𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦 retweeted
With intellect like this, how could we not mock them?
Çin toplumu ve kültürü üzerine araştırma yaparken. Milli marşlarının ilk cümlesinin şu ifade ile başladığını öğrendim {Qǐlái! Bù yuàn zuò núlì de rénmen!} Ayağa kalk köle olmayı kabul etmeyenler. Ulan milli marşta bile köle kelimesi geçen bir millet 😂
3
4
146
3,469
For the Chinese, the moon represents space, rockets, civilization, and the future.
For the Turks, the moon represents history and ultimately leads to rape fantasies.
This is the watershed between civilizations.
For the Turks, the moon represents history and ultimately leads to rape fantasies.
This is the watershed between civilizations.
@OopsGuess Moğol dedelerinizin ninelerinize tecavüz ederek sizleri nasil pic melezlere dönüştürdügünden bahsetmiyorsunuz 🤣🤣 bence babalar gününde tüm çinliler Mogolistan'a hediye göndermeli 🤣🤣
2
2
35
873
𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦 retweeted
Yeah, twitter is not a place for people with thin skin, not even the terrorism apologist.
@ibrar_bhatt @SELVATOR2 See what? That you people have been cheerleading terrorists who burned down their home?
0
1
2
408
"The Japan depicted in anime cannot truly be called Japan; it is an idealized utopia."
This is not a contradiction.
It is a clear demarcation.
For many young Chinese today, the "Japan" of the 2D world and the Japan of reality are two entirely different things.
In anime, Japan politicized, often fictional cultural space:
Summer festivals. Cherry blossoms. Trains. School life. Music. Romance.
Reality is different.
Real Japan remains inseparable from the blood of the Nanjing Massacre, the atrocities of Unit 731, colonial aggression, Yasukuni Shrine, distorted history textbooks, the revival of militarism, and the persistent shadow of fascism.
So yes, a Chinese anime fan can watch hundreds of Japanese anime series and still look at the Rising Sun Flag and say:
"Unforgivable."
That is not "nationalism defeating cultural exchange."
It means a new generation of Chinese young people is mature enough to distinguish between creative works, society, the state, and historical responsibility.
In short:
The "anime Japan" I love is not the Japan of reality.
I can love the cherry blossoms, even while fully aware that countless corpses lie buried beneath the trees—and that the blossoms themselves are stained red with blood.
This is not a contradiction.
It is a clear demarcation.
For many young Chinese today, the "Japan" of the 2D world and the Japan of reality are two entirely different things.
In anime, Japan politicized, often fictional cultural space:
Summer festivals. Cherry blossoms. Trains. School life. Music. Romance.
Reality is different.
Real Japan remains inseparable from the blood of the Nanjing Massacre, the atrocities of Unit 731, colonial aggression, Yasukuni Shrine, distorted history textbooks, the revival of militarism, and the persistent shadow of fascism.
So yes, a Chinese anime fan can watch hundreds of Japanese anime series and still look at the Rising Sun Flag and say:
"Unforgivable."
That is not "nationalism defeating cultural exchange."
It means a new generation of Chinese young people is mature enough to distinguish between creative works, society, the state, and historical responsibility.
In short:
The "anime Japan" I love is not the Japan of reality.
I can love the cherry blossoms, even while fully aware that countless corpses lie buried beneath the trees—and that the blossoms themselves are stained red with blood.
2
9
56
1,200
The timing of the New Yalu River Bridge opening is interesting.
It sat finished for 12 years.
Now it opens while:
North Korea is leaning heavily on Russia,
testing missiles across East Asia,
Trump is trying to reopen diplomacy with Kim,
and Washington is distracted elsewhere.
ooks like China and North Korea are getting closer.
I see something else.
Beijing is putting its hand back on the leash.
Russia can give Kim weapons, technology and strategic room.
America can offer talks.
But North Korea’s real economic lifeline still runs through China.
The bridge is not just infrastructure.
It is a reminder:
You can make noise.
You can play Moscow against Beijing.
You can flirt with Washington.
But do not forget who keeps the door open for your country to eat, trade and breathe.
It sat finished for 12 years.
Now it opens while:
North Korea is leaning heavily on Russia,
testing missiles across East Asia,
Trump is trying to reopen diplomacy with Kim,
and Washington is distracted elsewhere.
ooks like China and North Korea are getting closer.
I see something else.
Beijing is putting its hand back on the leash.
Russia can give Kim weapons, technology and strategic room.
America can offer talks.
But North Korea’s real economic lifeline still runs through China.
The bridge is not just infrastructure.
It is a reminder:
You can make noise.
You can play Moscow against Beijing.
You can flirt with Washington.
But do not forget who keeps the door open for your country to eat, trade and breathe.
3
3
45
1,574
So now language proves ancestry?
Fine.
Then Indians, Singaporeans, Nigerians and Filipinos must all be descendants of the British because English is an official language.
Latin Americans must be Spaniards.
Francophone Africans must be French.
A language can survive conquest, migration, empire and political change.
It does not magically turn every later speaker into the biological descendant of whoever spoke it first.
You’re confusing language, ethnicity, dynasty and statehood because your argument collapses the moment they are separated.
And after all this noise about Chinese intelligence, you've managed to demonstrate is that the Turks have an IQ even lower than that of a monkey.
Fine.
Then Indians, Singaporeans, Nigerians and Filipinos must all be descendants of the British because English is an official language.
Latin Americans must be Spaniards.
Francophone Africans must be French.
A language can survive conquest, migration, empire and political change.
It does not magically turn every later speaker into the biological descendant of whoever spoke it first.
You’re confusing language, ethnicity, dynasty and statehood because your argument collapses the moment they are separated.
And after all this noise about Chinese intelligence, you've managed to demonstrate is that the Turks have an IQ even lower than that of a monkey.
Aslında bu yazılan paragraf direkt yansıtma psikoloji ve bunu kimse farketmemiş herkes gönderiyi beğenmiş 😀😀 Çinli demiş ki:
"imparatorluğu patlayınca acilen geçici bir kimlik kartı uydurup kendine sahte ata arayan..."
Güleceğiniz bir şey yazayım,bu ülke Türkiye değil, 1912 yılındaki Çin'in ta kendisi Aslında 😃😃😃
Maymuna anlatır gibi her şeyi Çinlilere anlatacağım ki iyi anlasınlar:
Atatürk doğmadan 450 yıl önce 1420'lerde Osmanlı Padişahı II. Murad Oğuzname yazdırarak Osmanlı hanedanının Orta Asya'dan gelen Oğuz Türklerinin Kayı boyu olduğunu kayıt altına aldırdı ve topların üstüne Kayı damgası vurdurdu. 1473'te Fatih Sultan Mehmed Otlukbeli zaferinden sonra Doğu'ya gönderdiği Fetihname'yi bizzat Uygur alfabesi ve Çağatay Türkçesiyle yazdı. 1893'te Moğolistan'daki 8. yüzyıl Orhun Yazıtları okunduğunda ise bunu İstanbul'da büyük bir gururla kitaplaştırıp yayınlayan bizzat Osmanlı Padişahı II. Abdülhamid dönemi aydınlarıydı. Çünkü 732 yılında Bilge Kağan'ın Moğolistan'da taşa kazıdığı Türkçe sayılar, zamirler, fiiller ve dilbilgisi ile bugün Anadolu'daki bir çocuğun konuştuğu Türkçe birebir aynı dil idi ve bu bizim için çok büyük bir keşifti. Fakat güncel olarak Çin'e bakarsak bugünlerde Pekin'de yaşayan bir Çinli 732 yılındaki Tang başkenti Chang'an'a gitse tek bir cümleyi bile anlayamaz çünkü kuzey şiveniz Kitan, Cürçen, Moğol ve Mançu istilalarıyla bozularak Mandarin haline geldi.
Avrupa haritalarında Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'nun adı 700 yıl boyunca zaten Türkiye İmparatorluğu olarak geçiyordu ve 1876 Osmanlı Anayasası Kanun-i Esasi'nin 18. maddesinde devletin resmi dilinin Türkçe olduğu açıkça yazılıydı.
İmemparatorluğu yıkılınca sahte kimlik kartı uyduran bizzat sizsiniz Çinliler. 1902 yılından önce tarihte
Zhonghua Minzu diye bir kavram yoktu 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Sun Yat-sen ilk başta "Tatar barbarları kovun" diyordu ancak 1912'de Mançu Qing yıkılınca baktınız ki sadece Han Çinlisi kimliğiyle kalırsanız Mançu efendilerinizin fethettiği Mançurya, Moğolistan, Doğu Türkistan ve Tibet elden gidecek hepinizin götü tutuştu. Liang Qichao'nun uydurduğu Zhonghua Minzu geçici kimlik kartına sarılıp sizi 268 yıl saç kuyruğuyla kırbaçlayan Mançu köle efendilerinizi ve Moğolları bir gecede kardeş ve ata ilan ettiniz 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Evet Çinlilere gülün çünkü bunu yaptılar. Han Çinlileri onları kırbaçlayan ve köleleştiren kişileri kabul etmek zorunda kaldılar 😀😀😀
2
11
89
1,895
A Turkish clown says:
“Chinese products are cheap and low quality.”
Then a Chinese netizen tries to boycott Turkish goods, searches his entire house, finally finds a souvenir crystal ball bought in Istanbul—
Made in China.
Meanwhile, Chinese factories have already turned the entire online feud into T-shirts, pillows and meme merchandise.
This is the funniest part:
You provide the outrage.
China provides the supply chain.
Even your resistance to “Made in China” is made in China. 😂
“Chinese products are cheap and low quality.”
Then a Chinese netizen tries to boycott Turkish goods, searches his entire house, finally finds a souvenir crystal ball bought in Istanbul—
Made in China.
Meanwhile, Chinese factories have already turned the entire online feud into T-shirts, pillows and meme merchandise.
This is the funniest part:
You provide the outrage.
China provides the supply chain.
Even your resistance to “Made in China” is made in China. 😂
阿基米德曾经说过，给我一个支点，我可以撬起整个地球。给我们中国一天时间，我们就能产出辱土耳其表情包和各种丰富实体周边。
4
18
260
16,940
𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦 retweeted
阿基米德曾经说过，给我一个支点，我可以撬起整个地球。给我们中国一天时间，我们就能产出辱土耳其表情包和各种丰富实体周边。
听说土耳其要抵制中国货，我很生气😡，我也要抵制土耳其产品
翻遍全家 ，终于找到一个从伊斯坦布尔买的纪念水晶球
丢到垃圾桶的瞬间看到底座写着 made in china
不是，我连反击的资格都没有吗？😭
x.com/p1mplecs/statu…
134
226
3,654
170,559
I understand why she feels hurt.
She has lived in China for years, loves the country, has Chinese friends, and now feels that affection has been thrown back in her face.
But if you truly understand China, you should also understand the two things Chinese people will never treat as casual internet banter:
historical memory
and territorial integrity.
China is a civilization that went from centuries of power and prosperity, through invasion, occupation, humiliation and national disintegration, and then rebuilt itself from the ruins.
That history is not decoration.
It is part of the psychological architecture of the country.
Chinese people know what happens when a nation allows its history to be rewritten, its collective memory to be hollowed out, and its territorial identity to be treated as negotiable.
So when Turkish trolls tell Uyghurs that they are not Chinese, encourage separatism in Xinjiang, rewrite Chinese history, invoke Unit 731 as a racial taunt, and turn Japanese invasion into material for humiliation, they are not touching some random internet sensitivity.
They are walking directly onto the deepest historical wounds of the country.
You may dislike the response.
You may think it is too harsh.
But once your side chooses the red line, you do not also get to choose how comfortable the backlash must be for you.
You cannot provoke China at the exact points where its historical trauma and territorial integrity meet—
and then reduce the reaction to “Chinese trolls became irrational.”
It is not China that you love;
you only love the version of China that remains comfortable for you.
She has lived in China for years, loves the country, has Chinese friends, and now feels that affection has been thrown back in her face.
But if you truly understand China, you should also understand the two things Chinese people will never treat as casual internet banter:
historical memory
and territorial integrity.
China is a civilization that went from centuries of power and prosperity, through invasion, occupation, humiliation and national disintegration, and then rebuilt itself from the ruins.
That history is not decoration.
It is part of the psychological architecture of the country.
Chinese people know what happens when a nation allows its history to be rewritten, its collective memory to be hollowed out, and its territorial identity to be treated as negotiable.
So when Turkish trolls tell Uyghurs that they are not Chinese, encourage separatism in Xinjiang, rewrite Chinese history, invoke Unit 731 as a racial taunt, and turn Japanese invasion into material for humiliation, they are not touching some random internet sensitivity.
They are walking directly onto the deepest historical wounds of the country.
You may dislike the response.
You may think it is too harsh.
But once your side chooses the red line, you do not also get to choose how comfortable the backlash must be for you.
You cannot provoke China at the exact points where its historical trauma and territorial integrity meet—
and then reduce the reaction to “Chinese trolls became irrational.”
It is not China that you love;
you only love the version of China that remains comfortable for you.
56
49
742
40,954
I think this goes beyond her simply "suspecting the presence of Chinese 'troll farms'"; rather, she has begun to use the idea that "these people might not be real" as a defense mechanism to protect her existing worldview.
Because if she were to accept the reality—that these he genuine sentiments of ordinary Chinese people—she would simultaneously have to confront a far more uncomfortable truth: the China she knows, likes, and has lived in for so long is not the same as a China that is perpetually gentle, always welcoming, and one that would never push back against her home country in defense of its own history and national interests.
Consequently, the easiest psychological escape route is to claim:
"These people might be bots."
"This could be coordinated harassment."
"The 'real' Chinese people aren't like this."
Yet, this is a classic trope within Western narratives:
When Chinese people are viewed favorably, they are seen as charming, ordinary individuals.
But the moment they express political will that falls outside the Western "comfort zone," they are suddenly recast as robots, paid trolls, or manipulated accounts.
At this point, her underlying perspective is laid bare.
What she truly appreciates is a China that provides her with friendship, life experiences, a sense of cultural belonging, and a feeling of security.
But when Chinese people begin to act based on their own national memory, territorial integrity, and national interests—rather than prioritizing her personal feelings—she suddenly begins to question whether these people are even "real."
This, in itself, speaks volumes:
She is capable of accepting China as a space in which to live.
But she cannot accept China as a political community that possesses its own will, its own "red lines," and its own distinct ways of expressing anger.
And yet, both of these aspects are, in fact, one and the same China.
Because if she were to accept the reality—that these he genuine sentiments of ordinary Chinese people—she would simultaneously have to confront a far more uncomfortable truth: the China she knows, likes, and has lived in for so long is not the same as a China that is perpetually gentle, always welcoming, and one that would never push back against her home country in defense of its own history and national interests.
Consequently, the easiest psychological escape route is to claim:
"These people might be bots."
"This could be coordinated harassment."
"The 'real' Chinese people aren't like this."
Yet, this is a classic trope within Western narratives:
When Chinese people are viewed favorably, they are seen as charming, ordinary individuals.
But the moment they express political will that falls outside the Western "comfort zone," they are suddenly recast as robots, paid trolls, or manipulated accounts.
At this point, her underlying perspective is laid bare.
What she truly appreciates is a China that provides her with friendship, life experiences, a sense of cultural belonging, and a feeling of security.
But when Chinese people begin to act based on their own national memory, territorial integrity, and national interests—rather than prioritizing her personal feelings—she suddenly begins to question whether these people are even "real."
This, in itself, speaks volumes:
She is capable of accepting China as a space in which to live.
But she cannot accept China as a political community that possesses its own will, its own "red lines," and its own distinct ways of expressing anger.
And yet, both of these aspects are, in fact, one and the same China.
@YinQiao4a@WhileTravelling, this is no longer a debate about facts.
I have already distinguished her good intentions from the attacks launched by those Turkish accounts, and I have explicitly acknowledged that she should not be held responsible for the actions of others.
Yet, she keeps steering the focuI’ve been hurt by Chinese netizens," "these accounts might be bots," and "why can’t both sides just stop?" This reveals that what she truly seeks is not an understanding of why Chinese people are provoked by such content, but rather to get people to admit that her moral judgment on this conflict is the correct one.
And I do not accept that.
She is free to believe that some of the counter-responses have gone too far.
I, for my part, maintain that issues like Unit 731, the earthquake, the stigmatization during the pandemic, and the calls for territorial fragmentation are not merely internet memes.
These two perspectives do not need to be forcibly reconciled.
Her final decision to block me actually brings a clean end to the matter: there is no longer any need for further explanation or proof, nor do I have to continue managing her expectation—the idea that "because I love China, Chinese netizens should respond in a way that makes *me* feel comfortable."
Some disagreements cannot be resolved simply by writing another three thousand words.
What she seeks is validation; what I offer is an explanation.
From the very beginning, these two things have never been the same.
40
14
299
9,319
China’s message is pretty clear:
“National security” is not a free pass for discriminatory trade policy against a specific country.
You do not get to target normal investment and commercial cooperation, wrap it in a security label, and pretend it is neutral policy.
And the na will take necessary measures to protect its legitimate rights and interests.
Translation:
You are not the only country with tools for a trade war.
“National security” is not a free pass for discriminatory trade policy against a specific country.
You do not get to target normal investment and commercial cooperation, wrap it in a security label, and pretend it is neutral policy.
And the na will take necessary measures to protect its legitimate rights and interests.
Translation:
You are not the only country with tools for a trade war.
The funniest line in this entire proposal is this:
“retaining, and in some cases regaining, American leadership in biotechnology.”
Regaining leadership — by restricting investment, transactions and access to the very ecosystem that has already pulled ahead of you?
China moves S. screams, “Stop it!”
You lost to China not because China cheated.
You lost to it because it is more focused than you.
If the United States has lost ground in biotechnology, the answer is better science, better talent, faster commercialization and stronger industrial capacity.
Protection can slow a competitor.
It cannot manufacture superiority.
8
35
197
4,106
If Confucius is really this dangerous, I have one question:
Why hasn’t China conquered the universe yet?
Apparently a philosopher who died 2,500 years ago can still infiltrate American minds, threaten the Pentagon, undermine universities and endanger national security.
At this point, Confucius is less a philosopher than an intercontinental cognitive weapon.
And somehow China forgot to use him for galactic expansion.
Imagine possessing a 2,500-year-old mind-control superweapon and still wasting time building aircraft carriers.
Why hasn’t China conquered the universe yet?
Apparently a philosopher who died 2,500 years ago can still infiltrate American minds, threaten the Pentagon, undermine universities and endanger national security.
At this point, Confucius is less a philosopher than an intercontinental cognitive weapon.
And somehow China forgot to use him for galactic expansion.
Imagine possessing a 2,500-year-old mind-control superweapon and still wasting time building aircraft carriers.
@SecWarus lived 2,500 years ago.
Now the Pentagon says Chinese language programs can “infiltrate minds” and threaten U.S. national security.
Fine. Then American AI, Hollywood, Disney, universities, NGOs and social media should be national security threats everywhere else too.
When America shapes foreign minds, it’s called “soft power.”
When China does it, it’s called “infiltration.”
That is not principle, it is monopoly.
2
11
79
1,888