(Continued from the upper half)

While non-Muslim countries in the West condemn the CCP's Xinjiang "re-education camps," Muslim countries are silent and even supportive of the CCP's Xinjiang policy; the claim of "defending traditions" by communities and countries that believe in Islam is itself a logical contradiction, and it is only by keeping up with the times that beliefs can be kept green

Islamic civilization, a non-Western but still profound civilization, is indeed worthy of respect. But its splendor and progress were mainly manifested in ancient times. In modern times, although it is still an important part of world civilization, it is obviously idealistic, dogmatic, outdated and in need of reform in comparison with the Western civilization based on secularism, human rights and humanity, and science and rationality. (One of the major reasons for the decline of Islamic civilization from being open, tolerant and aggressive to being closed and conservative is the destruction and distortion of Islamic civilization by the Mongol Western Expedition and the Crusades (in Europe during the period of the Crusades, the rulers of kingship and those who made use of the manipulation of the power of the clergy were the "barbaric" aristocrats in the north and the east who destroyed the Roman Empire).

It is also important to remove the confinement and harm it has done to women, and to realize the rights of the Muslim woman and her liberation. Modern Western civilization, on the other hand, has been very helpful in expanding women's rights, and it is even said that women's rights are an indispensable part of the mainstream values and civilization of modern Western society.

The "cultural relativism" and "anti-Western hegemony" of some of the Western leftists are indeed against the hegemony of Western discourse and politics, and they respect Islamic civilization. But this is not conducive to the freedom and emancipation of women who practice Islam and live in Muslim countries/communities.

Compared to Islamic civilization, Western civilization is relatively strong. Some Westerners and Muslims, in this way, believe that the hegemony of the West has bullied Islamic civilization and Muslim communities. This is true to some extent. Western secularism (and some Christian culture), capitalism, and modernization are all influencing (or eroding) the Islamic world. And the United States, with its hegemonic character, is also interfering and manipulating in various ways in the Middle East, influencing the internal and external affairs of other Islamic countries as well.

On the other hand, contemporary Western civilizations, political systems, societies and cultures place greater emphasis on human rights and freedoms, and are more friendly and tolerant towards women, including Muslim women.

On the other hand, women in Muslim countries are generally brutally oppressed by authoritarian and clerical regimes (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Bahrain, etc. are examples, and even in the more open countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Turkey, openness and tolerance are only found in the big cities such as Dubai, Istanbul, etc., and in the middle class and above, while the rest of the countryside, the hinterland, and the lower-middle class, in particular, are still very conservative, with serious repression of women's rights and freedoms). (The rest of the population, especially in the countryside, the interior, and the lower middle class, is still very conservative, and the suppression of women's rights and freedoms is very severe.) Even in some Muslim communities and families in the West, women are still persecuted and controlled by the head of the community/family members dominated by Sharia law and religious values, such as forced hijab and forced circumcision.

For these Muslim women, both Western interventions in the Muslim countries where they live and Western government interventions in the local Muslim communities and families are very often precisely in favor of women's free emancipation. It would be a tragedy for these women if the West, out of respect for the sovereignty of Muslim countries, the autonomy of communities, and cultural differences, did not intervene in the situation of women in these places, and allowed religious leaders and male heads of families to engage in all kinds of anti-human rights practices.

The political stance of Muslims living in the West, and even some of those who have become naturalized in Europe and the U.S., remains conservative and intransigent.In the 2023 Turkish elections, according to a CNN Turkish-language channel poll, 65 percent of Turks in Germany voted for Erdogan, who holds a position of Islamist conservatism, nationalism (pan-Turkism), and populism, and only 35 percent voted for Kemal, the representative of secularism and progressivism. progressivist representative Kemal. Instead, support for the Turkish domestic duo was 53%:47%, suggesting that Turks in Germany, and even in Europe and the United States, are on the whole even more conservative than Muslims within the Turkish state. This is partly a reflection of the fact that the West's policies of acceptance and integration of Muslims have not led to a general secularization and progress of Muslims, and that conservative hardliners are still the dominant force in the entire Muslim world, including Muslim communities in the West. (Of course, I am also opposed to some of those who come from Islamic countries and then go to the West and become too extreme in their opposition to Islam. For example, those who blaspheme the Qur'an in a rather insulting manner. Such people are ugly and unforgivable unless they have been brutally persecuted by religious forces. And even if they have been victimized, it is not appropriate to go to such extremes, but rather to express their protests by more reasonable means.)

Much of this has to do with the values and policies of the "regressive left" in the West, which is overly pluralistic and opposed to assimilationist tendencies. While its emphasis on respect for the religious beliefs of the Muslim community may be conducive in the short term to amity and harmony between different ethnic groups in the West (especially between non-Muslims of European descent and Muslim immigrants), in the long term it will only serve to bolster religious conservatism and exacerbate ethnic polarization within the West, as well as the rights and freedoms of vulnerable groups, including Muslim women.

In addition, many Islamic countries are not as good as non-Islamic countries in terms of human rights, including the protection of and attention to Muslims. For example, on the Xinjiang issue, the United States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom strongly oppose the Chinese Communist Party's policy of "re-education camps." Most of the 23 countries that jointly condemned the CCP's Xinjiang policy in the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) are European and American countries with predominantly non-Muslim ethnic groups (predominantly white, mostly Christian or atheist). On the contrary, the CCP later mobilized 54 countries to jointly refute the 23 countries in Europe and the United States and to support and endorse the CCP's Xinjiang policy, including many Muslim countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, and Sudan. Other Muslim countries that did not participate in the coalition in support of CCP China have also been largely silent on the CCP's Xinjiang policy (only Turkey has mentioned and opposed it, but most of the time Turkey also expresses its support for the CCP's efforts to maintain unity and stability in Xinjiang).

  The New York Times op-ed "Why the Muslim World Is Silent on China's 'Gulag'" analyzes this issue succinctly, pointing out that the majority of Muslims in many countries (and especially the rulers of regimes that are also Muslim) do not care about the human rights and freedoms of their fellow Christians. This reality is due to a combination of complex reasons, such as the fact that many Muslim countries are authoritarian and economically dependent on China. The poor human rights situation in the Muslim world today and the fact that they do not particularly care about the human rights of their own countrymen and foreigners, and even share the Chinese Communist Party's anti-Western ecumenical values, is a very important aspect of the situation.

In addition, as mentioned earlier, many Islamic countries, like China and Russia, cite adherence to tradition and independence as reasons for resisting the "cultural invasion" of the West. But in fact, these Islamic countries and the Muslim population have not always believed in Islam from ancient times to the present day. On the contrary, historically, they were conquered by the Islamic forces originating in the Arabian Peninsula, and then gradually converted to Islam. There are places, such as Afghanistan and Pakistan, where fundamentalism is prevalent today (especially the Pashtuns in both countries, who make up the vast majority of the Taliban), where the faith of their forefathers was that of native primitive religions or tribal primitive religion-like beliefs, not Islam. On the contrary, they once fiercely resisted the invaders who tried to force them to practise Islam, at great cost. And today, they are sacrificing themselves fighting and dying for the religious forces that their ancestors fought so desperately to resist, sadly. Going back further, the two "holy cities" of Islam today, Mecca and Medina, were also conquered by Muhammad before they became territories and holy places for the forces of Islam.

What I am saying is not to deny the rationality and legitimacy of the belief in Islam by the communities in these regions, but to deconstruct their irrational and anti-progressive behavior in the name of "defending traditions" and "from time immemorial," rejecting and belittling the West and other civilizations as foreign, and refusing to adapt to the times and innovate and develop. irrational and anti-progressive behavior.

I have always believed that Islam has historically been beneficial to faith communities and has made a great contribution to human civilization. However, it must not remain an outdated religion and needs to be actively reformed today, especially by emphasizing human rights and science and adapting to modern society. Islamic civilization was quite enlightened and progressive and respected science before it was sunk by the Crusaders and the Mongols for a long time. The Islamic world today should also engage in a "Renaissance" and "Enlightenment", as Europe did after the fourteenth century.

    The prophet of Islam, Muhammad, was a pioneering spirit, and the sayings of the Qur'an and the Sunnah, which were prescribed and enjoined by him according to the historical stage of his time, were progressive and of great benefit at that time (especially compared to the various ignorant and backward tribal religions of that time, and the Christianity, which had been left untouched for a long time and had been instrumentalized by the barbarians who had invaded Rome), and they contributed to the economic and cultural prosperity of the Middle East region. It promoted the economic and cultural prosperity of the Middle East, favored the integration of different ethnic groups through religious beliefs, and protected women, the elderly, and other vulnerable groups. If he had known the present day, he probably would not have been happy to see all kinds of conservative forces using his name and writings to imprison his Muslim brothers and sisters all over the world, but he would have hoped that believers would, like him, be the pioneers of progress in the times, eliminating all kinds of bad habits that run counter to the trend of history, and promoting the development of civilization. Muhammad would be pleased if the Muslims of today could do so.

(It is worth mentioning that among the Islamic-dominated countries in the Middle East and North Africa, Iran is the only one that has deep roots of secularism. Although it is temporarily controlled by the power of the clergy and the Shari'ah law is strict, but the people are secular, progressive and enlightened. Iran's cultural identity, national values, and historical experiences are quite similar to those of China. (However, since the main content of this article is not to discuss Iran and China, I will not go into the details).

The relationship between Han Chinese and other ethnic groups, the absurdity and black-and-white inversion of "anti-Han nationalism" and "Han Chinese making amends for ethnic minorities", and the Han Chinese in central and southern China's quest for rectification and "transitional justice" are only reasonable. It is only reasonable that the Han Chinese in central and southern China should seek to rectify the situation and "transformational justice"

The white-dominated Western countries of Europe, America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand oppose white supremacy and white nationalism, and elevate ethnic minorities and aborigines out of reasons such as atonement for colonialism, which is justified in reason and necessary in reality. In China, however, the Han Chinese were the ones who were oppressed, massacred, and persecuted by the "minorities" such as the Jinn/Manchu, Mongols, and so on, and there is clearly no need for "atonement".

As for the violence of the Han Chinese against the minorities in southern China at some stages of history and in some parts of the country, the level of atrocities was much lower than that of the Jurchen/Manchu and Mongols against the Han Chinese and these minorities, and the vast majority of them have assimilated into the Han Chinese (and not out of violence but out of obedience to reason and morality), and have been educated and baptized into a sincere love for Han civilization, and have identified themselves with it even more than the Han Chinese in the north (including the independent Viet Nam). (including independent Vietnam, which also calls itself "Little China"), there is of course not much need to denounce and "atone" for this history.

On the contrary, the Han Chinese, especially those in central and southern China, need to assert their rights, trace their history, and criticize and counterattack the historical crimes and harms of the Manchus and Mongols like the Whites did under slavery and apartheid, as well as some of the Han Chinese in Beijing and Northeast China with similar values, interests, words and actions, who have been "Manchurianized". (c) To realize "transitional justice" and genuine ethnic equality through crimes and real-life behaviours that hurt interests and feelings.

Moreover, from ancient to modern times, the Han Chinese have been very inclusive, assimilating other ethnic groups (the Han Chinese themselves are an ethnic group with a strong cultural identity rather than a strong bloodline) mainly through their cultural breadth, decent values, profound thinking, and great benefits to agriculture, industry, and business (unlike the West's ethnic evolution, which has been based on the massacre or even extermination of dissidents based on their racial and religious differences). Most of the historical processes dominated by the Han Chinese did not involve massacres of specific ethnic groups (some were acts of retaliation for being massacred, and they were also restrained. And compared to other ethnic groups in the same period, the killing and destruction is much less), war is more class conflict and power struggle between or within the regime.

Under such history and reality, most of the time and under most circumstances, when China talks about "opposing Greater Han nationalism", "Han people making reparations for minorities", and "de-Han centrality", the majority of the time and in most circumstances (with the exception of some of the southwestern ethnic minorities, and specific incidents such as the "re-education camps" in Xinjiang, which required apologies and atonement from only some of the Han Chinese involved, not all of them), it is absurd and completely reverses black and white.

Also, the most populous ethnic group in a country/empire is not necessarily the one that dominates. And an ethnic group that is proportionately in the minority of the population may not be the persecuted and disadvantaged ethnic group. It is a huge misconception that because Han Chinese made up the vast majority of China's population from ancient to modern times until today, that Han Chinese are the ruling class and minorities are the dominated class.

If the majority of the population is the ruling class, then during the caste system in India, during the Muslim and British colonization of India, were the Hindu lower castes and the "untouchables", the colonized people, who made up 90% of the population, the ruling class/ethnic group? Were the Muslim rulers of earlier times, the British, because of their small numbers, the "underprivileged"? This is clearly absurd. The same applies to the relationship between the Han Chinese and the Manchurian Chinese.

Chinese/Han civilization and Western civilization: both are the leaders in rationalism and humanism, the core contributors to human civilization, and have shared mutual benefits throughout history; the achievements of Chinese civilization in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, Korea, Japan, Malaysia and Vietnam, and the Chinese Communist Party's letting Chinese civilization sink is not the fault of Chinese civilization itself; now that Chinese civilization is sinking, there is a greater need to learn from the West and revitalize that part of the traditions that are good to create a new glory of human civilization together

Nowadays, it is obvious that the Western civilization is more superior than the Han civilization. Han civilization once flourished for a long time, when ancient Egypt, ancient Babylon, ancient India, ancient Rome, ancient Greece have sunk, but the Han nation through the pre-Qin, Qin, Han, Tang, Song, Ming, several times sinking and several times revival, even when sinking Han civilization's legacy is also in the official and civil existence everywhere. But later, because of all kinds of external and internal disasters, especially the Manchurian colonial rule for nearly three hundred years, Japan's invasion and destruction, the Chinese Communist Party's rule for decades and especially the destruction of the Maoist era, temporarily sunk. However, the prosperity of Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, which belong to the Chinese cultural circle or are influenced by its radiation, as well as that of South Korea, Japan, Malaysia and Vietnam, reflects the fact that Chinese culture and Han civilization, when not destroyed or negatively distorted, have the great advantage of valuing labor and creativity, promoting rapid economic development and the flourishing of science, education, culture and health, assisting in the governance of the country, constructing the endogenous order of the society, and maintaining the harmony of human beings in the modern peaceful and democratic societies. Great Advantages.

Moreover, the Chinese/Han Chinese are relatively tolerant of disadvantages and respectful of diversity compared to other ethnic groups of other identities and beliefs. Singapore and Taiwan, both Chinese-majority countries/regions, are quite tolerant of ethnic minorities/indigenous people (especially when compared to the policy stance of Southeast Asian countries towards the Chinese). Although Hong Kong is more xenophobic, it is to a large extent a last resort due to its small size and resource constraints, and it does not have a clear system of racial discrimination or systematic xenophobic violence (it does discriminate against mainlanders of the same language and race, which shows that its xenophobia is not based on race). The ancient Han, Tang, Song and Ming dynasties, as well as the modern Republic of China, were also relatively reasonable and lenient in their treatment of minorities and even some of the enemy communities (e.g., Mongols/Tatars).

The CCP regime in mainland China, on the other hand, opposes "Han nationalism" and emphasizes ethnic equality. Its cruelty to some ethnic minorities is not only directed at these minorities, but also at the middle and lower Han Chinese classes (and due to their weak sense of unity and cohesion, and their low "unification value (the priority of being cared for and appeased by the CCP regime)", they tend to be more victimized, and receive less assistance than the ethnic minorities). (and due to their weak sense of unity and cohesion, they have less "unification value (the importance of being cared for and appeased by the CCP regime)" and tend to be more victimized and receive less assistance than ethnic minorities).

Other ethnic groups of other identities and beliefs are mostly less tolerant than the Chinese/Han. I have illustrated this comparison in another article on Xinjiang:

   "Compared with other countries, the relative status of China's dominant ethnic groups and minorities happens to be relatively equal. In many multi-ethnic countries in the world, especially in developing countries, the oppression of disadvantaged ethnic groups by the dominant ethnic groups is obvious and serious.

   In India, since Modi of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power, he has been vigorously promoting Hindu nationalism and Hindu supremacist concepts, oppressing and bullying Muslims, and restricting the autonomy of Muslim-populated areas such as Kashmir;

   In Malaysia, "Malays first" and "Islam as the state religion" are enshrined in the constitution, and Chinese and Indians are second-class citizens;

   In countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar, Sunni Islam is dominant, and the minority Shiites are suppressed, with the Shiites having almost no political power at all (even if they make up 10-20% of the population of Saudi Arabia, etc.), and the latter are not permitted to engage in political activity, and resistance to this is suppressed (including the killing of leading figures);

   In Israel, too, Jews are clearly dominant (in 2018, the Netanyahu-led Israeli government amended the constitution to explicitly refer to Israel as a "Jewish state"), and Arab Israelis are subordinate (not to mention Palestinians who live in Israel without citizenship rights, and Palestinian citizens trapped in the Gaza Strip). Palestinian citizens trapped in the Gaza Strip);

   In countries such as Indonesia, Vietnam, and Cambodia, the dominant ethnic group is also highlighted as inhibiting and assimilating minorities, and often violently cleansing them;

   In countries such as Ethiopia, Nigeria, Sudan, etc., the dominant peoples also persecute the weaker ethnic groups through wars, massacres, and political repression;

   Even in developed countries such as the United States, Japan, and the United Kingdom, there is systematic discrimination against and oppression of minority groups (e.g., Blacks, Ainu, and Catholics in Northern Ireland) (although the level of oppression is lessened nowadays, there are still serious conflicts or controversies)."

In addition, in countries such as Europe and the United States, Chinese tend to be relatively the most law-abiding and virtuous group, with hard work, low crime rates, and low-key lives. Although for various reasons (e.g., some Chinese lived in the mutually harmful society created by the Chinese Communist Party and later immigrated to Europe and the United States), some Chinese/overseas Chinese exhibit some refined self-interested, neighbor-avoidance, and social Darwinist values, they are not the mainstream (at least not for the time being), and they have not always been so. Overall, Chinese in Europe and the United States still contribute more than they get and have more positive than negative impacts on their host societies.

The good qualities of Han civilization, the good virtues of the Han/Chinese people, and especially their tolerance and forbearance towards other ethnic groups, have been greatly neglected. Or the whole Han civilization has been dragged down by the badness of the CCP regime and the ugliness of the Chinese nationals under its influence. Even some of the evils and atrocities committed by the Manchus and other non-Han ethnic groups (or those who are Han by blood but whose values, words and deeds are Manchurianized) have been treated as the work of the Han (e.g., the slaughter of the Jungars, which was treated as the work of the Han by some scholars as mentioned earlier), which is quite a great injustice.

And while it's true that there is a lot of dross in traditional Chinese culture, it only lags behind modern Western civilization, and is still much better compared to other traditional civilizations. Even comparing ancient China to ancient Europe and America, Chinese Han civilization is much superior. Europe in the Middle Ages and the Middle East and North Africa in the past thousand years have been struggling with religious despotism and bloody sectarian feuds for years; the conservative Christianity in the dark Middle Ages was dominated by one family (while the Tang and Song dynasties in China at that time were quite enlightened, with the integration of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism co-existing); India was bound by the caste system, with the untouchables having no personality, and the people being bound by religion and immersed in emptiness or violence, with civilization stagnating for a long period of time; the nomadic people in North Asia were barbaric and brutal and trampled on life and human rights; Japan was a country in which the Chinese civilization was much better than that of other traditional civilizations. trampling on life and human rights; Japan's civilization is narrow and perverted, and under the appearance of civilization progress, it extremely excludes foreigners; the civilization of the Korean Peninsula is mostly learnt from China, and its own creation is limited; Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa were basically in the beginning stage of civilization at that time, and because of their relatively isolated geographic environments, the civilization was backward and slow in development. ......

Therefore, throughout the ancient and modern world, among the major civilizations, only Han civilization is more rational, tolerant and moderate, and also more profound. Most importantly, the Han civilization is a relatively peaceful and constructive civilization, in which people of all statuses and classes, such as soldiers, farmers, industrialists and businessmen, use different forms of labor to promote social prosperity, maintain harmonious interpersonal relationships, and achieve human happiness and well-being. Many other civilizations are less constructive and more destructive/constrictive, and nomadic and fishing and hunting civilizations are mostly aggressive and destructive with little or no construction, and in times of peace their rule is more of a shackle and restraint than an aid to prosperity and development.

Han civilization from pre-Qin to Han, Tang, Song and Ming dynasties is quite similar to modern Western civilization, such as the emphasis on rationalism, secularism, human virtues, social justice and so on. Han civilization was also not overly dogmatic like many religious civilizations, but was constantly reforming and changing (though not always for the better). Even when Confucianism and Confucius were highly revered, Confucianism was not demanded to be followed completely and unswervingly like religion and the Bible, and Confucius' words and deeds did not become oracle-like golden rules. In the European Enlightenment, the sages of the Enlightenment, such as Voltaire, praised China's rule by reason and its secularist society (although it was also denigrated by Montesquieu and others, but to some extent because of China's Manchurian rule at the time, which led to the social ugliness of the hearts and minds of the people. Voltaire's praise was more for the China outside of the Manchu violence, including the old Han China, the part of China not completely destroyed by Manchu oppression), and Han civilization played a large positive role in the Western Enlightenment.

After the founding of the modern era, "Western learning", bitterly feeling the corruption and brutality of the Manchu Qing Dynasty, including some Qing officials, scholars, scholars, such as Guo Songtao, Xu Jiyu, Wei Yuan, Yung Ma-teung, etc., are sighing "the beauty of the Western state and civilization", and believe that it is difficult to find traces of the Confucian sages and philosophers in the Chinese society. The ideals of Confucian sages, which are hard to find in Chinese society, have been realized in the West. Guo Songtao, who served as minister to the United Kingdom, praised the democratic political system, welfare system, and social customs of the United Kingdom and other European countries in his book "Chronicle of the Western Mission". And Xu Jiyu（徐继畲）, who served as a key official in coastal areas such as Fujian and Liangguang, praised Washington in his masterpiece Yinghuan Zhilue（瀛寰志略） (which was engraved on a stone and given to the United States and preserved in the Washington Memorial Museum), which fully reflects the respect of enlightened Chinese scholars at that time for Washington, the leader of the pioneering independent country, as well as the praise for the Western republican system and the desire for democratic politics:

"  Su-Ki-Yu（Xu Jiyu),  by  imperial  appointment,  Lieut.  Governor of  the  Province  of  Fu Jian, in  his  universal Geography  says  :  It  is  evident  that  Washington was  a  remarkable  man.  In  devising  plans, he  was  more  decided  than ChenSheng  or WuGuang, in  winning  a  country,  he  was  braver than Cao Cao or Liu Bei.  Carrying his  four footed  falchion,  he  extended  the  frontiers  thousands of  miles,  and  then  refused  to  usurp  the regal  dignity,  or  transmit  to  his  posterity,  but first  established  rules  for  an  elective  administration. Where  in  the  world  can  be  found  such  a public  spirit  ?  Truly,  the  sentiments  of  the  three dynasties  have  all  at  once  unexpectedly  appeared in  our  day.  In  ruling  the  state,  he  promoted and  fostered  good  customs,  and  did  not  depend on  military  merit.  In  this  he  differed  from  all other  nations.  I  have  seen  his  portrait,  his  air and  form  are  grand  and  imposing  in  a  remarkable degree.  Ah, who  would  not  call  him  a  hero  ? The  United  States  of  America  regard  it  promotive of  national  virtue  generally  and  extensively neither  to  establish  titles  of  nobility  and  royalty nor  to  conform  to  the  age,  as  respects  customs and  public  influence,  but  instead  deliver  over their  own  public deliberations  and  inventions  so that  the  like  of  such  a  nation  one  so  remarkable does  not  exist  in  ancient  or  modern  times. Among  the  people  of  the  Great  West  can  any man,  in  ancient  or  modern  times,  fail  to  pronounce Washington  Peerless?

On the other hand, Westerners who came to China also praised the Chinese people, especially the Han people, for their hard work and resilience. For example, the commander-in-chief of the Eight-Power Allied Forces, Wadesi, wrote in his memoirs:

"All government officials are ignorant of the world situation, corruption is their spirit of corrosion. The royal family also fails to produce uplifted men ...... but the Chinese ...... population of 400 million ...... Chinese people should not be regarded as weak or morally deprived. On the contrary, there is an infinite vitality in them, and they possess incredible virtues such as indolence, hard work, intelligence and ease of governance. In my (Wadesi's) opinion, the physical health of this underclass is far superior to that of the majority of the people in the industrialized areas of our country. If China produces a wise and courageous ruler in the future who is able to take full advantage of the advanced culture that the countries of the world are willing to export to China today, I am sure that China will have a glorious future ......."

Although Wadesi was an aggressor, he spoke quite highly of the Chinese people while maligning the Manchu regime. This kind of overflowing praise has no motive to lie and should be the truth. And other foreign officials, missionaries and travelers in China during the late Qing Dynasty, such as British-born Hurd, a high-ranking official of the Qing court, the missionary Timothy Lee, and Pasteur, the French minister in China, all praised the Chinese, especially the Han Chinese, quite a lot. The fact that the Han Chinese people, after being enslaved by the Manchu Qing Dynasty for more than two hundred years, were still able to hold on to their qualities of diligence and kindness better reflects the greatness and eternity of the Han civilization's tenacious existence under tyranny.

And a series of innovations in the late Qing and early Republican period, no matter the foreign affairs movement, the Hundred Days' Reform, the New Deal in the late Qing, the Three People's Revolutions (a series of revolutions in the late Qing and early Republican period), and the New Culture Movement, all of them glorified learning from the West. And the only counter-current, anti-Western anti-civilization "Boxer Rebellion" occurred, some people in the West, on the contrary, to return the favor, opened universities in China, the development of education, in order to promote the people of the country to get rid of obscurantism, civilization and enlightenment, and to promote exchanges between the East and the West, which is a great achievement. After the outbreak of the war of resistance, western countries actively supported China's war of resistance and played a great role in China's final victory over Japan. For example, Pearl Sai and other international friends who had deep feelings for China, struggled to speak in the United States and other Western countries to raise funds to support China's war of resistance. All these prove that China, especially the Han Chinese, shared the same feelings with the West.

Nowadays, China and the Han Chinese people should learn more from the West, especially when it comes to human rights, science and technology, distribution of benefits, interpersonal relationships, and treatment of the disadvantaged. In the future, the "perversion of China" will be corrected, and the Han civilization, which is broad, moderate, civilized and progressive, will work hand in hand with the Western civilization to bring about the full realization of broad and lasting peace, democracy and progress in the world.

(It should be made clear that the relative advancement of Han and Western civilizations refers to the cultural and value levels that have been gradually developed by the Han and some Western ethnic groups under the influence of external factors such as historical and geographical environments as well as their own efforts, rather than racist, innate, genetic "superiority", "greatness" and "superiority". Nor is nationalism the same as racism. In Han Chinese identity, culture and values also take precedence over blood lineage. Racism, especially racial superiority and pure-bloodedness (similar to the Nazis), should of course be despised).

Conclusion: Civilizations should be evaluated and treated with universal human rights standards, and the cruelty and brutality within civilizations should be emphasized, while non-Western/non-Han civilizations should not be criticized or praised

Of course, "cultural relativism" and "de-Westernization/de-Han-centrification" also have some value in their perspectives and research, and are not worthless. The comparison of different positions and perspectives is conducive to a more comprehensive and objective reflection of history. Listening to different voices is certainly good. However, fundamentally, it over-exalts the standard and positive impact of "non-Western/non-Han" civilizations, while greatly neglecting their negative effects of undermining human rights, destroying and damaging other civilizations, impeding progress, and distorting human civilization. It focuses on equality among "civilizations" and rebellion against Western/Han "hegemony", while ignoring the oppression, barbarism, dross within "civilizations", the killing and maiming and even extermination of Han Chinese and other disadvantaged peoples, as well as the "civilization" of "non-Western/non-Han" civilizations, and the "civilization" of the Han Chinese. The oppression, barbarism, dregs, killing and even extermination of Han Chinese and other disadvantaged peoples within the "civilization", as well as the widespread, prolonged, and very serious killings and injustice in the course of conquests and domination. Very often, the ugliness within these civilizations/countries/systems outweighs the oppression and harm from the outside, especially from the West. Many of the smaller and seemingly weaker communities are actually quite brutal and violent, causing far more harm than the West or the Han. There are also times when members of non-Western civilizations and communities need to be "invaded" and rescued by more advanced civilizations.

All cultures, values, and civilizations should be evaluated neither in a derogatory way because they are different from Western/Han civilizations, nor in an elevated way. It should be evaluated on the basis of whether it is conducive to humane human rights, social progress, productivity and scientific and technological development, economic prosperity, educational, cultural and medical progress, as well as the degree of balanced and inclusive benefits for all people within the civilization, the quality of attitudes and behaviors towards the disadvantaged groups, the degree of real harmony within the community and in the relationship with other communities (rather than "harmony" under violent oppression), and so on. "), etc. Historical civilizations and specific periods of history should be evaluated both in comparison with other civilizations of the same time and in the light of today's universal human rights standards, so that they can be appropriately commented upon, judged, treated.

Wang Qingmin

June 18, 2023

Day of Chariot in Prairial in the year 231 of the Republican Calendar (first draft)

July 2023

Prairial of the 231st Year of the Republican Calendar (Revised)