Taiwan's Independence

@ breadloaf: Actually, no. Lee only owns some of the media (at best: Lee started off in the property business). The other bits are owned by another dude (the owner of Apple Daily and various other magazines. He also had HQ in Taiwan. Go figure.) who is strongly anti-CCP and I'm pretty sure Lee doesn't have a say on the TV broadcasting network. The other TV commercial channel is strongly pro-CCP (the Asia TV, and it gets to ridiculous levels). Newspapers not Apple Daily are getting more pro-CCP nowadays however and I'm pretty sure they are not owned by Lee.

edited 18th Nov '12 9:16:31 PM by IraTheSquire

The Taiwanese government is a multiparty Democracy, the Chinese government is pseudo-communist authoritarian State.

How is the Chinese government superior?

Is this question rhetorical?

edited 18th Nov '12 9:41:58 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Why should Taiwan be a part of China?

- Territorial Integrity - Shared Heritage/Culture - Lowering of tensions and potential for conflict, leading directly to: - Lower defense budget and manpower - China can benefit greatly from Taiwan's advanced technology and educated populace - Economies of Scale

What?

And America could greatly benefit from Canada's natural resources. That doesn't justify the US absorbing Canada.

And the US having a larger economy than Canada wouldn't justify it either.

This could also be accomplished if China & Taiwan just acknowledged each others existence.

edited 18th Nov '12 9:27:08 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

But the US and Canada have always been separate countries ever since their independence, whereas Taiwan has long been Chinese territory. Whatever their differences, both the PRC and the ROC acknowledges this.

Then the Communist party should return its land to Republic of China already.

That's the best possible solution, but of course, completely unrealistic.

Exactly the point I was going for.

The ROC has as much right to existence as the PRC.

And so is hoping Taiwan will just go along and peacefully submit to the PRC's authority.

edited 18th Nov '12 9:52:40 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Not in the immediate future. But in the long term, China's growing military and economic might will change that.

@Jauce What do you mean Taiwan has long been Chinese territory? You mean the ROC? Maybe they should just change their name . On a more serious note, I don't really understand how "length of time" automatically means "it belongs to China". Why don't we just give Taiwan to the Manchus then?

edited 18th Nov '12 10:03:55 PM by blueflame724

I treat all living things equally. That is to say, I eat all living things

Economics and Military strength aren't substitutes for freedom.

If China becomes a legitimate Democracy, I'd be okay with it uniting with Taiwan (as long as the majority of Taiwan's population was okay with it.)

And it still is. As I previously mentioned, the PRC is no more the 'official Chinese Government' than the ROC.

edited 18th Nov '12 10:26:12 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

US and Canada is one countries 1606 -1774. that 168 years together. Taiwan become part of China in 1661 - 1895 and 1945 - 1949. that 238 years together. Its only 70 years difference, not that long.

Since PRC never conquer Taiwan, PRC also always separate countries since PRC independence. If Taiwan ever declare independence, like Canada they also will become separate countries.

This only hold as long as Kuomintang is majority party in Taiwan, if pro-independence party become majority, it will be reversed.

Taiwan and PRC is not the only countries with "Shared Heritage/Culture" that become separated : Belgium-Netherlands, Indonesia-Malaysia, USA-Canada also originally have shared heritage and culture. if you go far enough even France-Italy- Spain have shared heritage culture.

edited 18th Nov '12 10:07:46 PM by PhilippeO

Oh, it will happen. As long as there arn't enough idiots likes CK Liang to ruin the whole thing.

/rant

To be fair, the Taiwanese did elect for a pro-unity party as opposed to the pro-independence party, so that could be an indication of some sort.

edited 18th Nov '12 11:14:44 PM by IraTheSquire

How are you defining 'long'? Because China only really began to exert any control over the island (as opposed to the surrounding waters) in the later half of the 17th Century and they ceded it to Japan after the First Sino-Japanese War (1895).

@ Phillipe O

Well no actually. Canada was never part of the Thirteen Colonies. That's a bit of a mangling of history there. The British owned Nouveau France and the Thirteen Colonies, but the two were separate entities. So it stands that we were never the same country, hence the argument doesn't apply to North America. (However, for unrelated reasons I do want a North American union which I won't get into)

When the Thirteen Colonies declared independence they asked Canada to follow suit... because were separate entities. To drive the point home, one of the American grievances was that the British gave Canada religious freedom.

So I don't think that particular issue is relevant.

I think you would want to address the economic/military aspect though.

@ Braeburn

China/Taiwan have the unique option to unify to clear up a lot of problems. The United States and Canada do not. If we wanted to unify, it'd be a much longer and annoying process. Besides, why shouldn't the US and Canada unify? I don't actually see the problem. Certainly, Canada/US would unify solely on economic grounds rather than historical or philosophical ones but I've already laid out my non-philosophical reasons for China/Taiwan and they basically coincide with any other closely related set of nations.

@ Ira

To be honest, I'm concerned about the recent elections in Canada that were rigged and increasingly lenient media toward the Tories. So, I'm starting to view the issues facing Hong Kong to be rather similar to what is happening in Canada, and our democracy is being eroded by domestic groups. So, I feel that the issue is that the people of Hong Kong have to defend their rights regardless of China. People will take advantage of the electorate's ignorance no matter who is in charge or what is going on.

This is the reason why I might seem indifferent to the issue of China being there. Rights across the West have been deteriorating given the recent economic troubles in a similar fashion to what is happening in Hong Kong and we don't have a China to blame, just ourselves.

@ blueflame

Can I cite the Tories in my country are corrupt asswads that have pilfered billions of dollars for their own ends? Unfortunately not! But we all know they did. I do the same with the Taiwanese leaders. But more seriously (well, I do really think the previous statements but I'd have trouble proving it court-style), the lowered tensions in the region would reduce military spending.

I don't think 60 years is all that long. Last time Taiwan broke off from China (when Qing took out Ming), it took a century before Qing finally took hold of Taiwan. Besides, the Koreas have been split for 60 years, I still think they should unify. And Germany was split for 50 years before they finally unified. As I've seen that it can be done successfully, I don't think there's any question that it can't be done properly. My primary concern is that the unification happens properly.

I'm not sure about the point about China becoming "better". That particular issue can be spun both ways. China is better, therefore Taiwan has nothing to fear to rejoin. Or, China is better, therefore Taiwan doesn't need to rejoin anymore. But, when I take it to a more international perspective, I'd like to ask you, do you think EU should exist or not exist? In that aspect, if you believe the EU should exist, then the same type of logic applies to China/Taiwan. Amalgamation can be mutually beneficially for their trade power.

Hm, so what are the unifying lines outside of government that you were thinking of? Can't make such an intriguing statement without following up on it.

edited 19th Nov '12 2:52:27 AM by breadloaf

The problem with unification is that neither country wants to get rid of the government they have now, so merging the two countries would mean denying a lot of people their preferred system of government.

You Western people cannot stand the current Chinese government, just as I cannot stand how you are using Democracy / Communism as an excuse to descriminate between Mainland and Taiwan and to bypass logic and fact that the two belong as one whole territory. Is this fair for you? Not for me.

It's also jarring that the government system is being used (by you) to segregate what China has done positively and negatively in order to vilify the wrong group of people. A country is run by its people, not the systems. No matter which kind the system, so long as the wrong people are in charge, doing the wrong thing, the end result is always the same.

Hong Kong right now is a bad example not for pro-integrity arguments, but for seperatist arguments instead. Keep in mind, China had NEVER de facto seceeded neither Taiwan or Hong Kong. The government's only compromise was having the country run in two kinds of systems. It has always stood as a point that this synergy of mainland and Hong Kong + Taiwan has brought long lasting growth and prosperity, UNTIL U.S of A came in and muck things up

And also the people of Hong Kong can't read enough history to save their lives: how LONG have they been in colonial rule? 15 years of election system and they already cried foul, while if they never merged, things would've been a lot worse. This is also strengthened by how every British colonized nation has high corruption rates (excluding Singapore, since it's an island state segregated from Malaysia). They're blaming the wrong people for their own mess. Demonizing the Citizen Education books is only a diversion, since there's no scan of the contents.

Back to Taiwan, breadloaf has spoken first yet again: USA has been trying to take Taiwan off of this synergy with the mainland for many years through trades and military arms. And why? Because in order to make the diversion seem like a truth to everyone. The whole Chinese territory, run by its people, could never be broken. Only by having external elements' inteference can things seem like a bad situation. But did Taiwan's own elections ever prove to perform better than the mainland?

No. More money went down the corruption drain, land-size wise.

Again I must stress, despite the mainland having death sentences galore and lots of issues, a whole territory and the country with it, is run by people, not the systems. Some emperors had oppressed the people, they rebelled and they won. 1911 proved yet AGAIN that we Chinese have integrity and what it takes to keep the land intact.

And lately yet AGAIN when Japan is fooling around lately to buy an isle which was supposed to belong to Chinese waters according to Cairo and Postdam Treaties, both the mainland and Taiwan people resonated.

It takes unco-operative sides of people to form valid reasons of independence and secession. It takes my point above to bust the myths of independence.

What profit is it to a man, when he gains his money, but loses his internet? Anonymous 16:26 I believe...

You haven't offered a compelling reason why we should consider Taiwan and the mainland to be one nation that must be held together other than "they used to be one nation, so they should stay that way." And if we go by that logic, we may as well get the Mongol Empire back together.

@ Raven

Well primarily, people don't normally consider a civil war as automatically justifying the seceding pieces as deserving of independent status. If the option exists for unification, then it's the more preferable option. Unify, under a better government, that includes the views of all the people, rather than two opposing factions continuing to exist in a cold war.

---

I understand it's par for the course on this forum but I've rehashed the reasoning over and over again and there's plenty of posters here that don't actually attack those view points but say things like "but I'm sure they could do it without unification". It's the anti-unification crowd that needs to justify its views much more strongly. Why? Let me go through the list here:

Americans: Justify that the blood spent in the American Civil War wasn't worth it and the Confederate States of American should exist.

Germans: Justify that the unification of Germany was wrong and that you actively advocate splitting up again.

Canadians: Justify that keeping Quebec in the fold is wrong, or bringing in Newfoundland was wrong, and therefore they should be separate countries.

British: Wow wee, is there soooo many separatist movements throughout history.

And I could go on.

Not a single poster here comes from a country that didn't actively and violently suppress separatist movements. So really, get off the high horse that doesn't even exist and try not to be hypocritical. If you're not advocating the split up of your own country, don't advocate it for others because it's easier when it's foreign soil.

edited 19th Nov '12 3:17:44 AM by breadloaf

What problems is Taiwan facing? That aren't caused by the PRC.

Thank you #Raven.

The problem is the PRC doesn't speak for the people, it speaks for the Chinese Communist Party. Tiananmen Square proved that.

Who here would support Korean unification if it meant the North Korean Government would be in charge of both countries?

And the ROC is as much of a secessionist movement as the PRC.

Look the reason I don't support China and Taiwans unification is that the authoritarian undemocratic Chinese government would likely gain control of both countries.

edited 19th Nov '12 4:58:45 AM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

There's something for me to add concerning splitting up. Take a look at Sudan. The quality of the nation is determined by the quality and livelihoods of its people. It doesn't take long after splitting up for war to start engulfing them again. Plain logic being shown here that seceeding a piece of territory is not a permanent solution, OR a short term one. If the people running the soil aren't united, then it doesn't matter how small each shard of a nation becomes.

Again, using the systems to segregate things up. Let's start with why you're going with the 'taking control of both lands' argument yet again (note the 'yet again' means it's not the first time this topic is thrown across in this thread). Your wording here implies that you STRONGLY believe that Taiwan and China were born seperate, while historical and societal facts prove landslides OTHERWISE. It doesn't matter whether the capital of the territory is at Beijing or Taipei. What matters is that Beijing is the capital of the official central government. However, your wording implies that Taiwan is a country, while it is actually wrong.

China didn't let Taiwan run democracy so that it can become a nation by itself, and neither it did Tibet. Familiar with Jonestown?

edited 19th Nov '12 3:35:22 AM by Cassie

What profit is it to a man, when he gains his money, but loses his internet? Anonymous 16:26 I believe...

What do you mean?

N.Korea begs to differ..

edited 19th Nov '12 3:32:12 AM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

But for most people living in China and Taiwan today, the civil war happened before they were even born; unification means asking them to abandon the only government they've ever had.

Honestly, the calls for unification sound a lot like those 19th Century Americans who decided that enslaving black people was wrong, and so proposed shipping all the black people in the country "back" to Africa. The fact that almost all black slaves at the time had been born in America and had never seen Africa before didn't seem to matter.

edited 19th Nov '12 3:32:57 AM by RavenWilder

Okay, a lot of people keep comparing Taiwan's independence to secessionist movements that happened in other countries.

Here's the thing though,

TAIWAN DID NOT SUCCEED FROM THE PRC! The ROC was given control of the island after WW 2 by the Allies.

The PRC never had control of Taiwan!

edited 19th Nov '12 4:49:52 AM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Except NO ONE asked Taiwan to abolish democracy, OR hightail its people to the mainland.

You are missing a major plot point here: Taiwan has a potential seperatist government in the making, called the Progression Party, aka the Green Party. The Green is so pro-seperatist, America has been up in arms trying poke fun at it so that the status quo remains as is: neither totally cooperative with China nor succeed in being an island nation.

edited 19th Nov '12 3:39:04 AM by Cassie

What profit is it to a man, when he gains his money, but loses his internet? Anonymous 16:26 I believe...