Gabriel Martin · truth is truthUpdated 4y
I will give my opinion:
- I was born after the war. So as a child, I didn’t hate any country. Because I have no feeling of war even though I know how bad it is.
- I watched a lot of animated movies on TV (mostly foreign films, because at that time, Vietnam did not produce many films). I figured out the unique characteristics of each country and now I call those things “culture”.
- After classes at school, I became more and more aware of the unique cultural characteristics of Vietnam. When I compare the similarities and differences of cultures, I am even more proud of my culture. Probably because all cultures are equally unique and wonderful.
- I wish I could do something in the future to plant a Vietnamese flag on the international market. I want to share more about my people’s culture to the world.
- When I went to Quora, I met people like Huijian Wu, Goodi Shang, Cheong Tee,… They propagate stupid things like “Vietnam is an inferior nation”, “Vietnamese people are actually Han Chinese, Vietnamese leaders changed their writing so that the Vietnamese could no longer see their Han ancestors,”… They make up stories about Vietnamese history!!!
That is the cause.
The US or French government also sometimes opposes the Vietnamese government. But the Americans, the French and the Japanese for the most part don’t care much, they behave more politely. And some Chinese people keep showing their level of ignorance which makes me very uncomfortable.
I don’t deny China’s influence over Vietnam, but I don’t want people to say Vietnam is exactly like China.
These 2 people have the same opinion as me:
Cultural faux pas, Contrasting world views, Preconceived ideas. Here are all those things that people in China don’t understand about Vietnam:
Đại Nguyên Trần’s answer to How do Vietnamese people view the Chinese?
The Chinese view of Vietnam is grotesquely distorted, that made I resented their patronizing airs. Many Chinese netizens gave the unguarded comments on the social network such as Bilibili, Zhihu, Youtube, Quora. Example: Vietnam is an ancient, inseparable part of China, it must be revoked soon. Vietnam has stolen Chinese Culture for thousands of years.
After the unification of Vietnam ,The Khmer Rouge launched ferocious raids into Vietnam Ba Chúc massacre in 1975–1978. When Vietnam responded with a counter-attack that toppled the Khmer Rouge, China launched a brief, punitive Invasion of Vietnam. At the same time, Vietnam was gravely slandered when we was described as Imperial Invaders.
Nowadays, both governments decide to let bygones be bygones and be friends again, although Chinese often repeat that Vietnam was such an ungrateful nation
In summary, We don’t like egotistical people, That’s a laconic response.
We respect Chinese people who are more polite and understanding like this:
https://www.quora.com/Do-Vietnamese-think-that-their-ancestors-are-Chinese/answer/Lily-4283Tao Zhang · 5y
What is the ethnic origin of Vietnamese?The Vietnamese people are rather diverse and there are many ethnic groups within Vietnam. However you likely refer to the Kinh people, the large majority population of Vietnam and the people who speak the “Vietic language”.
The Vietnamese Kinh people, are an Austroasiatic people of the “Muong-Vietic” branch, native to mainland Southeast Asia. Austroasiatic people were one of the first rice agriculturalists and expanded from southernmost China and northern mainland Southeast Asia. They were one of the successful East-Eurasian groups closely related to the East Asian clade.
Although the Vietnamese are classified as Southeast Asian, they also belong in the East Asian cultural sphere due to the historical Chinese rule of Vietnam. The Viet are one of the 4 main groups of Vietic speakers in Vietnam, the others being the Muong, Thổ and Chứt.
Written history first refers to the ancient Vietnamese people simply as the Lạc or Lạc Việt, and the country of Vietnam as Văn Lang. Archaeological evidence has been found of the Đông Sơn culture (also known as Lac Society), a culture that existed during the Bronze Age.
The Vietnamese or Kinh people are an Austroasiatic people who lived originally in the area of present-day northern Vietnam and southeastern China. From there, several Austroasiatic tribes migrated to other parts of Vietnam, as well as the rest of Southeast Asia and parts of present-day Indonesia and eastern India.
Genetic analysis shows that they are a Southern Mongoloid population closely related to other Southeast Asians and East Asians. They are nearly exclusively East-Eurasian genetically. Vietnamese people formed from three East-Eurasian components: * Austroasiatics Vietic groups * Taic groups (related to Tai) * Han-related groups Matsumura and Hudson concluded that a broad comparison of dental traits indicated that modern Vietnamese and other modern Southeast Asians are closely or even indistinguishable from more northern groups (East Asians and Siberians), possibly supporting the immigration hypothesis, instead of regional continuity hypothesis, as the model for the origins of modern Southeast Asians. However this northern origin may have already happened during the Paleolithic times, meaning that the ancestors of Southeast Asians lived in Southeast Asia since more than 10,000 years.
Vietnamese show a close genetic relationship with other Southeast and East Asians. The reference population for Vietnamese (Kinh) used in the Geno 2.0 Next Generation is 83% Southeast Asian, 12% East Asian and only 3% non-East-Eurasian (mostly from influence of South Asia like groups).
Sara Pischedda et al. (2017) found that modern Vietnamese have a major component of their ethnic origin coming from present-day South China and a minor component from a Thai-Indonesian composite. The study said that admixture analysis indicates that Vietnamese Kinh have a major part which is most common in Chinese and two minor parts which have the highest prevalence in the Bidayuh of Malaysia and the Proto-Malay.
The study said that multidimensional scaling analysis indicates that Vietnamese Kinh have a closeness to Malay people, Thai and Chinese, and the study said that Malays and Thai are the samples which could be admixed with Chinese in the Vietnamese gene pool.
Bhak Jong-hwa, a professor in the biomedical engineering department at the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST), said that the ancient Vietnamese, which was a population that flourished with rapid agricultural development after 8,000 BC, slowly travelled north to ancient civilizations in the Korean Peninsula and the Russian Far East. Bhak said that Korean people were formed from the admixture of agricultural Southern Mongoloids from Vietnam who went through China, hunter-gatherer Northern Mongoloids in the Korean Peninsula and another group of Southern Mongoloids.
Bhak said, “We believe the number of ancient dwellers who migrated north from Vietnam far exceeds the number of those occupying the peninsula,” making Koreans inherit more of their DNA from southerners. Genetic research indicates that populations related to modern East and Southeast Asians existed as distinct genetic group already during early human times (see Tianyuan man). Significant geneflow from East Asia and eastern Siberia into parts of Europe were carried out through multiple migrations of East-Eurasian hunter gatherers and nomads. Genealogical research has indicated that “all other Vietnamese groups”, apart from the Mang and the Cham people, show “ancestry sharing” with southern Han Chinese, even though on average the Vietnamese people are similar to other Southeast Asians.
A 2020 genetic study about Southeast Asian populations, such as the Javanese, by Liu et al. 2020, found that mostly all Southeast Asians are closely related to East Asians and have mostly “East Asian-related” ancestry. The Andamanese (Onge) were found to consist of two distinct components, one distinct indigenous Oceanic component at 55% and one East Asian-related component at 45% (Fig.8.C), disproving the long held hypothese of complete isolation of the Andamanese peoples. Liu et al. 2020 concluded that the full genome evidence and shared DNA alleles and SNPs further spreads out the East Asian cluster, with Siberia and Northern Asian groups at one end, and Insular Southeast Asia (ISEA) groups at the other.
Not only Mainland Southeast Asians but also Insular Southeast Asians (such as Malays, Javanese, Filipinos) are part of the East Asian clade of the East-Eurasian cluster. Southeast Asians descend from the Austroasiatic and Austronesian populations from southern China and Indo-China (Mainland Southeast Asia such as Vietnam or Laos). The wider East Asian clade (East-Eurasian) is also known as Mongoloid “race” by early Westerners and anthropologists. These populations share specific autosomal DNA and SNP data as well as genetic lineages, which helps to make a graphical distribution of these populations and their associated ancestry and ancestral genome.
East Asians, Southeast Asians, North Asians/Siberians and most Central Asians as well as Polynesians and Native Americans are closely related and belong to the East-Eurasian ancestry cluster, anthropologically also known as Mongoloid race. Genetic studies revealed a close genetic relation between these populations and that they can be clearly distinguished from other populations (e.g. Africans or Europeans or Indians.) Contemporary DNA tests also use the term “East Asian and Native American” to refer to all of this people because they are genetically very closely related: Most recently, several Chinese studies have revealed strong evidence for a multiregional origin of modern human populations. The Central South University (CSU; 中南 大学) published two recent studies in 2019 and 2020 which support the multiregional origin theory. They found that the new genetic data is in contradiction with the Out-of-Africa theory and concluded that this evidence refute it completely.
A multiregional origin for modern humans was recently supported by studies from Yuan et al. 2019, Chen et al. 2020, Huang (various studies, most recently also in 2020). They independently concluded that there are three human ancestry groups. The wider East Asian clade (East-Eurasian) is also known as Mongoloid “race” by early Westerners and anthropologists. These populations share specific autosomal DNA and SNP data as well as genetic lineages, which helps to make a graphical distribution of these populations and their associated ancestry and ancestral genome. Northeast Asian, East Asian and Southeast Asian, but also Native American, Central Asian, Siberian and Polynesian, are one people in terms of genetics and race. They can be clearly distinguished from Europeans, Africans or most Indians. Similarly, Rowold et al. 2020 modeled the genetic clusters of worldwide populations and the study results are in agreement with the results of Yuan et al. 2019.
There are three different genetic groups: * East/Southeast Asians * Europeans/Middle Easterners * Africans (Sub-Saharan) “East Asians and Southeast Asians were found to be most distant to both contemporary West-Eurasians and Sub-Saharan Africans and formed a completely separate cluster.” South Asians (Indians) are a special case as they consist of ancestry from both the European/Middle Eastern genetic group and the East/Southeast Asian genetic group. Additionally they have noteworthy ancestry from a third group, which is shifted towards Africans (Negritos): “Caste populations are generally shifted towards Europeans and Middle Easterners but having noteworthy ancestry from the East/Southeast Asian cluster peaking in the Himalayan region and a gradual cline from western India towards eastern India, peaking in the Northeast and the Eastern Peninsula. Interesingly, non-caste populations of India (samplified by the Soliga people, one of the Adivasi) which make up about 8,6% of Indians population, were found to be shifted towards Sub-Saharan Africans and share specific alleles. A link to certain Oceanians was also detected, suggesting ancient gene-flow.” “Moreover, the presence of these Y-STR profiles in several sub-Saharan populations and conspicuous absence from the other Eurasian collections suggest a unique genetic connection between Indian tribal groups and sub-Saharan Africans.” — Rowold et al. 2020
For a comprehensive overview, see: Recent developments regarding human genetics and human origin, with a special look onto East-Eurasian peoples and their history. Here are Native Indonesians from Borneo as example for the people of Insular Southeast Asia (ISEA): There are various distinctive characteristics and components which characterize East/Southeast Asians (and related people in Siberia or Native Americans). This includes anthropologic features (such as facial features, bone and skull structure as well as overall body characteristics) but also genetics and biological features (such as various body functions and distinctive genes and alleles). Forensic experts can reveal the race/ancestry of a skull to 95% correctness. While genetic research is able to determine genetic clusters with nearly 100% accuracy. Here the average facial features from Southeast Asians, East Asians and Siberians/Central Asians respectively: Here genetically related populations: Native Americans:
Now back to the main topic, the Vietnamese and Austroasiatic peoples: There are around 117 million speakers of Austroasiatic languages. Of these languages, only Vietnamese, Khmer and Mon have a long-established recorded history and only Vietnamese and Khmer have official status as modern national languages (in Vietnam and Cambodia, respectively). The Mon language is a recognized indigenous language in Myanmar and Thailand. In Myanmar, the Wa language is the de facto official language of Wa State. Santali is one of the 22 scheduled languages of India. The rest of the languages are spoken by minority groups and have no official status.
Austroasiatic had ultimately expanded into Indochina from the Lingnan area of southern China, with the subsequent Mekong riverine dispersal taking place after the initial arrival of Neolithic farmers from southern China. Sidwell (2015c) tentatively suggests that Austroasiatic may have begun to split up 5,000 years B.P. during the Neolithic transition era of mainland Southeast Asia, with all the major branches of Austroasiatic formed by 4,000 B.P. Austroasiatic would have had two possible dispersal routes from the western periphery of the Pearl River watershed of Lingnan, which would have been either a coastal route down the coast of Vietnam, or downstream through the Mekong River via Yunnan.
Both the reconstructed lexicon of Proto-Austroasiatic and the archaeological record clearly show that early Austroasiatic speakers around 4,000 B.P. cultivated rice and millet, kept livestock such as dogs, pigs, and chickens, and thrived mostly in estuarine rather than coastal environments. At 4,500 B.P., this “Neolithic package” suddenly arrived in Indochina from the Lingnan area without cereal grains and displaced the earlier pre-Neolithic hunter-gatherer cultures nearly completelly (some historians note that there is convincing evidence for a kind of genocide of outnumbered hunter-gatherers), with grain husks found in northern Indochina by 4,100 B.P. and in southern Indochina by 3,800 B.P.
However, Sidwell (2015c) found that iron is not reconstructable in Proto-Austroasiatic, since each Austroasiatic branch has different terms for iron that had been borrowed relatively lately from Tai, Chinese, Tibetan, Malay, and other languages. During the Iron Age about 2,500 B.P., relatively young Austroasiatic branches in Indochina such as Vietic, Katuic, Pearic, and Khmer were formed, while the more internally diverse Bahnaric branch (dating to about 3,000 B.P.) underwent more extensive internal diversification. By the Iron Age, all of the Austroasiatic branches were more or less in their present-day locations, with most of the diversification within Austroasiatic taking place during the Iron Age. Paul Sidwell (2018) considers the Austroasiatic language family to have rapidly diversified around 4,000 years B.P. during the arrival of rice agriculture in Indochina, but notes that the origin of Proto-Austroasiatic itself is older than that date.
The lexicon of Proto-Austroasiatic can be divided into an early and late stratum. The early stratum consists of basic lexicon including body parts, animal names, natural features, and pronouns, while the names of cultural items (agriculture terms and words for cultural artifacts, which are reconstructable in Proto-Austroasiatic) form part of the later stratum. Roger Blench (2017) suggests that vocabulary related to aquatic subsistence strategies (such as boats, waterways, river fauna, and fish capture techniques), can be reconstructed for Proto-Austroasiatic. Blench (2017) finds widespread Austroasiatic roots for ‘river, valley’, ‘boat’, ‘fish’, ‘catfish sp.’, ‘eel’, ‘prawn’, ‘shrimp’ (Central Austroasiatic), ‘crab’, ‘tortoise’, ‘turtle’, ‘otter’, ‘crocodile’, ‘heron, fishing bird’, and ‘fish trap’.
Archaeological evidence for the presence of agriculture in northern Indochina (northern Vietnam, Laos, and other nearby areas) dates back to only about 4,000 years B.P. (2,000 BC), with agriculture ultimately being introduced from further up to the north in the Yangtze valley where it has been dated to 6,000 B.P. Hence, this points to a relatively late riverine dispersal of Austroasiatic as compared to Sino-Tibetan, whose speakers had a distinct non-riverine culture. In addition to living an aquatic-based lifestyle, early Austroasiatic speakers would have also had access to livestock, crops, and newer types of watercraft.
As early Austroasiatic speakers dispersed rapidly via waterways, they would have encountered speakers of older language families who were already settled in the area, such as Sino-Tibetan. According to Chaubey et al. 2015, “Austro-Asiatic speakers in India today are derived from dispersal from Southeast Asia, followed by extensive sex-specific admixture with local Indian populations. They brought East Asian ancestry into the Indian gene pool.”
Similarly Zhang et al. 2018, concluded that Austroasiatic migrations from Southeast Asia into India took place after the last Glacial maximum, circa 10,000 years ago and left clear genetic traces linked to modern East and Southeast Asians. Some non-Vietnamese Austroasiatic people: Conclusion The Vietnamese people (Kinh) originated from largely Austroasiatic rice agriculturalists with noteworthy influence from Sinitic and Taic groups. They are an Southeast Asian population and like other Southeast Asians also closely related to East Asians and other East-Eurasians.
If most Chinese people have the same understanding as them, then Vietnam and China are friends too, that would be very good.
9.2K views
View 74 upvotes1 of 31 answers
8 comments from
Banh Dau
and more
CVD 