When did the myth of chinese superiority begin?
They dominated all of East Asia culturally and economically, and trade to Europe. That's why.
>>18630412East asia was a backwater cut off from the center of human civilization. They were cut off from Europe/Middle East/India. They had nothing. When they were discovered, they were still using bows and arrows.
>>18630420>When they were discovered, they were still using bows and arrows.When are you talking about? Even the Romans knew of China.
>>18630420>When they were discovered, they were still using bows and arrows.Where do you think guns came from?
>>18630420East Asia was consistently more advanced than Europe from the start of human history until the early modern period and there still wasn't a wide gulf until the industrial revolution. All of Europe were still illiterate primitives when the Chinese were establishing the sophisticated Zhou Dynasty and the Han Dynasty surpassed the Roman Republic and Empire in every single way. In summary, you're a retard.
>>186303852008 Olympics. International media started a big campaign to gloss over the crippling problems of sanitation, literacy, poverty/unemployment, pollution, lack of free thinking, ugly women, 18th century style secret police, and literal communism
>>18630420
>>18630385They believed in the Mandate of Heaven, plus were the superpower of east asia for a long long time without a comparable rivalEven when they got conquered they still stuck around as the top dog just under different leadership and gradually assimilated the conquerors (Mongols, Qing)
This board is filled with wumaos and sinophiles
>>18630531>SinophilesAka buck broke seamonkeys and brown people that need to hide behind other races
>>18630531China will punish the CIA for giving my abuela the diabetes o algo
>>18630531>sinophilesHi IPO schizo
when chinkies got internet access
>>18630385Jackie Chan
>>18630539This. None of them are actually Chinese, take this schizo for example >>18630545 who thinks everyone who uses the term "sinophile" is the same guy (we're not the same guy by the way)
>>18630385The entire period from the supposed xia to the song dynasty was invented
>>18630531And people who actually care about history and don't wish to warp it due to retarded agendas.
>>18630687Yet it is already warped. How does a supposed advanced civilization still practice to this day cannibalism and torture and eat dogs?
>>18630385Western Zhou (if not earlier) China at this time was effectively an archipelago of semi-independent city-states amid a sea of semi-nomadic pastoralists and hunter gatherers. The city dwellers considered these country dwellers to be subhumans and theorised their organs and internals were completely different
>>18630696>civilization is when you don't eat dogslol
>>18630441>the Han Dynasty surpassed the Roman Republic and Empire in every single way.The Hans never had a real navy and were never able to project their power across the sea.Their army also relied a lot on sheer numbers rather than tactics which can hardly be considered an accomplishment.
>>18630434Obviously not China
>wei's bordersmagnificent, based even
>>18630661>we're not the same guy by the wayLol
>>18630441Lmao. Go rub rhino horn powder on your 1.5 inch pecker
>>18630786Nta but he's correct
Europoors once thought themselves of exceptional. It just keeps hapening to whomever is at the top of the world, no idea why. And China has been just that for over 30 of the last 40 centuries.
>>18630792First is true, latter is false. The Han had no need for a navy capable of mass sea battles beyond river and coastal fleets but the Han did engage in diverse battlefield tactics which differed depending on which enemy they were facing, with great tactical developments occuring throughout the centuries. And aiming for numerical superiority was a common sense factor in every military worldwide, including the Roman. Intentionally trying to fight with far less numbers than your enemy is nonsensical. Victory is never assured through sheer numbers, something Crassus learned the hard way, but it is more likely.
>>18631439Nobody intentionally tries to fight with less numbers, point is numbers can be a relatively easy way to make up for lack of training and tactics and conversely having high standards makes it harder to keep your numbers up. The average Roman legionary was undoubtedly a superior fighter than the average Han rice farmer.
>>18631761>numbers can be a relatively easy way to make up for lack of training and tacticsSomething that wasn't the case during the Han Dynasty. If you sincerely believe the Han fought with untrained human waves with no strategy and tactics behind it, then you are just a complete clown talking out of your ass. There are extensive texts from the Han Dynasty itself on its military training, organization, and strategy with modern texts on the Han as well. With most of the wars fought by the Han also thoroughly documented. Every account demonstrates the use of diverse strategy and tactics in warfare with strong organization behind it.
