These are elite, dare I say superior people, it is no surprise that White nationalists, such as Professor Wax, have in recent years begun speaking about their fears of the "rise of an Asian elite (especially Indian)" in the US. Indian Americans are not the same as Indians in India. Indians in India are instead trying to enter the US illegally via the Mexico border en masse, they are the face of all of the anti-Indian hate that exists on social media and their recent immigrants are wrecking havoc in the USA's northern neighbour of Canada. When people say, "Indians are hardworking, great people", they're talking about the Indian Americans. Anybody that thinks otherwise, make sure you bookmark this video and read my comment again when Trump decides to put tariffs on Indian goods. You Indians in India need to understand this.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@daniellebcooper7160 Someone else called you out on your attitude towards Aboriginal Australians, maybe scroll up and read through every single sentence you posted in your essay-long replies before replying. It's right there, you just need to look.
16% of Australians are of Asian descent, you think 16% is a small number? This is basic statistics, 16% is not a "small percentage". We learn this in year 7. So you have a problem with non-Anglo Australians being featured in commercials yet continue speaking about "wokeness" and being upset? You really have an issue with non-Anglo Australian people, don't you? Idk why you're so bitter and hateful towards people different to your own ethnic group. Imagine getting upset because TV advertisements are featuring more ethnically diverse people. It actually reflects Australia's population. Why are you being so hateful and bitter? Go outside, you think everybody you see is Anglo-Australian? Like I said before, you learn it at home. So yes, my educated conclusion is correct.
Also there is an irony in all of this. You continue to talk down on non-Anglo Australians and speak about the English yet despite being born and raised in this country, you can't construct a gramatically correct sentence in the English language, the national language of this country. Danielle B Cooper, it's time you took several seats.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@daniellebcooper7160 I'm not twisting anything. You inferred that people who are in the minority shouldn't be visible on TV screens. You're upset about the fact that non-Anglo Australian minorities are being featured in advertisements for Coles, Woolworths, banks and so on. You're upset about that and that gives me the idea that you don't want to see any non-Anglo Australians on TV. It's not overuse. 36.1% of Australians are English, the other 63.9% of Australians are of other European, Asian, African, Pacific Islander etc. origins and you're telling me that they are overrepresented. Idk why you're so upset that a Chinese woman, Italian nonna or Indian mother are being featured in random advertisements on TV when they are part of the Australian population. Why are you so upset about this?
If you scroll up you'll find another user who called you out but you never replied to them.
Supporting Jacinta Price doesn't mean one's racist views towards Aboriginals is cancelled out.
I'm sorry but it looks to me that you call everybody you disagree with an SJW/Woke person. Why?
I don't know what your intention is Danielle but I'll say this. You saying these things makes it seem like those of us who are not of Anglo origin don't deserve to be here and considering the fact that Australia has a sad history of targeting new migrants (Irish, Italians, Greeks, Dutch, Vietnamese, Lebanese etc.), your views sound all the more worse. I don't know what your other beliefs are but that's the impression I have received from your comments.
P.S. Thanks + good morning
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ogolow570 That's not true at all. It has nothing to do with their genetics or appearance, it's to do with culture. Kaman Muslims look exactly like Rohingyas but with light brown skin but their culture is more similar to Bamar Buddhists and the language they speak (Arakanese) is closely related to Burmese. Tatmadaw of Myanmar believes in Burmanisation and so groups that are culturally unrelated to Bamar face persecution in hopes that they will become Burmanised. Hui are also closely related to Han Chinese in language and culture. Same thing in China, Sinicisation means that all groups culturally unrelated to Han face persecution in order to be Sinicised. China wants the Uyghur to be Sinicised and their practice of Islam must be compatible with Han Chinese culture just like Hui who practice a moderate form of Islam with significant Han Chinese influence in their culture.
Rohingyas are Indo-Aryan mixed with Tibeto-Burman, Rohingyas don't all look the same. Some Rohingyas look more like the majority of Bamar Buddhists like Wai Wai Nu who is a pro-democracy activist of Rohingya descent. Also, Bamar Buddhists are diverse, some of them look remarkably closer to the majority of Rohingya like Major General Soe Naing Oo and Burmese actor, Hugo Naing. Same thing with Uyghurs, some Uyghurs look more similar to Han Chinese. It's do with culture rather than appearance, only some government officials in Myanmar have made unjust remarks about Rohingyas and called them anti-Muslim slurs but I would say that's the result of Rohingyas in the 1940s campaigning to become part of Pakistan, which is why the Rohingya Hindus and Christians are treated better than their Muslim counterparts. It also explains why in the past Kaman were xenophobic towards Rohingyas. Until 2021, many viewed Rohingya Muslims as traitors.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pete5691 Bangladesh is indeed an Asian Tiger and they have a plan to become developed by 2041, whether they reach achieve that or not, only time will tell but they have that plan in place and are using the same East Asian economic model that is also currently being used by Vietnam (another modern Asian Tiger).
It is the Asian Century and China is the most powerful nation of the Asian Century. Basing a region's worth on who migrates there is not a valid argument because it's not the same across the whole world. Asian countries (whether rich or poor) have very strict immigration policies. There is a lot of inter-regional migration within Asia and most Asian countries mostly accept temporary migrants from other Asian countries. Asia has experienced tremendous economic success, China is set to become the biggest economy by 2030, India is expected to rise to #3 by the end of this decade and Indonesia is set to rise to #4 by the middle of this century. Multiple Asian countries are competing in key sectors like space exploration (China, India, Japan), robotics (China, Japan, India, Singapore, South Korea) and AI (of which China is currently ahead of the US in multiple AI sectors). A push for de-dollarisation has gained traction in Asia and Asian soft power has also risen considerably, with South Korea now competing with the US on a global scale. The biggest song in the world right now is a song by a South Korean Kpop girl group called "Cupid", the most watched series on Netflix is a South Korean series and the most used app in the world is TikTok, a Chinese app. Idolisation and fetishisation of Korean people and culture is now common place and there are people who are getting plastic surgery to look Korean/East Asian. This level of infatuation and idolisation was only ever seen with the US but now South Korea is up there too. So yeah we are in the Asian Century.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tausifchowdhury8180 A lot of elements in Sri Lankan culture are of Indian origin from culinary aspects to religion, linguistic influences, clothing, festivals, literature, architecture and mythology among many other things. In regards to Japan, Sri Lanka's majority Buddhist heritage has created socio-cultural connections with Japan such as elements of Sri Lanka's most sacred Buddhist temple, Temple of the Tooth, incorporating Japanese architectural elements and how Japanese TV dramas were once widely popular in the country during the 1980s. Sri Lankan women, along with Thai, Korean, Chinese and Filipino women, used to travel to Japan as migrant brides during the 1980s and 1990s to marry Japanese men.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chaosXP3RT I'll try to explain. The US has always supported India's enemy, Pakistan. Pakistan and the US developed close relationships in 1954 and the US has since then supported Pakistan. In the 1971 war, the US supported Pakistan against India. When the preceding Bangladeshi genocide occurred in 1971, the US supported Pakistan's genocide of the Bangladeshis and encouraged the transfer of arms from the Middle East to Pakistan so that the Pakistanis could use them against the Bangladeshis. The Indians were on the side of the Bangladeshis. President Nixon, of the time, was staunchly pro-Pakistan and anti-India and infamously made racist remarks about the Bangladeshis when the genocide was happening. Relations between Pakistan and the US continued to remain warm even when the War of Terror began. when India faced its deadliest terror attack at the hands of Pakistani terrorists, the US continued to support Pakistan and in 2011, when Bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan, the US continued to support Pakistan. In the eyes of the Indians, the US has never been on their side. So, when you think about it, it is kind of a surprise that India has tried to develop better ties with the US in the 21st century despite being treated wrongly by the Americans throughout most of their time as an independent nation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@user-pn3im5sm7k "You are clinging on to the past and fail to see the divide of Japan in 2022 and 1941"
There is a stark difference between the Japan of 2022 and the Japan of 1941 but the country still doesn't accept reality. Right wing Japanese people still believe they did the right thing by invading Japan. They deride conversations about comfort women and the Nanjing massacre and continue to claim that South Asian and Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam, India, Indonesia and Malaysia are only independent from Europeans because of them. As a result, they believe they did the right thing by invading and subjugating the region. Their aim was to never free Asia from the Europeans.
"This sentiment is of course an anti-Japanese propaganda technique used by Chinese propagandists, which radiates throughout your entire comment"
I'm not Chinese and this is NOT anti-Japanese propaganda. You just fetishise Japan and so can never see things from my perspective. This is why you think anybody that says anything remotely critical of Japan is a Chinese propagandist.
You don't know enough about the Yasukuni Shrine. It's so wrong for an American man to undermine reality around these events. That shrine houses the Yushukan, a museum rife with Imperial Japanese pan-Asian propaganda including maps of Greater East Asia and walls with a huge map suggesting South Asia and Southeast Asia were freed from the Europeans by the Japanese. That whole museum takes part in historical revisionism. You aren't even allowed to take photos of the content within the Main Sanctuary. Now why would that be the case? Oh that's right because the whole museum is used to justify and undermine the atrocities committed during WW2. One thing that tires me is how White Americans idolise Japan to such a great extent whilst calling out China but not realising that modern China is using the same tactics that Imperial Japan used in WW2. Had you had any idea of reality in the Indo-Pacific today, you'd know that China is using the same pan-Asian vocabulary the Japanese did "Asia for Asians". You idolise Japan but fail to realise that Japan's revisionism of WW2 history is incredibly problematic.
I don't hate Japan but I'm not infatuated with it like many White Americans. I have the ability to admire the good qualities of Japan but also be critical of it too. I don't hark on about Japan's past like this usually but seeing Americans blindly support Japan and undermine WW2 reality is lowkey irritating because it comes off with that "holier than thou" and fetishistic mentality.
If you were able to read my comment, you'd realise I called out China and its expansionism but because of your fetishisation of Japan, you didn't see that. Of course you're in the US military and of course you're advocating for the militarisation of Asia. Why am I not surprised? The US and China's cold war is going to destroy Asia and the Pacific. I'm so tired of this war mongering. We're always getting caught up in the drama that the US and China create. Constantly asked to pick sides. Please give us a break seriously. When my generation reaches our middle aged years, we want to be living in relative peace not fighting wars started by men in foreign nations decades ago and not realising if our future children (our parents' future grandchildren) will survive. I say this quite boldly, but many people of all ages (young to old) across various parts of the Indo-Pacific do not want war, whether that's a fully blown war or proxy wars. The blatant warmongering has made people very tired.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AngryKittens Yes you are absolutely correct correct but Indo-European is a language family, it's not a race. Race is a social construct anyway. There are "East Asian" looking people in South Asia whose native language is Indo-European. There are "South Asian" looking people in South Asia and Myanmar who speak Sino-Tibetan languages. In the case of South Asia, this does not make sense. I know what you're talking about, you're talking about the Steppe pastoralists who brought Indo-European languages and understand what you're saying but the case of South Asia is very different because miscegenation has occurred ever since the first humans settled in the region. I wouldn't call it "Indo-European" either but Steppe ancestry.
Dravidian speakers are not the first inhabitants of South Asia. They seem to have emerged from the IVC. The first inhabitants of South Asia are the AASI and they are related to East Asians, Southeast Asians and Aboriginal Australians. It's tribal groups in South Asia that have the highest levels of this AASI ancestry out of all South Asians, not the large Dravidian-speaking groups (Tamils, Telugu etc.). The AASI emerged from one of the earliest waves of humans out of Africa. This ancestral Asian population settled in South Asia and genetically split into three populations: AASI, ESEA of E/SE Asia and AA of Australasia. All of these groups are related to one another and consequently share varying degrees of affinity to an early modern human known as Tianyuan Man. Source: "A genetic history of migration, diversification, and admixture in Asia" - Melinda A. Yang, 2022
Nagas are like other South Asians. Everybody is a descendant of various migrations into the region that mixed together. The dominant ancestral component of the Nagas is known as Ancestral Tibeto-Burman (ATB), while small amounts of their DNA comes from mainland India much like the Meitei and Chakma.
What I was trying to say is that not all South Asians speak Indo-European languages and genetically, the "Indo-European" component you speak of (which I call Steppe ancestry) is not the dominant component of any South Asian population that speaks an Indo-European language. The dominant ancestral component of most South Asians is Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC)-related ancestry, which is older than Steppe ancestry. IVC ancestry is predominantly made up of West Eurasian Neolithic farmer ancestry from what is now known as Iran (87%) with smaller amounts of Southeast Asian hunter-gatherer ancestry (13%) - related to that first wave f humans out of Africa. Source: "An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers" - Vasant Shinde et al. 2019 The IVC is also suggested to be the home of Dravidian languages.
Yes, the case of Singapore is like any other area after the Era of Exploration, yes most Singaporeans speak an Indo-European language despite ethnically being Chinese, Malay, Tamil etc.
1
-
1
-
@AngryKittens Sorry but it's not a vague term, it's the actual term used in academics. Everybody is termed based on position in human evolution: pastoralists, hunter-gatherers, farmers etc. There is nothing vague about it. So, for example, when geneticists describe the genetic landscape of South Asia, they will say South Asians are descendants of indigenous ancient hunter-gatherers known as AASI and subsequent waves of exogenous Neolithic farmers, Steppe pastoralists and/or Austroasiatic-speaking and Tibeto-Burman-speaking farmers. These terms are used to illustrate the type of technology that developed within a civilisation over time. So, for example, with rice cultivation in South Asia we know that rice was cultivated in the IVC because that was a farmer-based society and we know that Austroasiatic speaking farmers who settled in South Asia from the east also brought agrarian practices with them, introducing a new form of rice cultivation to the region. Same thing with Steppe pastoralists and the AASI were obviously less developed, due to their early origins, having been a hunter-gatherer-based society.
Well Islander Southeast Asians are close to East Asians genetically. The idea that they're far apart is incorrect. It is generally understood that Austroasiatic-speaking farmers were present across a much larger land coverage of Southeast Asia (all the way into western Indonesia) and genetically speaking, Island Southeast Asians are close to East Asians. Both groups carry Basal East Asian DNA. This is why among all groups in Asia and the Pacific that carry some degree of East Eurasian/Eastern Non-African DNA, it is the ESEA (East/Southeast Asian) groups and Native Americans (who predominantly descend from a Basal East Asian lineage) that have the highest genetic affinity to Tianyuan Man (a Basal East Asian from northern China). If you look at all of the other groups in the world that have affinity to Tianyuan Man (Australians, Melanesians, South Asians, Central Asians, Maori, Romani), they are further away in genetic distance. So this idea that Islander Southeast Asians are not closely related to East Asians is incorrect. We already know, from studies dating back decades, that East and Southeast Asians are closely related. Both regions are in proximity to each other and it's understandable that genetic influence from various groups associated with East Asian-related DNA, would have impacted Island Southeast Asia to a great extent unlike Polynesia which is further away. Yes there is a genetic connection between Island Southeast Asians and Austronesian-speakers in the Pacific but that doesn't erase the fact that the closest genetic relation these populations have is with the rest of Southeast Asia and East Asia. All of these populations carry Basal East Asian DNA. Polynesians and Micronesians are also part of this same lineage albeit having split earlier. They're all descendants of ESEA aka East Asian-related lineages. Same thing with Indo-European-speaking South Asians, they all have Steppe ancestry but their dominant genetic component is IVC ancestry which is why they're comparatively closer to Iranian-speaking populations of Central and West Asia than to Europeans on a PCA plot.
1
-
1
-
@AngryKittens The reality for most North Indians is that their main genetic base is not Steppe ancestry. Many love to hype up their claims of proximity to Europeans while deriding Adivasi tribals and low caste Indians who are comparatively closer to eastern Asian populations. Only the northwestern populations like Punjabis, Kashmiris and various groups in that region have a dominant base of Steppe ancestry. The rest of North India is largely a blend of IVC and Steppe ancestry. They idolise sharp (Eurocentric) features like high bridged nose whilst deriding neotenous features (flat noses, flat face etc.) and this is why you shouldn't be generalising to begin with. By generalising the whole of South Asia through the eyes of North India you're suggesting the default for South Asia is North Indian Indo-European-speaking people (which is literally what North Indian nationalists claim to be reality) and that's not reality. If there was any sort of "default" population then it would be the Adivasi tribes (dark skinned people with flat noses, flat faces etc.) found across South Asia from south India to Bhutan.
If you're suggesting North Indians to be specific are the closest cousins of Europeans, that is not true. It's actually West Asians who are the closest cousins to Europeans. Both groups are of basal West Eurasian origin.
Yeah Basal Asian is basically that large ancestral population that gave rise to the ESEA, AA and AASI populations of East, Southeast, South, Central Asia, the Pacific and Americas. It's ancient and their strongest affinity in modern humans is in various parts of South Asia, Island Southeast Asia and Australasia (especially Papua New Guinea).
I agree with everything you're saying about Austronesian-speaking peoples but that does not change the fact that Island SEA populations don't share strong genetic ties with East Asia.
I don't understand why you're focusing so much on the concept of "Asian" as understood by Americans. Nobody in Asia thinks of "Asian" as a race or something. It's just a demonym and a secondary thought for people that are actually living in Asia. So why should it matter what Americans think when they're not the ones living in Asia and are not aware of the serious cultural and genetic overlap that Asian populations share with other continents? In the US, they transformed "Asian" into some sort of racial, pan-ethnicity, pan-cultural identity due to racial politics. Asian, in its most basic and original form, is just a demonym and at its greatest extent it's just a cultural term. Why do I say it's cultural because Imperial Japan used "Asian" in a cultural context to refer to the areas of Asia culturally influenced by Indian and Chinese culture. This is why Japan tried to create Greater East Asia, a concept rooted in their own historical idea of Asia known as "Sangoku" (Three Kingdoms of China, India and Japan). Additionally, the whole concept of pan-Asianism has been rooted in culture (take for example Lee Kuan Yew's Asian Values ideology). The term, "Asian" has never been associated with genetics or appearance in the way it has been altered to mean in the US and other countries outside of Asia. The US has its own terminology because everything is centred around "race". It's the way things are for them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Buddhism, Hinduism and other Eastern religions are deeply intertwined. The prevalence of Hindu-derived deity worship in various parts of Buddhist Asia is because of the Hindu influence. Phra Phrom (Thai depiction of Brahma) as featured in the video at 10:52 cannot be tied to Buddhism but more broadly to the general Dharmic/Indic culture that exists in Thailand. Thai people also popularly worship Ganesha, a deity that does not exist in Buddhist cosmology and Thai people also visit Hindu temples in Thailand. Some of the largest Ganesha statues outside of India are located in Thailand. Phra Phrom in Thai-style is also worshipped by ethnic Chinese across Southeast Asia and southern China. In Hong Kong, there is a famous Phra Phrom statue that is frequented by Chinese people. In Japan, there are Japanese versions of Ganesha, Shiva and Skanda and in Sri Lanka, you will find Buddhist people worshipping local folk gods as well as Hindu gods inside some Buddhist temples like Seema Malaka. The same thing applies to other Buddhist groups in Asia.
So correlating it to Buddhism is incorrect because some of these devas don't even exist in Buddhism. The reason people worship them in Asia is because of the pre-existing Hindu influence and the general overlap that Eastern religions share with one another. Thailand was previously a Hindu nation, these Hindu practices were simply carried over after Theravada Buddhism was brought to the country from Sri Lanka. There is no restriction to how people must practice Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism etc. so people mix them together.
1
-
1
-
Buddhism, Hinduism and other Eastern religions are deeply intertwined. The prevalence of Hindu-derived deity worship in various parts of Buddhist Asia is because of the Hindu influence. Phra Phrom (Thai depiction of Brahma) as featured in the video at 10:52 cannot be tied to Buddhism but more broadly to the general Dharmic/Indic culture that exists in Thailand. Thai people also popularly worship Ganesha, a deity that does not exist in Buddhist cosmology and Thai people also visit Hindu temples in Thailand. Some of the largest Ganesha statues outside of India are located in Thailand. Phra Phrom in Thai-style is also worshipped by ethnic Chinese across Southeast Asia and southern China. In Hong Kong, there is a famous Phra Phrom statue that is frequented by Chinese people. In Japan, there are Japanese versions of Ganesha, Shiva and Skanda and in Sri Lanka, you will find Buddhist people worshipping local folk gods as well as Hindu gods inside some Buddhist temples like Seema Malaka. The same thing applies to other Buddhist groups in Asia.
So correlating it to Buddhism is incorrect because some of these devas don't even exist in Buddhism. The reason people worship them in Asia is because of the pre-existing Hindu influence and the general overlap that Eastern religions share with one another. Thailand was previously a Hindu nation, these Hindu practices were simply carried over after Theravada Buddhism was brought to the country from Sri Lanka. There is no restriction to how people must practice Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism etc. so people mix them together.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@雷-t3j Global South is in reference to the developing world (composed of middle income and low income nations - consists of most of Asia, most of Africa, most of Latin America, the Pacific and parts of Eastern Europe). Global North refers to the developed world (composed of high income nations - the definition is subjective but always includes Western Europe, Canada, the US, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Israel). In the case of IP waiving, it was the governments of developed Western nations, Japan, Singapore and a few others that refused to waive IP. Most of the governments of the developing world supported the temporary waiving of IP. The current war in Ukraine has also exacerbated the divide between Global North and Global South. All Global North nations have supported sanctions against Russia, whereas the Global South hasn't. Unfortunately, this is the result of the Cold War where Russia (Soviet Union) was sympathetic and supportive of struggles in the Global South whereas the Global North (led by the US) was not. Many in the Global South fear that picking a side in the war will result in consequences. They fear that siding with the US will ruin their relationship with Russia and thus they will have nobody to support them in their own struggles. They also fear that picking a side will open their countries up to proxy wars and become pawns between the US and Russia like what has happened to Ukraine (also based on their past experiences, the conflicts of the Cold War era backed by either the US or the USSR were fought in Global South nations).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You clearly know nothing about Sri Lanka. Sri Lankan culture is a mix of Sinhalese, Sri Lankan Tamil, Moor, Malay and Eurasian cultures. There is nowhere in India where those five groups are present. As a result a lot of the culture present in Sri Lanka is not found in India. Nobody in India eats lamprais for example, nobody eats sambal, nobody makes batik, nobody wears redde hatte, nobody eats seaweed, nobody wears tubular sarong, nobody listens to baila, nobody speaks Sinhalese, nobody speaks Sri Lankan Malay, nobody eats seenakku, nobody eats achcharu, nobody eats nasi goreng, nobody plays the rabana, nobody creates Kandyan masks, nobody wears the traditional Kandyan chieftain attire and I could go on and on. All of that is found in Sri Lanka, not in India.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@csaww I think the reason why they could never communicate is because they never had any rights after the Burmese military stripped them off their citizenship. What exactly could they do? They didn't have access to anything and then they faced genocide in 2017. They are not to blame and that does not mean they are any less Burmese than the Bamar that live in Yangon or elsewhere. The parents still identify as Burmese hence why they even want to teach their kids how to speak the language and sing the national anthem.
Myanmar is a nation that is riddled with ethnic strife, it stands out compared to other ethnically divided nations in Asia in that Myanmar is very much like Asia's Yugoslavia. Minority groups in Myanmar have always faced persecution from the majority and suggesting that to be Burmese is to be able to speak the language is not right. All of their lands are within the boundaries of present-day Myanmar they are Burmese through that fact not because they know how to speak Burmese, the native language of the Bamar who are not native to Rakhine State. Rakhine, Mon, Rohingya, Karen, Kachin, Shan, Wa etc. etc. are all Burmese people. They are not the same as the Bamar and they are all different to one another but they are all Burmese. The Tatmadaw has never accepted this though and they have always wanted to Burmanise Myanmar but unlike China's successful Sinicisation policy, Myanmar's Burmanisation policy has always failed.
The only hope left in that country are the Gen Z Burmese of varied backgrounds, including Bamar, who are fighting for real change, forming their own militias against the Tatmadaw. Those young Bamar have a different mindset. They have lived with freedom for 10 years and are more accepting of minority groups after seeing their lives turn upside down because of the coup. I know Myanmar can become better if they succeed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travellersagar437 It's the fault of the Indian government. If they didn't allow huge religious festival to go ahead and didn't encourage people to come out in record numbers to vote or naively claim that the pandemic was over in India then this wouldn't have happened. The government became complacent and led to this. Now, the government is trying to silence people who criticise it, in fact they're trying to silence people who don't even live in India.
I can't understand how you can sit here and tell me India is doing well and defend the Indian government. The Indian government has ruined everything. Think about the long term damage the Indian government is going to do India and the rest of the world. There are countries that now have to suspend their vaccination program because India can't make vaccines for export anymore. How is India supposed to develop its economy? Look at what's happening to the country. The virus is now spreading to the rural side, something they managed to prevent last year. India once had the largest middle class in the world but because the Indian government couldn't control the pandemic, the Indian middle class lost 32 million people. That's 32 million people back into some form of poverty. The way things are going, as they said, India could very well be sent back 20 years. Imagine, all of the things that India acquired over those 20 years, gone. Totally gone and that's because the Indian government, its supporters and other people became way too complacent even though cases were still at 9,000, 8000 etc. at the start of the year.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Homer-OJ-Simpson If Australia's foreign policy was more similar to Asian nations, then it would be rather different and more similar to say Australia's northern neighbour, Indonesia. It would be able to stand on its own. The country would sit in the middle, maintaining cordial relations between both the US and China without feeling the need to pick a side. Cultural and historical ties have traditionally meant Australia has ignored Asia and looked to the US and UK. This is why Pine Gap (US military base) exists in Australia, it's not a response to China. China's rise and expansionism is only something recent. Australia always pursued closer ties with the US. So it was inevitable that with the rise of the US military, particularly after WW2, that the country would ally itself with the US. It was the expected thing to do for a Western country at the time. Going neutral like Asia and Africa did would have been unimaginable and still is.
It's only since the late 2000s/2010s that Australia really began engaging more with Asia and recognising its geography. It sees itself as both a Western nation and an Asia-Pacific nation (we are taught this in school) and has integrated itself into the region in areas ranging from politics to culture such as the Asian Football Confederation and the RCEP. Controversial remarks made by Asian leaders of yesteryear like Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew were always haunting reminders for the dominant White Australian government of what could become of the country if it continued to ignore its geography and present itself as "white only" (the White Australia Policy was only abolished in 1973 and its native population are Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders). On top of that, ever since colonisation, the perceived "Asian threat" has always existed (a fear that Asian migration or invasion would result in the country becoming "Asian"). The fear first began with the migration of Chinese, Sri Lankan, Malay, Japanese Malay pearl divers during the colonial era, it became particularly prevalent during WW2 amid fear that Australia would be colonised by Japan and its most recent incarnation is in the form of China's rise and expansionism. It's also a theme that appears in Australian pop culture. The truth is if Australia's foreign policy was more independent and not dependent on other nations (in this case the US), Australia wouldn't have been so caught up in all of this. This is why Australia is diversifying and building better ties with Southeast Asian countries and India, engaging further in the Pacific, fixing its ties with China and continuing to build its ties (particularly in the area of defence) with the US. It has recognised its nature as both a Western and Asia-Pacific nation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@overworlder Japan and South Korea are NOT part of the West. If you believe they are part of the West, then you don't understand what the West is. Just because they are politically aligned with Euro-America, does not mean they are Western. I know y'all really fantasise about Japan and South Korea but Japan and South Korea are Asian and Sinosphere nations, they have more in common with other Chinese-influenced Asian nations like China and Vietnam. Broadly speaking, they are culturally Eastern. Their mentality, cultural habits and essence are completely Asiatic. There is a reason why Japan and South Korea (like all other Asian nations - Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Maldives) prefer hiring migrant workers and skilled workers from other parts of Asia and not from anywhere outside of it. If they were truly Western like you claim them to be then how come the largest migrant groups in Japan and South Korea come from countries like China, Vietnam, Philippines and Nepal? Would they not prefer Westerners over other Asians? Japan and South Korea are definitely Asian and not Western. You said other Asian nations are part of the West too but no, Singapore is also Asian too. They have a lot of Western influences but the overall influences from the Chinese, Malay and Indian cultures dominates the entire nation's state of mind. So it's culturally Eastern just like Japan and South Korea. Singapore is the country after all that gave birth to the modern "Asian values" ideology in the 1990s (an ideology that also generated interest in East Asia).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DMS-pq8 No but the Sentinelese are clearly related to the Onge, Jarawa, Shompen and Great Andamanese populations who live on the same group of islands as the Sentinelese. The Onge, Jarawa, Shompen and Great Andamanese physically resemble the Sentinelese. The difference between the Onge, Jarawa, Shompen and Great Andamanese and the Sentinelese is that the Onge, Jarawa, Shompen and Great Andamanese established contact with outsiders whereas the Sentinelese decided they wanted to remain in voluntary isolation confirmed by the fiercely defensive and hostility they had towards the British colonists, who actually captured 6 Sentinelese people, including children, in 1880. Since India's independence from the British in 1947, the Indian government has declared North Sentinel Island a tribal reserve, prohibited travel to the island within 5.6 kilometres of it and banned photography in order to uphold the desire of isolation the Sentinelese have. So any genetic research on the Andamanese tribes is done through contact with the Onge and Jarawa populations.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@physicsonline8853 They're not erroneous. A Tamil in Chennai or a Naga in Dimapur can't speak Hindi for example. You say they're proficient in three languages and what is the binding language? The binding language is English. English is the lingua franca of India due to colonisation. Remove English, is there a binding language that all 1.4 billion Indians will be able to understand?
China has a tremendous ethnic diversity, that's the thing. A Uyghur, Russian, Kazakh, Tibetan, Dai, Manchu, Mongol, Korean, Hakka, Yi, Nakhi, Teochew, Blang, Hui, Tajik, Wa and Zhuang are bound by Mandarin even though they have their own indigenous languages. Walk around Urumqi, the Uyghur heartland or Jilin, the Korean heartland and you'll be able to see signage in Mandarin and the local language. Walk around Chennai or Kinnaur and you'll only find the local language(s).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ronnie is Malaysian, it was a joke. Malaysians are of Malay, Chinese, Indian and Orang Asli descent. Why would he think Indians are not Asians when Indians are one the main groups that contributed to the formation of Malaysian culture? Malaysia is after all known as "mini Asia" as a result of this. Also, East Asians don't think Indians are not Asian. In Hong Kong, there is a large community of Indian that settled there during the colonial era and they're known by the Cantonese equivalent of "South Asian". India also culturally influenced large parts of Asia. South Asia and most of Southeast Asia is part of the Indian Cultural Sphere. In the UK and countries in the Gulf and East African nations, "Asian" means Indian. The term is subjective but all of these groups are Asians.
BTW, in Chinese, "Asian" is known as "亞洲人" and refers to everybody from Asia (Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Korean, Thai, Kazakh etc.) but the word "黄种人" means "East Asian race" and is not the same as "亞洲人". If you use, "黄种人" then you are referring to Chinese, Japanese, Koreans etc. (i.e. East Asian people) but if you use "亞洲人" then you are referring to all Asians (i.e. the native ethnic groups of Asia). "黄种人" is racial and "亞洲人" is geographical.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@willdehne1 This is why the late Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore always lamented on Sri Lanka's demise and failure. He always said Sri Lanka had the right ingredients to become another Asian Tiger economy and he used to say this even before Sri Lanka collapsed into ethnic strife in the 1970s. He was very disappointed in that country and very critical of those that changed that country (he's spoken about it in interviews and in the books he's written). This is why Singaporean students are taught about Sri Lanka as an example of what happens when a country discriminates against minorities. Singapore is multiethnic too made up of 4 main ethnic groups: Chinese, Malays, Indians (Tamils) and Eurasians and is one of the most advanced nations on earth. It uses English as the lingua franca so as to give an equal standing for all ethnic groups and makes sure all ethnic groups learn their native languages to keep in touch with their ethnic identities. Sri Lanka could have done the same thing. It has 5 main ethnic groups (Sinhalese, Tamils, Moors, Malays and Burghers/Eurasians), a nation where English was once widely taught and a literate population, it could have easily followed a similar path to Singapore by acknowledging its ethnic diversity but instead it followed the path of ethnic division and eventually set itself on fire. It still pays the price today and continues to suffer a brain drain. Not to mention, this is a developing country with a rapidly aging population and low fertility rate. They're in a such a bad position that had begun hiring foreign workers from India, Bangladesh and Myanmar to fill gaps in their job market. A developing country should not be relying on foreign labour but because of its literate population it was inevitable that the country's fertility would decline and living standards would rise. Too bad that the country is across the board still poor and does not have money to actually support its growing elderly population. They really shot themselves in the foot. I feel sorry for all of the innocent civilians, the elites really destroyed their country. I can see why the late Lee Kuan Yew was so repulsed at what had happened to that country.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dreamsalamander Your explanation was perfect, I actually agree with it but yeah to add more context, it's more the result of ethnic nationalism.
For Bamar identity, Bamar culture and Buddhism are intertwined, so in a way to be Bamar is to be Buddhist, if that makes sense. Bamar nationalists say that Myanmar is only home to Bamar people (which is true) so they fear that they will be wiped out by bigger ethnic groups, religions and countries and this has always been a thing since Myanmar became independent. A Burmese leader once infamously expressed fear on behalf of Myanmar, Sri Lanka and other southern Asian countries about the fear of being absorbed into the spheres of India or China. So it's very much about protection of their identity and that mean Bamar Buddhist identity.
Having said that, it's also very ethnocentric and discriminatory because Bamar nationalists believe everybody in Myanmar must adhere to Bamar culture so that's why other minority groups besides Rohingyas face discrimination too like the Shan and Kachin (both of whom also follow Buddhism). It's also why Bamar Muslims have never faced extreme hate because despite being Muslims, culturally they are the same as Bamar Buddhists in terms of the way they dress, their food and their language. Their mosques also harbour a lot of Burmese Buddhist influenced architecture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@garrydean8670 It's not a main reason though. Everybody is talking about China when Sri Lanka owes 10% of its debt to Japan too. Why is everybody talking about China but not Japan, when Sri Lanka owes the same amount to both countries?
Western media keeps mentioning China because of Sinophobia. There is a fear of China these days and it's so detrimental to international relations and even ordinary citizens. Firstly, China is an Asian country, outside forces should not drive a wedge between it and other Asian or Pacific countries (like Australia, which is where I'm from). We are all neighbours, we need to learn to live in peace with each other regardless of what we feel for each other. Secondly, I am not fond of the CCP and what it does but blaming China for everything makes no sense. It serves no purpose and only causes harm in the form of strained relations, power struggles between bigger countries over smaller countries (etc. Sri Lanka, Myanmar) and spreading of misinformation on social media (which is a huge issue in some Asian countries like Sri Lanka and Myanmar), which can lead to social unrest (e.g. this has happened in Sri Lanka before). It's also gotten to this point where China is blamed for everything that it's now affecting random Chinese people and even other Asian people who could be mistaken as Chinese in other parts of the world. For example, an elderly Sri Lankan man with light skin and Southeast Asian features was brutally bashed on a train in New York last year in a COVID-19 related racist attack. All those anti-Asian attacks in the US last year really opened my eyes up to the issue of Sinophobia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ayaankhan-eh1xy I think there's a lot for you to learn because why would Brunei, a high income developed nation with the second highest standard of living in Southeast Asia and one of the highest in Asia, be ranked below countries like Uzbekistan, Jordan, Mongolia, Indonesia, Bhutan, Philippines, Vietnam, Armenia, China, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Thailand, Oman, Russia and Kazakhstan?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Momoa786 You know Mohamed Hadid can pass anywhere across Europe. Zinedine Zidane, John Elway, Doug Flutie, Brian Habib, Jeff George, Jillian Michaels (half Arab, half Jew - full Middle Eastern), Djamel Mesbah, Kerim Frei, Josef Boumedienne, Adam El-Abd and Amal Clooney are of Arab/Middle Eastern descent. They can pass in Sweden, Germany, France, UK, Estonia, Netherlands and every other part of Europe you want to distance from southern Europe.😁
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@opensprings ...and just so you know, many ethnic groups in eastern India share genetic ties to East Asia and Southeast Asia? India is extremely diverse, just like Russia. Also, Indians are culturally related to East Asians. East, South and Southeast Asia all share a common cultural heritage rooted in the Indic and Sinic cultural traditions.
I think it's also worth pointing out that Middle Easterners are genetically related to Europeans. Both Europeans and Middle Easterners belong to the West Eurasian lineage and both groups share an overlapping history. Indians are different as they are a mix of South Eurasian, West Eurasian-related and East Eurasian DNA. Indians are basically "mixed race".
Yes Russia is one landmass but Slavic Russians are not Asians and don't identify as Asians (Slavic Russians have literally said this). Slavic Russians colonised Siberia. Siberia (Asian Russia) was never part of Russia to begin with. The native people of Siberia are genetically related to East Asians and Central Asians and practice shamanist beliefs similar to shamanist beliefs in Korea and Japan or practice Vajrayana Buddhism, which is practiced in Mongolia, Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan and parts of Northern India. In other words, the native Siberians are genetically and culturally Asians. Slavic Russians are genetically and culturally European. Their history is tied to Europe, not Asia. Also, just so you know, because of the pandemic Central Asians have experienced racism in European Russia, simply because they're from Asia. Most Central Asians don't even look Chinese. Central Asian-looking people have also faced racism in the areas of Russia in which Central Asian-looking people are native to like Tatarstan due to the pandemic. So while Russia is one continous landmass, a single country, the difference between "Asian" Russia and "European" Russia are very clear when people focus on appearance, culture and religion.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidbowie5023 So not only are you speaking about something you don't understand, you're also finding ways to attack me personally. You're doing a great job showing me the type of person you are.
What radical sects? The fact that you're talking about Islam and Christianity here really shows me that you're way out of line to be talking about Buddhism in Asia.
Why are you trying to put two and two together in order to peddle a false narrative? Your hate is extremely palpable. The Sri Lankan Civil War has NOTHING to do with Theravada Buddhism and if you actually took the time to understand the conflict, you'd realise it stems from linguistic and ethnic differences. You'd also realise that it stems from Sinhalese supremacy, a concept that includes people of different religions that are ethnically Sinhalese. Nobody went to any Sangha to receive blessings because to inflict violence, don't spread lies because per your logic, the same could be said about Prabhakaran who was a practising Christian.
Thaificiation is not connected to Theravada Buddhism lmfao. Are you aware of the fact that many aspects of traditional Thai culture are Hindu in origin? Your obsession with sects is so insane because in Asia, syncretism is a huge thing and the differences between sects are not felt because local religions like Buddhism are syncretised with native or other local beliefs like Hinduism or folk religion. Why are you doing this??? Don't use the Southern Thailand insurgency to push your agenda please. The issue in the deep south is between Malay separatists who want independence from Thailand and the conflict between the Thai government and the Malay separatists.
You still don't get it do you? If this is all about Theravada Buddhism, why on earth is the Tatmadaw persecuting the Shan, Rakhine, Karen etc. all of whom practice Theravada Buddhism???? You can't find a single answer to this so your next form of attack is to criticise me and use ad hominems to put me down.
Lmfaoooo I actually can't believe this. You are a Western person with an East Asian fetish. I cannot believe you just made this about the economic standing of South/Southeast Asia and East Asia, which has NOTHING to do with Buddhism. Buddhism is not the state religion of any of these countries and your logic makes absolutely no sense because Bhutan practices a different form of Buddhism, that can be classified as Mahayana, to Sri Lanka or Thailand and yet both countries are more socially and economically well off than Bhutan. Only a Western person obsessed with identity politics would say such things and not realise how funny it sounds. There are millions of Theravada Buddhists ethnic groups in southern China and the Chinese government is literally atheist and yet you're making this about sects in Buddhism. You're so interested in making this about sects that you don't even care to learn that Mahayana beliefs are still practiced in Thailand, Sri Lanka, Myanmar etc. etc. like the worship of Guanyin. You also don't realise that there is a sangha in East Asian countries like Taiwan. Here's a word of advice, don't speak on Asian issues if you don't actually understand what's going on in Asia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@deeksha2964 Also, as you said, Asians discriminate against their own. People talk of East Asian hostility towards South Asians but it also goes the other way. India has a huge problem with its treatment of Northeast Indians who look East Asian and broader discrimination against other Indians who have East or Southeast Asian like features who come from other parts of India. Not to mention other forms of discrimination against the varied ethnic groups of India like Biharis and Tamils, in addition to racism directed at neighbouring nations like Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Rohingyas of Myanmar. Same thing in Southeast Asia, Thai vs Burmese, Cambodian vs Vietnamese, Malaysian vs Singaporean, Thai vs Thai Malay, Bamar vs all other ethnic groups in Myanmar and so on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@illustryfe5354 Firstly, Mongoloid is outdated racial term from the 19th century referring to the shape of people's skulls. You can't determine race based on skull shape. Mongoloid and other racial terms are outdated and no longer used in the scientific community today. Brown is also not a racial term. So many diverse groups are "brown skinned" but that doesn't mean they're the same race.
Secondly, it depends on context. In the US, the first wave of Asian immigrants were from East Asia and in the UK, the first wave of Asian immigrants were from South Asia. So in US English, "Asian" refers to East Asian and in British English, "Asian" refers to South Asians. Officially on government documents, both East Asians and South Asians as well as Southeast Asians are classified as "Asians" regardless of how the term is used in colloquial language. In Asia, "Asian" refers to everybody from Asia. In Singapore, for example, all Singaporeans of Indian, Malay and Chinese descent are considered as "Asians". This is because Singapore is an Asian country and the definition in Singapore and other parts of Asia is most similar to the dictionary definition of "Asian". So it depends on context but at the end of day, everybody from one of the native ethnic groups of Asia is Asian.
Finally, some Indian groups like Bengalis and various Northeast Indian groups have East Asian admixture which is why some of them look Thai or Chinese.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nanaholic01 Yeah you're right. I think most countries in the region, including Australia, want to get along with China without fully siding with the US. Australia is still very much on the US side but it recognises it needs to co-exist with China. Malaysia, Indonesia, India and Singapore don't recognise the Nine Dash Line and Malaysia claims islands and surrounding sea in the SCS and Indonesia claims the surrounding waters of Natuna Islands in SCS. So they won't do anything for China in recognition of the Nine Dash Line. However, I wouldn't be surprised if one day all of those countries I mentioned (except for Singapore) were to fall to the Chinese side. Right now, the only major thing stopping Malaysia, Indonesia and India from becoming blatantly pro-Chinese are territorial disputes. Though, all of those countries, including Singapore, could remain neutral if something like this were to occur, which is more believable to me. The belief of neutrality is so entrenched in much of Asia since the end of WW2 that I wouldn't be surprised if they all turned a blind eye and remained neutral for their own protection.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MiguelDLewis In regards to Thailand, the assimilation process of the Chinese happened hundreds of years ago when ethnic Chinese were migrating to Thailand. This happened a long time ago, sorry I should've been more clearer. It's not a modern example. Thailand also has a declining fertility rate, in fact it's lower than Japan's fertility rate and stands at 1.16, making it the second lowest fertility rate in Southeast Asia after Singapore's 0.97 fertility rate. Singapore's case isn't actually about integrating multiple Asian ethnicities. Singaporeans are mostly of Chinese, Malay and Indian descent so as a result, the Singaporean government accepts immigrants from Malaysia, China, Indonesia and India. Most of them are from Malaysia who are just like Singaporeans and mostly of Chinese, Malay and Indian descent and culturally very similar as they were once part of the same country. The case of Singapore is that it is very strict in who is allowed in but being ethnically Chinese, Malay, Indian and from Malaysia puts you at a much, much higher advantage than every other nationality because Singapore strives hard to maintain the demographics of the country which are 74% Chinese, 14% Malay, 9% Indian and 3% Others (mostly Eurasians). These have been the demographics of the country for hundreds of years. So the government wants to keep it the same to maintain stability, to make sure the Malay and Indian minorities don't get drowned out by immigrants and to make sure the Chinese know that they aren't shrinking in size.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@digbyjones4203 You claim to be superior yet it's an Asian nation (Singapore, with its multiethnic population of Chinese, Indians and Malays) that tops the international literacy, numeracy and science rankings each year. You claim to be superior yet it's the diasporic Asians in the US, UK and other Western countries that are the most educated group. You claim to be superior, yet the Asian Americans (Indians, Taiwanese, Chinese, Filipinos) have the highest household median income in the US. You claim to be superior yet it's Asians who dominate Ivy league schools so much to the point that there's an "Asian quota" to reduce the number of East Asian and South Asian students getting into each school. News flash, nobody is superior. Its people qualities that define who they are, not their ethnicity.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fortpark-wd9sx The native people of South and Southeast Asia are the AASI and Hoabinhian, they are both of East Eurasian origin. Later, Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman speakers migrated into eastern South Asia and Southeast Asia where they mixed with the natives. These two linages are also of East Eurasian origin and thus distantly related to the AASI and Hoabinhian. West Eurasian Neolithic Farmers and Steppe pastoralists (associated with Indo-Aryan languages) made their way into South Asia and into western Myanmar where they also mixed with the natives. Those eye shapes and nose shapes you talk about are present among so many ethnic groups in South and Southeast Asia that carry predominantly East Eurasian ancestry, including tribal Indian Adivasi groups that carry mostly AASI ancestry in addition to the dark skinned Maniq, Semang and Aeta in Southeast Asia. Those same features are also present among many Bangladeshis because yes, that's right, they carry a lot of AASI, Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman ancestry - just like the Rohingyas. You're trying so hard to divide up people based on appearance (it's giving Nazi/Hitler) but it's so bizarre to me when we're literally talking about Myanmar and Bangladesh, the area of Asia where Tibeto-Burman, Austroasiatic, AASI and Indo-Aryan merge. I can't believe your theory is that Bangladeshi-looking Rohingyas are fake and Bamar-looking Rohingyas are real. I've never heard of such a thing until I saw your comment.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Uh what does that have to do with the video? I'm from another Asian background and yes I've seen racist comments Indians make against people from my culture and yes I see the racist comments they make against Northeast Indians but what has that go to do with this video? Also, let's not forget that racism goes both ways. Inter-Asian racism and rivalry is a real thing. Indians vs Chinese, Chinese vs Japanese, Malaysian vs Singaporean, Cambodian vs Thai, Indian vs Nepalese and the list goes on. Are you forgetting that? I've done research into racism in India and there is racism towards each other, against Northeast Indians, against South Indians, against Biharis and even against North Indians. It's a two way street. If you think it's one-sided, it's not. All this finger pointing is why India has so many problems and is constantly at war with its own people, I mean look at the way you had to bring that up here when it has no relevance to the video. So negative and for what? Not to mention the Indians in the comment section who are upset that she's debuting in Korea. Y'all are always bringing each other down and constantly dividing each other up. Embarrassing. If you still haven't realised, look at a mirror.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrtt_awakeandreadytofight There is concern because:
1. This is the Delta variant and it is more contagious and the effects of it are more severe compared to the original strain, hence the reason why people who are not elderly are now increasingly ending up in ICU. Just look at Asia, many countries were able to control the virus last year but now all of a sudden these countries are having record breaking numbers of daily cases and deaths continue to rise. In Thailand, for example, they were once having 0 cases per day but now they're having 20,000 cases a day due to the Delta variant. Japan is now experiencing 25,000 cases a day. China has once again resorted to locking infected people up in their homes as cases of the Delta variant spread rapidly across the country.
2. More and more studies are revealing the long term effects of COVID-19. Data has shown, for example, a decrease in IQ for those who contracted COVID-19 compared to those who didn't. In the US, a case of a 15 year old boy revealed that he was a high achieving student pre-COVID-19 but after contracting a mild version of the virus, 6 months later he began to feel lethargic and was unable to complete his maths homework (something that he has studied for) and ultimately failed to complete his maths test after experiencing a meltdown in which he feared that he "may never be a good student again".
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@K Y Well to be fair, I'm not talking about India (which is much larger and very different and diverse) but about Sri Lanka and yes, Sri Lanka originally had the opportunity to follow a similar path to Singapore. Sri Lanka is composed of 5 main ethnic groups (Sinhalese, Tamils, Moors, Malays and Burghers/Eurasians), which can be narrowed down to 3 main ones (Sinhalese Tamils and Moors). Singapore is composed of 3 main ethnic groups (Chinese, Malays, Indians), with Eurasians as the fourth largest group.
Singapore's main language is English with Mandarin, Malay and Tamil constitute the other official languages of the country and taught as second mother tongue languages in school. Sri Lanka should have made English the sole official language as a way to unite all ethnic groups instead of pushing the Sinhala Only Act and disenfranchising the Tamils, Moors and Burghers who are not native Sinhalese speakers. Sri Lanka should have promoted the teaching of Sinhalese and Tamil as mother tongue languages so that the Sinhalese, Tamils and Moors are still able to converse in their native languages in addition to speaking English.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jdmytho9599 You're so wrong lmao. In the UK, '"Asian" means Indian. In Australia, even though "Asian" means "East Asian" people still know India is part of Asia. In the US, Indians are legally classified as Asians and educated Americans know that Indians are Asians. In African countries like Kanya and South Africa, "Asian" means Indian. There is a whole community of Indians in Kenya known officially as "Kenyan Asians". In the Gulf nations of the Middle East, "Asian" means Indian. Qatar built a whole complex called Asian Town and it's full of Indian/South Asian shops. In Southeast Asia, "Indians are always considered Asian. You really thought you could get away with that one. Many Malaysians, Singaporeans, Burmese have Indian ancestry and Southeast Asia is culturally influenced by India. Everything from the language scripts to write Thai, Khmer, Burmese, Javanese, to religion (Buddhism and Hinduism), to attire (e.g. Thai sabai, Cambodian sampot and Burmese longyi) to architecture (e.g. Angkor Wat) to traditional greetings (e.g. Thai wai, Cambodian sampeah and Balinese Om Swastiastu) to traditional Southeast Asian food (Thai, Burmese, Cambodian, Malaysian, Indonesian, Vietnamese curries and cooking techniques) are all of Indian/South Asian origin.
Next time, don't lie to an Asian person and tell us who we consider who is Asian and who is not. India (and China) are the mothers of Eastern culture. So don't even try to say Indians are not Asians.
BTW, stop liking your own comments. Also, funny you keep calling them "East Indians". Do you know why they're called that? The "East" in "East Indian" refers to their Asian origin (as in coming from the Eastern world). Smh...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@harshavandu Akhand Bharat is akin to China's belief in expansionism and acquiring territory linked to the Qing dynasty (aka "Greater China"). It is not the same as the Indosphere which is the Indic equivalent to the Sinosphere (Chinese cultural sphere), the later of which is not connected to "Greater China".
The rise in believers of Akhand Bharat are dangerous to India's reputation and I will be frank, India's reputation isn't the best overseas. While many like to believe India is the benevolent opposite to expansionist China, there are also many who are weary of what India may become in the future as it gets more powerful. A respected former diplomat in Australia (my country) published a book a few years ago about the Asian Century and he suggested that India, as it becomes more powerful, may begin to exert influence in southern Asia and the Indian Ocean. Last year, an article published in The Diplomat also spoke about the threat of "Akhand Bharat" and the rise of the RSS. It may not seem so plausible today but those young men online who believe in Akhand Bharat will eventually come to power, we don't know what will happen then.
Now I honestly believe the only way India is going to be able to gain the respect of the world is to get the world to fear it (at least per current standards), that or some well thought out form of soft power that changes international public opinion (like what the Korean Wave has done for South Korea). However going down the route of Akhand Bharat is not the way to go and I asked these questions because a recent video on TikTok quoted a bunch of tweets made by Indian nationalists that touched upon this topic (though was not the topic of the video) and a few days ago, someone on another YT video told me that countries like Nepal and Sri Lanka are "Indian states". So I had to ask, if that makes sense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@agonnoga6100 The Gopura is a feature used in certain traditional architectural styles in parts of Southeast Asia such as in Angkot Wat. Tamils, Khmer, Sinhalese and Thai all celebrate the Ploughing Festival. Burmese people used to celebrate this festival too during the Pagan era. The Thai, Khmer, Lao, Burmese, Balinese, Baybayin, Javanese, Sundanese, Cham, Dai and Mon scripts all descend from the Pallava script which is a South Indian script.
No such thing called pure "Indo-Aryan". I know you look down on South Indians but there is no such thing. Y'all are genetically of the same stock, just speak different languages and have different cultures.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ccb88888 "In Singapore's case, the British colonial authorities were not doing their job properly"
Sorry but why are you talking about the British colonial authorities? Singapore was not under full British rule for at least 10 years before it became the Republic of Singapore in 1965. It was partially self governing from 1955 until 1959 when it became fully self governing, then in 1963 it joined what is now Malaysia before being expelled from the union in 1965. Singapore was nothing but a low income nation in Southeast Asia, surrounded by other low income nations. Lee Kuan Yew marvelled at Ceylon (modern Sri Lanka), particularly of its capital of Colombo. At that time, Ceylon was considered a model ex-British Crown colony and on times that Lee would visit Ceylon, he would make remarks at wanting to create a "Garden City" like what Colombo had become. If Singapore was a middle income nation with good things going for it, Lee would not need to look at Ceylon for inspiration. However, Singapore had nothing and being so small it has no natural resources. Singapore turned itself around due to the sheer need of survival. It is why it is described as one of, if not, the greatest economic miracle of the 20th century.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@newtonmin3174 Yeah but some of your points are not correct. Not all Rohingyas are Muslims, there are Hindu and Christian Rohingyas too and while the Hindu and Christian Rohingyas are treated better than their Muslim counterparts, they too were driven out of their homes and now live in refugee camps in Bangladesh.
Yes Islamophobia exacerbated the situation but that is not the root cause of the problem. The Rohingyas have been "othered" first due to their decision to side with the British in the 1940s, the second for their attempt to gain independence after Myanmar became a country, the third when they were stripped off citizenship in the 1970s and finally when the military brainwashed the Bamar into thinking the Rohingyas were illegal immigrants from Bangladesh during the 2010s. It's very easy to claim that it's all due to religion but it's far more complex than religion. Burmese military has a tight control on information so it's unsurprising that the Bamar, who live far away from Rakhine State, would fall for military propaganda. Most of them have never been to Rakhine State and most of them know very little about Rakhine State.
Those who are Islamophobic are the ultranationalists and their Islamophobia is no different to the Islamophobia in other parts of Southeast and South Asia. In fact, the Burmese ultranationalists who are Islamophobic see themselves as part of a network with other ultranationalists, such as those from Sri Lanka and they've also inspired the ultranationalists in India and share similarities to their counterparts in Thailand. To them, they claim they all face extinction in South and Southeast Asia because of their communities' low fertility rates compared to Muslims. The Burmese ultranationalists played a role in brainwashing Bamar people but they are not the roose cause of the situation.
Also, when you say "Burmese" you mean "Bamar" because it is Bamar that accepted the Islamophobic and illegal immigrant propaganda. The ethnic groups in Rakhine State, on the other hand, have lived with Rohingyas for centuries and had no issue until the Bamar took over and the British colonised the area.
The important thing is that many Bamar are now supportive of Rohingyas and this support has been accepted by many Rohingyas in Kutupalong refugee camp in Bangladesh. People are finally realising they were wrong and are now expressing regret for their silence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@montaser9985 I'm speaking about ultraconservative branches of the religion imported from the Middle East that have changed people's way of thinking in Malaysia.
The truth is every high high income ultraconservative Muslim-majority nation that has become a high income economy is due to exploitation of migrant workers and/or oil. You can't compare the success of UAE, Qatar, Kuwait or Bahrain to the success of Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan or Japan when the former nations have developed through oil harvesting and exploitation of migrant workers. In fact, the majority of people who live in those countries are not even local citizens but foreigners (mostly from South and Southeast Asia). The locals also do not work, that's why white collar workers are also employed in large numbers to work in these countries. In other words, foreigners are the ones that have propped up those economies. Same thing applies to places like Saudi Arabia, they all rely heavily on foreigners to keep them afloat. Their failure to control COVID-19 really showed how much they rely on foreigners. Brunei is kind of an exception. They became rich through oil harvesting but they also rely on foreign workers too, not to the extent that exists in the Gulf nations though.
Another reason for why Gulf nations have succeeded apart from what I already stated is because ultraconservative Islam is native to the Arab world. It is part of the local's cultural psyche and is very different to Malaysia or anywhere else outside of the Arab world. Ultraconservative Islam is not native to Malaysia. In fact, it's supplanting the original strand of Islam practiced in Malaysia before people started adopting Arab cultural practices.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@royjacobs1204 Firstly, Bangladesh abstained, meaning they are neutral and in no way are supporting anybody. They abstained. Abstain is not showing support. Secondly, your contempt for the lives of the Global South is paramount. You talk of "jeopardising" the way of life of Europeans and Americans, but are indifferent to the destruction the US/UK/EU has caused to the Global South. So it's okay that 3 million Bangladeshis were murdered and faced genocidal rape by Pakistanis with strong support from the US or the thousands of Korean, Sri Lankan, Nepalese, Filipino and other Southeast Asian women trafficked into working as sex slaves on US military bases in Korea in the 1990s but when destruction happens in a part of Europe (excluding the Balkans because the rest of Europe and the US simply do not care about that region either) you want the whole world to fight your war. That doesn't sound fair. Thirdly, we are in a global pandemic. You really think preventing shipments of COVID-19 vaccines is only going to hurt the Bangladeshis? It's going to hurt the whole world because this pandemic will continue to be prolonged and more variants will emerge and more destruction to the entire world. It's in the interest of the world to end this pandemic not politicise it because a distant Asian country decided to remain neutral. This type of behaviour only sends these countries into the arms of the CCP.
You know, I shouldn't be surprised by these statements. The true feelings of the US and UK/EU have come forward (and I make a clear point to exclude Australia and NZ because even though they are Western, they are not part of this global power struggle) through their response to Ukraine and the mainstream US/UK/EU mainstream media. While China and India asked to temporarily waive IP so that they could make Pfizer and Modern vaccines to give out for free to developing countries, the US and the pharmaceutical companies said "no". It's so clear to see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1