This post reflects a typical CCP position, such as deflecting by bringing up other countries and making far-reaching interpretations of historical events or treaties.
I believe all of your points can be refuted, but some users in this thread seem tired of this kind of exhausting debate. It may be better to exchange our thoughts and positions through private messages instead.
Returning to the game, I believe it is possible to represent the language of the Jin dynasty, the Jurchens.
Manchu has already been represented in several Korean films and TV dramas. Manchu, which can be regarded as a direct descendant of Jurchen, is a language entirely different from Chinese or Korean.
Haha, to be honest, I’m very happy to discuss these issues and post about them. After all, my country, China, has long been subjected to false accusations in the Western-dominated media environment and is at a disadvantage.
On the Public Opinion Environment and Internet Management
Over 99% of Western smears against China are false. China’s necessary internet management—the so-called “Great Firewall”—is precisely meant to prevent this extremely false information from creating division at home. For example, take the claim that Uyghurs are being persecuted. If you have seen the real life in Xinjiang and met Uyghur people, you would know those “persecution” accusations are completely false.
On Xinjiang: Maintaining Stability Is Not Oppression
Xinjiang has been a multi-ethnic homeland since ancient times. The government targets only a tiny minority of violent separatists, protecting all people, including Uyghurs. If the government truly “oppressed” Uyghurs, why are there so many Uyghur stars (Gulnazar, Dilraba, etc.) and TV hosts (Negmat, etc.) in China’s entertainment industry? Why are so many young Uyghurs willing to study, work, and even marry Han Chinese in other parts of the country? Why is there almost a Uyghur restaurant in every city across China? I have several Uyghur friends and classmates. Their Mandarin is getting better and better, and their living standards are rising—this is not oppression; this is the result of development.
On Manchu History and the Narrative of Ethnic Unity
It is true that conflicts between Han and Manchu existed in ancient times (e.g., the Yangzhou Massacre and the Jiading Massacre). However, today’s China deliberately downplays these historical wounds precisely to promote ethnic unity—this is not “Han-centeredness,” but an active concession by the government to facilitate ethnic reconciliation. During the Qing dynasty, the Manchu had already been assimilated into Han culture. Today, there is no barrier between Han and Manchu people; their lifestyles are indistinguishable. China has produced many films and TV dramas that romanticize the Qing dynasty. Another striking example: Wu Jing, the director and star of Wolf Warrior 2, has publicly acknowledged his Manchu heritage and is widely seen as the most iconic patriotic soldier figure in China. This shows that in today’s China, patriotism and ethnic identity are fully compatible.
Responses to Other Arguments
“Backward historical concept” : It is true that the ancient “Hua-Yi” distinction existed, but today’s China has established a modern system of 56 equal ethnic groups. This is progress, not regression.
“Selective inheritance of the Qing” : International law allows a new regime to inherit territorial sovereignty while rejecting unequal treaties. Moreover, after the fall of the Qing, China fell into a period of warlord fragmentation. The Kuomintang (KMT) reclaimed territory from the warlords through hard-fought battles, and was later defeated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and retreated to Taiwan. The mainland was then inherited by the CCP—this is basic common sense.
“Contradiction on Taiwan” : The legal foundation for Taiwan’s status is the post-WWII international order. The PRC’s claim is based on the fact that the Chinese Civil War was never formally concluded. Even though Taiwan is now controlled by the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the opposition KMT still adheres to the One-China principle and identifies itself as Chinese. Moreover, the vast majority of countries’ legal documents do not recognize Taiwan as a country. Taiwan participates in the Olympics under the name “Chinese Taipei.”
“Expansionist historiography” : China has resolved most of its border disputes with neighboring countries through peaceful negotiations. Labeling the historical research of a multi-ethnic nation as “imperialist-style academic mobilization” completely ignores diplomatic realities.
In Summary
China’s current ethnic policy is not a continuation of the ancient “Hua-Yi” distinction. Rather, it is an effort to integrate historically hostile groups into a mutually respectful, jointly developing “Chinese nation.” The accusations you see online are either illusions born of information isolation or deliberate smears meant to create division.
You are welcome to visit China and see for yourself. Many of your preconceptions will naturally change.
However, one must ask: Why do you feel the need to make these arguments so insistently? The reality is that the entity known as “China” (Zhongguo) is difficult to define as a fixed, historical constant. Throughout history, Zhongguo has repeatedly cycled through phases of integration and fragmentation.
The reason you advocate for a historical narrative that the CCP has meticulously constructed—despite its inherent contradictions—is simple: Identity
Because such a vast and diverse territory lacks a single, tangible essence, the moment that “Great China” identity is deconstructed, the entire structure risks falling into division. This is precisely why you are so wary of, and so quick to deny, any interpretation or criticism like mine.
Regarding international law, interpretations are highly controversial and deeply entangled with the interests of the states involved. Since every party holds a different position, simply listing them often leads to nothing more than an exhausting, circular debate. However, there is a critical point here: if we interpret these issues from your logic, many of the outcomes could be viewed as failures of the CCP.
Yet, you never direct your criticism toward the CCP; the muzzle of your gun is always aimed solely at the West.
You claim that China is a nation that respects diversity. If so, why is there no respect for the “ideological diversity” of those you might consider "outsiders(Yi)”? I’d quite like my "minority opinion” to be respected as well. lol
Ah, I haven’t checked this thread for a few days and didn’t expect it to blow up like this. As expected, the ideological debates just never end.
Look, buddy, get what I meant by “I’m not just parroting ideological propaganda from either side”? This dude is actually echoing the CCP’s current official narrative, while I was just highlighting how complex the issue really is.
As for the flaws in the ideology — yeah, I know about them. Every ideology has its weak spots, I’m just not interested in diving too deep here.
Plus, there’s an awkward spot for this US forum: the fragility of the CCP’s current ideology comes precisely from shelving class struggle to develop a market economy. So if you think the current nationalism isn’t convincing enough, should we just go back to communism?
Yeah, I’ll pass. I don’t wanna turn this gaming forum into a Cold War debate club. That is exactly why I have been emphasizing the necessity of communication and understanding from the very beginning. I really don’t wanna drag this discussion further down an ideological rabbit hole.
So far, the requests are for Manchu language, something as close to Jurchen as possible, or for them to invent a “theoretical Jurchen” for the vocabulary of the First Age.
It’s not impossible, I mean, we already have machine translation, AI, online access to scientific articles, and China is large enough that there isn’t a single academic to consult about how to represent Old Manchu for voices.
It’s not like the voices are complex either: The voice actors only have to translate simple things like: “Build?” “I’ll go to work” “I’ll go fishing”, “Let’s attack” “Let’s fight” "For the glory of the Jin" and so on.
So, it all depends on whether the devs are meticulous as with the first 8 civs… or lazy and want to save money as the first 4 variants.
And we must remember what happened when it wasn’t done properly:AoE2:Three Kingdom, one of the criticisms was precisely the dialogues they gave the Jurchen in Chinese and the Khitan giving them Mongolian.
This is just a personal statement. Do not publish some incorrect history that is not officially certified, as it will be exploited by those with ulterior motives.
There are many dialects of Chinese, and Mandarin Chinese is the official language. Therefore, Han Chinese and other minority languages are only dialects and will not be treated as an official language on an equal footing. For example, I am from Guangdong, where the main language is Cantonese. However, Cantonese has many different pronunciations, and some neighboring cities, towns, and villages may not understand the language.
Jurchen language is just one of the many dialects in China, there’s nothing particularly special about it. In Chinese history, many kingdoms were established by ethnic minorities. Do not take the Jurchen people, who once established glorious dynasties, as an exception and become independent. Jurchen people are just a minority ethnic group in China.
In history, the Han people were the most dominant ethnic group in China, occupying the most fertile and developed land. Other ethnic minorities either lived in mountainous areas or in the Gobi Desert. Occasionally, some ethnic minorities would rise and establish dynasties during the decline and division of the Han regime. This was only a short period of time in Chinese history, and foreigners did not need to seize this brief moment to divide Chinese history. Foreigners who do not understand Chinese history can take a look at the map of China and see how dominant the Han ethnic group is, squeezing other ethnic minorities into resource scarce and barren land. Foreigners can also consult historical materials to see if the dynasties of China’s ethnic minorities were all established on the basis of the decline and division of the Han dynasty regime. For the vast majority of history, the Han dynasty was very dominant, and other ethnic minorities were no match for it. As for the massacre of some Han people by ethnic minority dynasties, it should not be magnified or highlighted, as it will mislead foreigners who do not understand Chinese history to sever it. There are also many Han dynasties that massacred ethnic minorities, many more, because the vast majority of Chinese dynasties were established by Han people. Of course, Han people are more civilized and courteous, and slaughter is seen as too barbaric and bloody in the eyes of Han people. Han people prefer cultural expansion and the integration of civilization with other ethnic minorities.
It’s not surprising that you’re saying these things, after all, you come from South Korea, a country with a single and exclusive ethnic group. People like you can never understand the basic structure of a multi-ethnic country like China, let alone expect you to realize that China has been a multi-ethnic country since ancient times. Let me correct a few cognitive errors:
Both the Jin Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty were overwhelmingly populated by Han people. Chinese served as the nationwide common language in both, they fully adopted the traditional political systems of the Central Plains, and both officially claimed themselves as China to the outside world. Even though the ruling aristocracies of these two dynasties were non-Han—the Jurchens and Manchus—they underwent thorough sinicization, willingly or inevitably. Quite a number of their emperors could only speak Chinese and had no command of their ancestral languages at all. There is absolutely nothing odd or questionable about the Jurchens of the Jin Dynasty speaking Chinese.
Over a full century before you even bring up the so-called “assimilation policy”, most Manchus, including their emperors, had already been deeply sinicized. They lost the ability to speak the Manchu tongue, and became virtually identical to Han people in every single aspect of life and social structure.
The Korean community in Northeast China moved into Chinese territory of their own free will hundreds of years ago, fleeing wars and chaos. They have every right to go back to the Korean Peninsula or stay and live in China. Given that many of them have chosen to be Chinese citizens, there is zero ground to question China’s recognition of their culture as an integral part of the nation’s ethnic minority heritage.
Tibet has been under the rule of Chinese imperial dynasties ever since the Yuan Dynasty. Though established by the Mongols, the Yuan is universally acknowledged by mainstream historians as a legitimate Chinese dynasty: it identified itself as China internationally, followed traditional Chinese governance systems, and was recognized as the orthodox ruling dynasty by later Chinese regimes. The Age of Empires dev team obviously knows this historical truth far better than you do. And frankly, it’s no surprise at all that you can never wrap your head around this basic fact.
Long before the Uyghur ethnicity even took shape, Han people had already set up formal administrative rule over Xinjiang（The Western Regions Protectorate of the Han Dynasty and the Anxi Protectorate of the Tang Dynasty）. As a matter of plain historical fact, the Uyghurs are merely late migrants who drifted into Xinjiang from the Mongolian Plateau much later in history.
Moreover, when it comes to distorting East Asian history, plagiarizing and appropriating other cultures, as well as pursuing de-Sinicization and breaking away from the suzerain state out of a desperate need to prop up national pride—no one fits this description better than South Koreans, does it?
