Notions of race in an East Asian centric world

Say East Asia ends up as the dominate region of the world as opposed to Europe

What would the notions and concepts of race in an East Asian centric world
 
It is arguable that western notions of race had their origins in Aristotle's writings on barbarians. The Spartan's views on helots plus the Arab's views on black slaves can both be seen as examples of 'proto-racism' that influenced western thought on race. With that said, the Spanish notion of Limpieza de Sangre I think would be the ultimate origin of racism in the west. This combined with the Atlantic slave trade.

I do believe East Asians could develop their own analogue to racism. A world in which Asians are dominant could quickly develop into notions of Asians being superior culturally, and perhaps by extension, biologically.

I think that a society that starts off with the idea that people are lesser because of how they act can very quickly develop notions of inane inferiority. 'They are inferior to us not of what they do, but who they are.' This is how racial antisemitism came into existence, as well as the Spanish's racism. I don't think it is much of a stretch for Asians to come up with similar ideas.
 
It might be more based on cultural stereotypes with the at least nominal implication that anyone of any racial background can be "civilized". So the racial hierarchy would appear like this:

1) Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese/Annamese, anyone which adopted Chinese civilization wholesale are deemed "civilized" (化人). Everyone else are barbarians by implication.

1.5) Siamese, Javanese, Khmer, etc, since they have been more strongly influenced by the "civilized" peoples, have many "civilized" peoples living there, and their royalty often have "civilized" ancestry. If any of them were to Sinify wholesale they might graduate to 1).

2) Indians, since they gave birth to the sacred teaching of Buddhism. Unfortunately for them, Buddhism has a reputation among "civilized" peoples as promoting laziness, and the supposed economic backwardness of India (cause in no small part by Chinese economic imperialism) is blamed on both the teaching and the peoples' inferiority.

Also 2) Iranians and "Romans" (could refer to all white Christians) had been respected as venerable cultures by Chinese scholars for centuries. If one of these countries does a "Meiji", it might be seen as "honourary civilized" similar to how Japan became an "honourary white" country.

3) Arabs were despised by all the 2) peoples as marauding barbarians, but their contribution to culture and science are a small point in their favour.

Also 3) the more organized empires of the Americas, assuming they survive first contact. Maybe the first Japanese Samurai who explores the Inca empire would be struck by the similarities with his own country and greet its Emperor almost like his own. Unfortunately, the fact that a huge proportion of their population quickly died to Old World diseases is proof of their biological inferiority and why they're not in 2).

4) Sub-Saharan Africans, who were already despised by Arabs as slaves. The less organized tribes of the Americas and Australia, since their apparent lack of any agricultural activity is supposed proof of their inferiority.

Overall it might not be too different from the European notions of race, in that it's mostly driven by experiences of colonialism and imperialism, with explanations for "biological inferiority" a result of their own actions.
 
No matter what, the fundamental distinction would be between the civilized East Asians and everyone else.

It depends on the dynasty, but a world dominated by a Han-ruled China, like some incarnation of the Song, would tend towards a more European-like view of race, in which non-East Asian peoples are virtually biologically inferior, uncivilizable, unsavalgeable (this was how the Ming elite viewed the Mongols, and why they were so reluctant about making peace with the Mongols; they didn't believe the Mongols had the humanity necessary to honor peace treaties). A world dominated by a Chinese dynasty founded by foreigners (say an alt-Qing) would tend towards a more cultural view of "race" in which East Asia has a mission civilisatrice towards the many barbarian peoples of the world, since this was actually how the Qing justified their control of China -- by pointing out that Chinese and Confucian civilization had reached its furthest geographical extent under the Qing, despite their admittedly barbarian origins.
 
It does depend how specifically the Chinese imperialism is carried out. I'm working on a TL where the Emperor grants one of his annoying eunuchs a monopoly to trade with all the barbarians west of Malacca, with a home port at Canton. At the time, no one realizes the Canton West Ocean Company (廣州西洋會社) would become a globe-spanning empire that would form colonies as far away as Argentina and bully rulers as far as Venice.

The CWOC submits an annual report to the Emperor where, in order to keep his good graces, it professes how well it is civilizing barbarians (and bringing gold into the Imperial coffers needed to keep the trains running and the workers quiet). In reality of course it's as ruthless and profit-seeking as our world's European empires. However, the Emperor chooses to buy into the story of the mission civilisatrice since it's working well for everyone. This becomes the official policy for imperialism and hence the official worldview towards the "barbarians".
 
There would need to be more specifics to be sure, but nations like China had Sinocentrism for a very long time, only truly disproven in 1895 with the war with Japan. Considering this, there would be a view of western barbarians by most Asians, however, there would either be more hatred or respect for other East Asians. Africa might be seen as a vast land unknown and fascinating for the Asian civilizations. Native Americans might be viewed as mysterious people along with Africans. Indians most likely viewed as equals, Siberians would be seen as sub-human, Arabs as a mystic ultra-religious people, Persians as equals I'm guessing, and Turkestani and Kazaks as barbarians as well.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Even in an Asian dominated World,the desire for sharp features would be greater. So in an Asian dominated World too,after the World has advanced to a stage which we haven't reached yet,more people would get Caucasian or sharper features in the Transhumanist era. Race relations would be better in a Asian dominated World due to the fact that Asians are far more greater number than Europeans. Even if Caucasians were in a larger number as in the other ATLs I talked about previously,race relations would be better with no Third Reich/WW2/WW1,etc. But that's for an another thread.
But yes,beautiful and good features in the Asian race too would be incorporated with the good Caucasian features like sharper features. In OTL itself,let us wait for 20-30 years when the Transhumanist era comes and we will see how this would turn out.
 
Race relations would be better in a Asian dominated World due to the fact that Asians are far more greater number than Europeans.
So there would be better race relations because asian supremacy is more sustainable than white supremacy?

race relations would be better with no Third Reich/WW2/WW1,etc.
This would seem to imply that Asians are incapable of comprable barbarism.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
So there would be better race relations because asian supremacy is more sustainable than white supremacy?


This would seem to imply that Asians are incapable of comprable barbarism.
That's not what I meant. Asians lived in places with conducive climate and for the most part secure and hence empires dominant from there would not feel as insecure as European Empires felt as the White population was and is not very high in the World's share. If Whites had been the dominant race in East,South and Central Asia,they would have been more peaceful. Alternatively if the more numerous Asians were dominant in the World,this wouldn't have happened to this extent too.
 
Last edited:
It is arguable that western notions of race had their origins in Aristotle's writings on barbarians. The Spartan's views on helots plus the Arab's views on black slaves can both be seen as examples of 'proto-racism' that influenced western thought on race. With that said, the Spanish notion of Limpieza de Sangre I think would be the ultimate origin of racism in the west. This combined with the Atlantic slave trade.

I do believe East Asians could develop their own analogue to racism. A world in which Asians are dominant could quickly develop into notions of Asians being superior culturally, and perhaps by extension, biologically.

I think that a society that starts off with the idea that people are lesser because of how they act can very quickly develop notions of inane inferiority. 'They are inferior to us not of what they do, but who they are.' This is how racial antisemitism came into existence, as well as the Spanish's racism. I don't think it is much of a stretch for Asians to come up with similar ideas.

While all the proto-racist ideas you mention existed indeed and influenced the formation of European racism, there's a leap in the 19th century Western thought on the matter: racism turned from biological prejudice with a veneer of (pseudo-)scientific legitimacy to a full-blown (pseudo-)scientific category central to the Western understanding of history, culminating with the bizarre concept of the "Aryan" race. This was not the inevitable of reading the proto-racist passages by Aristotle or the Arab physicians and physiognomists, and not even the invetiable outcome of the Limpieza de sangre ideology (though it was closer). It is certainly possible for East Asian to develop equivalents (it happened in Japan IOTL, though under Western influence); but they also might stick a more clearly culturally oriented view of their dominance, which, incidentally, is what Chinese thought tended to do IOTL for a long time.
 
Gurps AE 2 has the Ming timeline, where the Chinese dominate the world. But any white/black/native American guy who has studied Chinese culture is accepted as a civilized man.
 
Even in an Asian dominated World,the desire for sharp features would be greater. So in an Asian dominated World too,after the World has advanced to a stage which we haven't reached yet,more people would get Caucasian or sharper features in the Transhumanist era. Race relations would be better in a Asian dominated World due to the fact that Asians are far more greater number than Europeans. Even if Caucasians were in a larger number as in the other ATLs I talked about previously,race relations would be better with no Third Reich/WW2/WW1,etc. But that's for an another thread.
But yes,beautiful and good features in the Asian race too would be incorporated with the good Caucasian features like sharper features. In OTL itself,let us wait for 20-30 years when the Transhumanist era comes and we will see how this would turn out.

Why would there be a desire for sharper features in an East Asian dominated world? The standard of beauty would be East Asians and while even in antiquity pale skin was considered a mark of high status, no such ancient praise exists for sharp features. The only reason why white facial features are so popular today is because of colonialism. Without European colonialism, whites don't have a higher status and Chinese facial features would be considered more attractive.

I think there would be a general racial sense that East Asians, specifically Han Chinese would be superior, though there might be a greater emphasis on culture instead of bloodline. Of course there's not that big of a jump between "it's our culture that makes us better" to "it's our genetics that make us better. The Chinese already had a sense of race back in at least 836 CE. Lu Chun, the governor of Canton outlawed interracial marriage and banned foreigners from owning property when he saw a number of interracial relationships between typically Chinese women and Middle Eastern men.
 
Last edited:

Albert.Nik

Banned
Why would there be a desire for sharper features in an East Asian dominated world? The standard of beauty would be East Asians and while even in antiquity pale skin was considered a mark of high status, no such ancient praise exists for sharp features. The only reason why white facial features are so popular today is because of colonialism. Without European colonialism, whites don't have a higher status and Chinese facial features would be considered more attractive.

I think there would be a general racial sense that East Asians, specifically Han Chinese would be superior, though there might be a greater emphasis on culture instead of bloodline. Of course there's not that big of a jump between "it's our culture that makes us better" to "it's our genetics that make us bettwr
I am not saying that Asians aren't attractive. But Caucasians have a genetic edge here because Humans tend to go by clear and sharp facial and body features for decoding on attractiveness. Yes there maybe exceptions but this is the norm. Intelligence wise,Asians and Whites have the same as both evolved in similar conditions. So a few good aspects of Asian features and features from other races as well will be taken but base will be Caucasian only in all probability in the Transhumanist era.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Ancient praise for sharp features does exist. The Byzantine Greeks have praised the Caucasoid Hepthalite Huns in South Central Asia compared to the pure East Asian Huns as I read somewhere.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
The only reason why Caucasian or Caucasoid features are deemed more attractive is due to only one reason in the biological realm. It is because Eyes,Noses,Lips,Head features are more visible and ordered. It is not due to anything else. Asians are attractive no doubt. But Caucasian features have this edge for now. However in the Transhumanist era,something even more attractive than Caucasian features might be the norm and accordingly preferences would vary accordingly.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
The Qing exterminated an entire race out of paranoia...
I stand informed since that post was made. I was only half right. If the Asians were as dominant as Rome and Indo-European empires though OTL they were never were,they might have absorbed the the surrounding peoples as it happened in Europe. Because of abundance of resources in Asia and the vast territory Asians have in control then and now,the Wars in Europe that took place wouldn't have happened to that intensity in the homeland. Alternatively if Europeans had been dominant in China(Kushans/Tocharians/Iranians),Central Asia,India,North Africa and Middle East as they were in ancient era,in this case too,the wars wouldn't have happened as well. Give global superiority to a race but make that race dominant and stable numerically too. Europeans or Asians,if hit this combination can make the World more peaceful in any given timeline. But once choice of features is available, Caucasian features will win anyway.
 
The position of blacks varies dramatically depending on the kinds of blacks.

Han Chinese recognized Kunlun from varies places in Southeast, South Asia and East Africa from Somalia down to Madagascar.

The position is one of their social inferiority to Han Chinese but also a flexible one given time period and ethnic group.

There's a free paper on this topic on the internet.

The Magical Kunlun and “Devil Slaves”: Chinese Perceptions of Dark-skinned People and Africa before 1500 by Julie Wilensky
 
Last edited:
Top