Why was Pan-Asianism never seriously considered ?

Why was Pan-Asianism never seriously considered ?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    They literally have nothing in common. No language, history, religion. No nothing. What basis they can use to unite?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      they're all Asian

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You're actually thinking it like a libtard would strawman someone. You see them as "asian", which is quite arbitrary.
        Asia is huge and their more local geographic areas hold more distinct importance to their histories and identities.

        For scale reference, there is an episode of japanese tv, where they investigate and confirm how at different towns in Kyushu (one island of Japan), not 100km apart, people use different words to react to getting water on them (rain, pot hole, reporter's water gun etc).

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          They definitely see themselves as asian as a united identity more than "white".

          Even the japs still recognize they are asian.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Again why is "white" involved? Asian may be closer to Earthling than Japanese to them.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The asians see white and black as other groups, so naturally they form their own group - asian.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Think of it like outwards expanding circles. The closest circle is the family, then comes the neighbouring community, then the city/village, then the cultural region, then the nation, then the race and finally the species. People identify strongest with the smallest circle and then it gets less and less with each circle.
            In America there is a lack of established regional cultures since it's a very young country, people move places a lot and demographics change constantly. So this circle falls away, same goes for the village/city circle (aside from sports games maybe). Thus if people want to identify as a group that is bigger than just their neighbouring community, they turn to race or nation in America, but in Asia they turn to the cultural region or even the city/village.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The americans engage in it too, they just fricking lie about not doing.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      they all have really small eyes

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Middle easterners, South Asians, and Southeast Asians don't have small eyes

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    If you knew even a little bit about different asian cultures you would know they have little to nothing in common.
    Also they weren’t all universally colonized to form an anticolonial identity like some panafricans pretend.

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Even if there might've been a few "true believers" in the government, the japanese completely undermined any legitimacy the movement might've had with its invasions of the rest of asia

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Do Japs see Pajeets as their muh fellow brothers? Do Pajeets see chinks as their brethren? “Asians” is a meme term

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Well they have a common Dharmic Root, Buddhism in East Asia and Hinduism in South and Southeast Asia (Like in Bali) are Dharmic religions.

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Asia isn’t real moron

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It actually gained traction in the 1880s-1890s where nationalists from India, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and the Philippines frequently met with one another and exchanged ideas and there was a budding commonality based on blaming Westerners for Asia's miseries.

    But then the Japs ruined it with their own Imperialism, starting with the 1st Sino-Japanese War, and the point of no return was their annexation of Korea.

    • 2 years ago
      Black Chvd

      >It actually gained traction in the 1880s-1890s where nationalists from India, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and the Philippines frequently met with one another and exchanged ideas and there was a budding commonality based on blaming Westerners for Asia's miseries.

      All Based and Valid so far.

      >But then the Japs ruined it with their own Imperialism

      And frick up thing is they didn't need to be schizo about Chinese didn't like the West nor their current government and so the rest of SEA and India all they had to do was to not be as brutal as the West and not as incompetent as China and they would have gotten what they wanted easier.

      Invading China as a whole is moronic even if oil sanctions and West didn't intervene, there was no way they would have conquer China let alone trying to maintain it. The Best they should have done was take the capital and the land around it and have the rest of China be it's own "independent" pro-Japan country as a guise of Pan-Asianism.

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    1. The Japanese Empire colonizing other Asian countries

    2. Cold War politics dividing Asian countries

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Mountains

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Wow, all of Chinese history now makes sense.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Wow, all of Chinese history now makes sense.

      this, based post, but that only makes Genghis even more based

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >caucasus
      >no siberia
      >khazakstan chopped off
      a moron made this map

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It's literally forming before your eyes, chum.

    Only thing left is Japan switching sides, which we need because I want that jap bussy.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    because it makes zero sense outside of your cute little map?

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Because japs destroyed the appeal by using it as a cover for their larp as the british empire
    It was a popular movement before the imperial chimpouts and the various anti colonial revolutionaries were all friendly to japan

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      It's still popular, look at RCEP and how the asian countries treat Pelosi's provocation.

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    There's atleast 3 different 4 different Asian great cultures

    1) Indian
    2) East Asian/Chinese sphere
    3) Steppe sphere
    4) South East Asian

    You cannot mix them together, as they're all separate. European had a Roman heritage that closed the gap between the wilderlands/nomadic tribes and the civilized south, but the Asia didn't. Mongols even at its height didn't push their culture/civilization down everyone's throat. Even EastAsian/Chinese influence civilization weren't out of conquest but out of (past) admiration, so the modern unity is not there. The Indian unity were broken by the Muslim invasion. SEA had Indians/Buddhist culture uniting them until Islam created a separate sphere of influence. With a weakened Indian influence, the Buddhist influence waned.

    Japan tried to create a Pan-Asian sphere to counter the Pan-European sphere, but they failed.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Japan went the moronic way of doing it, they literally tried to kill asians to unite asians.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You think Roman empire were hippies when they united the European continent? Are you calling Roman empire moronic?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Romans didn't even come close to unite the continent LOL

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Sure they did.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            There's the whole northern Europe out there, matey.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Holy Roman Empire filled the role

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            HRE didn't have West, the med or Eastern Europe.

            Again, the chinese went further in uniting Asia than the Roman.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            It had the north. Which was missing from the Roman empire in the past. So the Roman identity was kept up until the 18th century or so when nationalism was becoming more prominent.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            It doesn't have the Scandi states, anon.

            As said, nobody comes close to unite Europe, not even Hitler and modern US.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Scandi states dont matter, as they later get assimilated by nearby Roman empires. They're a tiny number of people too

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            I disagree. China historically is pretty small compared to today's borders. China being so big today is due to foreign conquests

  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Because the concept of Asia is Greek. Chinese think China and India are even less similar than China and the West. Moreover, the CCP clearly has the will to unite the whole of East Asia. India also has the will to unite South Asia and as for Southeast Asia, they already have ASEAN.

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    To be honest, East Asians in particular are just too hierarchical and elitist in their way of thinking for this to really work. They seem to have trouble with the idea of taking the Westphalian notion of a politely nominal equality between states seriously.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Westphalian notion of a politely nominal equality between states

      I don't think Eastern and Western Europe are equal in the European sense. In addition, most of East Asia is considered equal to each other because they are all Chinese provinces. There may be places that feel superior because of economic factors, but these are not inherently discriminatory.

  15. 2 years ago
    Sigma

    For the same reason I do not consider IQfy a valid board.

    Yes, what you think does not matters.

  16. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    The only shared culture between those countries is "exposure to China at an early stage" so if you do pan-asianism you just end up with
    >China but HUUUUUGE

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Sudan is whiter than Spain
      What did they mean by this

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        frick spanish "people"

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Manichaeism is the answer for Pan-Asianism (and that'd included Middle East and Siberia)

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Mohism is better I think

  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    India is out of the question.
    The rest can be a thing if China can put Chinese province tags on them. Every Asian will be treated equally as Chinese.

  19. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    So many cultures and ethnicities and histories in that obscenely massive region that its virtually impossible

  20. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    yes, let's use a geographic construct made up out of thin air by racist whites as a basis for identity, what a moron lmao

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *