> I agree with the general premise that China is way more unified than Europe. In some respects, moreso than the US due to the lack of federalism and the 90%+ Han majority.
In some ways yes, in some ways no? How do Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, and until recently, Hong Kong fit into your theory? In Europe, they don't have 're-education' camps; on the other hand, they also aren't trying to impose a strong central government (the EU is nothing like Chinese central government).
Europe mostly has a unified alphabet, and words are often mutually recognizeable - not the same as China, but not nothing.
> I agree with the general premise that China is way more unified than Europe. In some respects, moreso than the US due to the lack of federalism and the 90%+ Han majority.
In some ways yes, in some ways no? How do Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, and until recently, Hong Kong fit into your theory? In Europe, they don't have 're-education' camps; on the other hand, they also aren't trying to impose a strong central government (the EU is nothing like Chinese central government).
Europe mostly has a unified alphabet, and words are often mutually recognizeable - not the same as China, but not nothing.