TV Tropes Org

Forums

On-Topic Conversations:
Taiwan's Independence
search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [1,137]  1 ... 14 15 16 17 18
19
20 21 22 23 24 ... 46

Taiwan's Independence:

 451 Derelict Vessel, Sat, 2nd Jun '12 7:23:47 PM from the Ocean Blue
Flying Dutchman
Not being recognized by the UN is actually a Big Deal, you know, even if the UN isn't a supranational government. For one, I think it screws up your trade enormously. That is to say, while the Taiwanese economy is good, I imagine it would be much better off if it were a UN-recognized nation with formal relations with all other UN-recognized nations.
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 452 Cassie, Sat, 2nd Jun '12 7:37:50 PM from Malaysia, but where?
The armored raven
The Greens want you Westerners to think that way. While being crowned with a UN status makes you an officially regarded nation, that's not what all Chinese want. That's seperation with specific violation of the One China Policy. Taiwan never needed a UN status to begin with in order to conduct trade, and I don't know what's the deal with you people confusing China for being an oppressor who wants Taiwan to sit on the chairs all day long.

China didn't want Taiwan to visit prominently because Chen (the Green) wanted other countries to back its seperatism plans. Now that Chen is stuck in bribery conviction, China has been VERY gentle as of late
What profit is it to a man, when he gains his money, but loses his internet? Anonymous 16:26 I believe...
 453 Derelict Vessel, Sat, 2nd Jun '12 7:42:49 PM from the Ocean Blue
Flying Dutchman
The Greens want you Westerners to think that way. While being crowned with a UN status makes you an officially regarded nation, that's not what all Chinese want. That's seperation with specific violation of the One China Policy. Taiwan never needed a UN status to begin with in order to conduct trade, and I don't know what's the deal with you people confusing China for being an oppressor who wants Taiwan to sit on the chairs all day long.

Well, the One China concept is kind of... odd-ball. What would happen if the majority of Taiwanese decided over time that they were to be Taiwanese, and their time identifying as Chinese was over? Shall we simply sit back and watch China take them over anyhow?

I acknowledge that they do not need UN independent status nor formal international recognition to conduct trade, but I very much so think it would be much simpler and easier for them to do their thing if they had those recognitions. Whether or not that has substantial value to them is obviously their own issue to consider.
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 454 Joesolo, Sat, 2nd Jun '12 7:44:43 PM Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Indiana Solo
[up][up] China's only gentle when Taiwan does what they want. Remember when they started mobilizing right before an election to try and intimidate the voters?
I am going to shove the sunshine so far up where the sun don't shine that you will vomit nothing but warm summer days -Belkar
@ Derelict

Regardless of our morality, we probably would sit back and let it happen. It's China. What are you really going to do? We can't even step into Syria, let alone touch China. But, I don't think this situation will arise in the next 50 years.

But the thing is, I was attacked for talking about "hypotheticals" in this thread, and I feel the other side of the argument should face the same reality. If I can't talk about the hypothetical refusal of Western nations to accept home-grown separatist movements, I don't think it fair for you to bring up the hypothetical "they want to identify as Taiwanese and separate as an independent nation".

@ Raven

It's not really that lawless, I think you're ignoring something we have in the international realm; laws. I'm quite serious though, aside from my joking tone in writing that but there is an official method upon which one is recognised as a nation.

So in the "lawless anarchy" of international politics, the only people saying Taiwan is "already" a nation are the ones who say it is a nation. Well, that's actually kinda how it works. You become a nation through reciprocal agreements to recognise each other as one.

 456 Derelict Vessel, Mon, 4th Jun '12 12:06:53 AM from the Ocean Blue
Flying Dutchman
Regardless of our morality, we probably would sit back and let it happen. It's China. What are you really going to do? We can't even step into Syria, let alone touch China. But, I don't think this situation will arise in the next 50 years.

I don't know that we'd have to fire a shot to stop a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. We'd merely have to consider economic suicide. If nothing else, that is why nothing will come of the Taiwan dispute. We are in an economic Mexican standoff with China.

But the thing is, I was attacked for talking about "hypotheticals" in this thread, and I feel the other side of the argument should face the same reality. If I can't talk about the hypothetical refusal of Western nations to accept home-grown separatist movements, I don't think it fair for you to bring up the hypothetical "they want to identify as Taiwanese and separate as an independent nation".

I did not attack you for talking about hypothetical situations.

I personally accept or reject separatist movements contextually based on their merits as movements. In Taiwan's case, I accept that their objections to the current Chinese government are valid, and thus that they should not be forced to go back to China at the current time.

"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

Well then that makes it easier, so I would say that the current popular opinion of the Taiwanese reflects their uncertainty about the future of the Chinese government. On one hand, if there is a continued liberalisation of mainland China, it makes going a separate way less and less practical. Afterall, what would be the point except to spite the mainlanders? But, if mainland China's progress stagnates and Taiwan becomes more democratic, then there is no reason to go back to a potentially worse situation. And of course, they also think about Hong Kong and Macao, will China honour the two-system rule? If so, then maybe they should just join back and end the military standoff. It's not free afterall.

Raven Wilder
International laws, including the ones for determining which governments are legitimate or not, don't have an enforcement mechanism, other than a sort of mob justice. And a law that's not enforced isn't really a law; like the Pirate's Code, international laws are "more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules".
"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko
Unchanging Avatar.
Speaking of Hong Kong, it appears its people aren't very happy at the moment. In addition to economic issues, there's a rising sentiment that China's eroding civil liberties.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.
Think most of the posters here are Taiwanese, either in Taiwan or the USA.
 
Well it's an American-based site, so that would make sense.

Unchanging Avatar.
It's probably plurality but not majority American.

I doubt it's majority Taiwanese, ethnicity or nationality.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.
^Yeah. The thing is you only see one side of the story, so to speak. Cassie's posts would probably be closer to what more mainlander chinese would think.

EDIT: I think a decent portion of the posters here are Taiwanese, either in Taiwan or the US/Canada.

edited 4th Jun '12 8:45:25 PM by revolutionincyberspace

 
 464 Derelict Vessel, Mon, 4th Jun '12 8:57:10 PM from the Ocean Blue
Flying Dutchman
I am not ethnically Taiwanese, myself.
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

^okay then. also some things to respond to:

Only just. I've heard that some historians think if the Bejing army units had been sent it, they're could have been an out right revolution and civil war.

Weren't the Beijing army units sent in first, but the protesters talked to them and then turned them around as the soldiers were all local conscripts who knew the crowd?

EDIT:

Quebec was kept within Canada through all the means from economic incentives to martial law and mass arrest security sweeps. There's hardly anybody complaining about the sudden destruction of civil rights when it suits us.

Mass security sweeps? Mass arrests? You referring ot the 1970 incident with FLQ blowing up stuff? I didnt hear of mass arrest of french-speaking Quebecois.

EDIT: When did the Canadian government move non-Quebecois into Quebec intentionally to oppose separatism. That seemed to be a side-effect of the Canadian immigration policies and not something intentionally practiced by the central government to prevent secessionist votes. Also, political incentives is not as morally questionable as force; lol.

. I just dislike people who pretend that they're okay with separatist movements until it's their backyard.
You have a luxury of blindly going for separatist or independence movements because it's not your backyard and it's not your family. You aren't the one that has to live with separated relatives because of an idiotic civil war and you aren't the one that has to live with a nation divided in a globalised world.

Honestly re. the "would you tolerate a Divided Statesof America" honestly YES I would.

And yes, in such a hypothetical scenario as the collapse of the US, I -would- personally be involved with the aftermath of a series of separatist movements which would have happened as my family would end up in multiple successor-states.

Personally I'd be happy with the dissolution of the American Empire, and for self-determination for all races, nations and people. Republic of New Afrika, fuck yeah :D

EDIT: And most of the other people pro-separatists would likely have the same response re. separatists in their country. Self-determination is not limited to just foreigners. International Law has steadily moved in the favor of acknowledging self-determination and anti-colonialism, and now with the collapse of U.S.S.R. has shown that ethnic self-determination is a force which is not dying any time soon (yes I know collapse of USSR was more complicated than 'ethnic nationalism rises again' - i.e. most soviet republics voting to stay in USSR minus the Baltics ans Georgia).

edited 4th Jun '12 10:11:28 PM by revolutionincyberspace

 
 466 truteal, Mon, 4th Jun '12 9:55:08 PM from the great southern land
animation elitist
Who would benefit more from reunification, China or Taiwan?

It would depend on what kind of political system it would have. A Communist dictatorship like the mainland or a democracy like Taiwan (if they chose Communist dictatorship, The Taiwanese people would suffer like their mainland brothers)

What reasons does the U.S. (among other countries) have to support Taiwan's existence?

Because it's the right thing to do, plus Taiwan is the lesser of two evils

And finally, do you support Taiwan's independence?

Yes (last time I checked, Taiwan was a democracy but I may be wrong on this)

@ revolutionincyberspace

There was a lot of internal political change going on due to the protests in China, which is why they even lasted so long but overall, I think in the long term, the protests did put in positive change in China even if a lot of people died.

For the FLQ... Hundreds were arrested in the police sweep in light of the War Measures Act in 1970, including prominent intellectuals and artists suspected for their separatist ties. Not sure why you didn't "hear" about it if you learned about it. That's... one of the central themes of the October Crisis beyond the martial law, kidnapping, murder and getaway by the FLQ. I mean if the deployment of thousands of soldiers isn't hurting civil liberties enough for you, I don't know what to say.

As for "pro-separatism" sentiment. If you're really a pro-separatist guy, then I suppose I'll just have to disagree with your ideology and really that's all we can say to one another. It's my personal feeling that without an active separatist movement in your face to create the actual reality of a breakup, a lot of people to me say all sorts of pro-separatist comments until they see something in their society that is pro-separatist and then attack it heavily. If that's not the case with you then I apologise.

edited 5th Jun '12 6:55:54 AM by breadloaf

I know it's been a few months, but I wanted to clarify your positions breadloaf. Why do you see unification as the ultimate goal here(If you still do)?

edited 18th Nov '12 2:27:38 PM by blueflame724

I treat all living things equally. That is to say, I eat all living things
 469 Cassie, Sun, 18th Nov '12 3:56:59 PM from Malaysia, but where?
The armored raven
[up]How about: Why do you suggest that Chinese soil (which had been largely intact for the past thousands of years) should be divided now of all times?

As a source of Chinese culture, Chinese race, and Chinese integrity, the mainland as well as the whole territory cannot be run like a state, to seceed or have any part of it become independant at will. It seems to me that the West wants to place its national values upon Chinese ones without consideration beyond their own.

edited 18th Nov '12 3:57:33 PM by Cassie

What profit is it to a man, when he gains his money, but loses his internet? Anonymous 16:26 I believe...
 470 Joesolo, Sun, 18th Nov '12 3:58:45 PM Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Indiana Solo
[up] Because the "main" china right now is abusive and non-democratic?
I am going to shove the sunshine so far up where the sun don't shine that you will vomit nothing but warm summer days -Belkar
 471 3of 4, Sun, 18th Nov '12 4:01:28 PM from Five Seconds in the Future. Relationship Status: GAR for Archer
Feeble Turtle Duck
[up][up] "should be divided"? It is de facto divided.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but what kind of "chinese race"? There seems to be a lot of them.

And shared culture does not need shared nationality. Saying that the culture can only come from the mainland would mean only the "approved by the mainland" culture? Because Taiwan cannot draw upon thousands of years of accumulated lore and society because of a bit of ocean?

Which would leave "integrity".

And by denying Taiwan Independence, does the Mainland not impose its National Values on the Taiwanese without consideration for them?

Or how about Tibet. Was that not imposing Chinas National Values on the Tibetians without consideration for them?

edited 18th Nov '12 4:09:30 PM by 3of4

LMage: NO ONE ASKED FOR YOUR WITCHCRAFT THREE
 472 Ira The Squire, Sun, 18th Nov '12 4:14:43 PM from No idea. Measuring speed
Phyrexian Dalek
Not to mention the PRC today in some ways is not "China" since the CCP considers itself to be equivalent to PRC, and "communism" is hardly a Chinese thing. If anything it is Taiwan that is more China than the PRC. PRC is just the CCP taking over the mainland.

That said, a declaration of independence from Taiwan at this point will only lead to war, though. PRC won't sit idol by while Taiwan declares independence regardless of its progress to become more liberal and open. I'll leave it to you to judge as to whether a war with PRC (allied with US and other countries, probably) is worth an independent Ro C.
 473 Trivialis, Sun, 18th Nov '12 4:20:17 PM from contemplation
Happiness
@Cassie

Ethnic culture alone should not be an excuse to assimilate everyone in that group into oppression.

Current Chinese Communist Party claims that the Chinese characteristics are incompatible with Western democracy. It's like using Chinese culture and unity as a hostage to prevent proper reform. This is where Taiwan becomes important; it's a counterexample. It directly contradicts the point that Chinese can't be democratic (if you consider them Chinese, that is).

And with ~50 years of separation, the two sides tend to develop different cultures anyway. That was the case for both Germany and Korea. Many Taiwanese think so too.

By the way, something I've noted recently. It's technically supposed to be two separate nations from the beginning. ROC was unable to stop PRC from establishing itself. Therefore PRC is a new nation. ROC was never conquered, so it too remains a nation. That means both are supposed to be sovereign. And if Chiang_Kai-shek didn't insist on trying to unify China and deny PRC any recognition, then it would've remained that way, too.

edited 18th Nov '12 4:22:01 PM by Trivialis

I don't need praise, I need help.
 474 Joesolo, Sun, 18th Nov '12 4:21:44 PM Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Indiana Solo
It's de facto independent. I think they should be content as is.

China's a prick for not even allowing anyone to have a official embassy with them without breaking relations though.
I am going to shove the sunshine so far up where the sun don't shine that you will vomit nothing but warm summer days -Belkar
I didn't see the post asking me to clarify my views until now, but better late than never I suppose.

Morally/Philosophically

My general view is that society should be moving toward unity and should move toward separation/independence if there is real benefit. The separation of China/Taiwan came about due to a civil war between the Nationalists and the Communists. As neither had clean hands, in the slightest, I don't view either side as having any sort of morally superior high ground as some of the other posters here. The depiction of Taiwan as somehow a superior government or morally superior is not something I find a fact, quite the opposite really, so morally speaking I see no relation between the two governments and whether one should be there and the other not.

I also maintain a pro-unity view because I live in Canada and I think Canada should stay a whole country. I would not accept a separatist Quebec, or a British Columbian breakoff, or an Albertan firewall or a return of the Dominion(?) of Newfoundland/Labrador. So why would I suddenly turn my philosophy around when it comes to a foreign country? I'm not a hypocrite, so I won't change my views simply to suit my country's desire to have a weaker China.

Further, I don't think it right for the Chinese to maintain this artificial split between them, creating a chasm between families and friends. Moves toward more open borders, more trade, more relations and more freedom of mobility is a general plus.

Just like I don't like racism, I don't believe in ethnic nationalism, such as with Tibet or the more recent Turkic movement. And this applies to Taiwan as well. Taiwan has its own ethnic groups, beyond the Chinese groups that moved over there after the civil war, and I think that they can and should be included in an overall government. The solution to minority rights is to give them, not to separate them from society and create new countries. Would I want a Chinese-Canada carved out of Toronto here? That's idiotic and I wouldn't apply that to China.

Pragmatically

The long-term consequences of the highly profitable arms trade and the highly attractive status of Taiwan as a military staging point for the United States and any other power poised against China, makes Taiwan an incredibly useful ally to have and to exist. Generally speaking, this situation is not beneficial to humankind in the long term. There should be peace in East Asia and that is best accomplished through a proper unification of China/Taiwan (and then after that, a proper unification of Korea and then after that, settle peace between Japan and everybody else).

I also believe that with the deteriorating economic condition of the United States that the ultimate future of Taiwan becomes more and more unstable so long as it stays independent. Whether China or the United States makes a move as they view a more enticing scenario for themselves in terms of territory and power, either way it is not good.

I also believe that the economic conditions in the area are best suited for unification. It will improve business, trade and middle class power. For instance, the current Taiwanese budget is heavily geared towards military defence, whereas China spends as little as 2.0% of their GDP by CIA estimates on the military. Given a unified China, Taiwan's military budget will plummet, which further improves their social network of education, healthcare and infrastructure. Taiwan's superior economic position is not due to democracy, it's due to good land and good government; that is, Taiwan's prowess is no better than China's power provinces.

I do like democracy and because of the improving political conditions of China, I am cautiously optimistic about their future. As China's government and it's people become more participatory, Taiwan loses what little argument it holds other than ethnic nationalism, on further independence bids. However, according to polls, most Taiwanese swing toward status quo, or unification and not independence. I think that is primarily held by the native tribes of Taiwan, for good reason (historically they've been heavily mistreated). Taiwan is pretty much run by factions made up of military families backed by the mafia (this would be libel if I were more important :P ) and China is run by the rich. It almost seems like it should be the other way around.

Total posts: 1,137
 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18
19
20 21 22 23 24 ... 46


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy