@ultra- that DESERVED a godwin. cassie was saying we shouldnt complain about how someone got power. I know hitler was elected, but he violently took over other countries. She's trying to say that we shouldn't complain the the soviets were the main reason the communists took power while breadloaf complains Taiwan is only independent because of the KMT's actions. it's flat out self-contradictory and ridiculous. I cant STAND that.
We're shoving nothing down their throats. they dont want to be ruled by China, they want status quo, which is NO COMMUNIST CHINESE CONTROL WHATSOEVER.
edited 29th Nov '12 6:32:21 PM by Joesolo
I'm baaaaaaackWell, firstly, I'm not Cassie, so saying her views contradict mine doesn't mean much. Secondly, I actually don't know your views on the subject because you haven't said much.
EDIT: But here's your problem. You state "Chinese" control. They are Chinese. Your view that they are a separate people doesn't matter.
edited 29th Nov '12 6:31:23 PM by breadloaf
@breadloaf: No. You may want to read my posts again. I've said they're de facto independent. You confirm this. You also confirm they want the status quo. At no point have I said, as you claim, that they have to become more independent. I don't care if they become independent in name or not. I want to preserve the status quo, since it's clearly (by your own admission) the will of the people. You're the one who wants to go against those, not me.
I'm not going to argue with Cassie here, since Cassie's views seem to be based in willful blindness and a lack of empathy for the people of places like Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.I don't think they are talking about what would happen to HK if Taiwan was given back to PRC or declared independence. But Hong Kong was given back to PRC, and I
mentioned
what
happened to its education and its freedom of speech. It is a indicator of what can possibly happen to Taiwan should reunification happens now.
edited 29th Nov '12 7:33:18 PM by IraTheSquire
@breadloaf
Even if both communists and nationalists are heirs of Sun Yat-Sen, it would make sense to say that each group is entitled to whatever land it actually managed to keep. Communists successfully claimed the mainland, and established PRC. That's why mainland is PRC territory. Nationalists successfully retained control of Taiwan islands, and maintained ROC. So why shouldn't Taiwan be ROC territory by same reasoning?
You keep saying I call PRC bad while I ignore KMT's crimes. On the contrary, I think you're downplaying KMT/ROC legitimacy while not applying the same for CCP/PRC. Your argument is to dispute ROC having legitimate claim over Taiwan. But my point is that nothing in your argument justifies PRC having any claim over Taiwan. Why do you assume that if ROC's claim is wrong then it automatically makes PRC's claim correct?
edited 30th Nov '12 11:49:36 AM by Trivialis
I believe that people should be honest with themselves and others about the reality of things. I think Taiwan should call itself an independent nation because that's what they are. Taiwan taking over the mainland is laughably improbable, and peacefully merging with China only slightly less so; it's been that way for decades, and it doesn't look to be changing anytime soon. Therefore, by not declaring independence, Taiwan's become the equivalent of a 60-year-old who tries to pass themself off as a 20-year-old: they're not fooling anyone and are just making themselves look sad and pathetic.
edited 29th Nov '12 9:35:48 PM by RavenWilder
Yes, Breadloaf, we know the Nationalists were horrible. I'm fully aware of the White Terror and its atrocities. My grandfather was imprisoned during Chiang's regime even though he was among the Chinese who came in the late 1940's. The ROC was without a doubt an authoritarian system with Chiang and his son. It's a something that the DPP will understandably never let go of. So are you merely proposing that the territories all unite under some random democratic government?
Let's at least try to be clear on what we think is beneficial and what the Taiwanese actually think.
I treat all living things equally. That is to say, I eat all living thingsAh okay, yes that is a discussion I'd like to have because I think that's far more productive than blanket statements about the PRC.
I'll go through what I've read here:
@ Ultrayellow
Like my own views were mixed up with Cassie's views, I mixed up your views with some of the more pro-independence views. Not sure what to say here because at this point, I sorta forget what was said and there's a lot of pages of replies. They are "de facto independent" means what exactly in the scope of Taiwanese independence?
@ Territory Legitimacy
The discussion revolved around the PRC having no right to exist, I challenged that by talking about the past and the crimes committed in them. Okay so PRC is allowed to exist. Then it was moved onto whether it has the right to lay claim to Taiwan. So it was claimed that CPC wasn't a part of the original ROC, therefore they cannot lay a claim. I challenged that by talking about the original factions under Sun Yat Sen. Okay so they were a part of the original ROC. So now it is claimed that because the PRC couldn't take Taiwan in the hot period of the civil war that it doesn't deserve the territory.
Well I don't know. I generally like Rule of Law more than Might Makes Right, but I do know that the history of the civil war was basically a challenge of Might Makes Right between the CPC and the KMT and the KMT nearly completely lost. As neither side was at all rosy, I really have no preference between the two. I don't believe in a philosophy of "better dead than red", so I don't have a strong opinion here.
@ Process / blueflame
(Well I got the feeling from the other posters that they thought the KMT did nothing wrong. It just bugged me.)
Firstly, Taiwan has a working political process, albeit rather corrupt and dominated by former military personalities, it can be worked upon. That's mostly a task for the Taiwanese to undertake. This would obviously form the top provincial government.
Second, as China/Taiwan have been separated for about 60 years, we'll want to take the process slowly. Taiwan would clearly retain its own government as an SAR province, when it joins, and before it joins, China/Taiwan can form a working group to hash out details on what needs to change first. Most likely this would involve a lot of "hands-off" rules on the Taiwanese government. It would also likely involve a major development project for 1.3 billion people, the likes of which the world has not seen.
This would primarily involve shifting China/Hong Kong/Macao/Taiwan wealth westward in China to benefit the 600 million still living in abject poverty and introduce Taiwanese healthcare, (I believe Hong Kong's education system is top in the region) education reforms and so on. Once the wealth divide and education divide objective is met, Taiwan should join as a full SAR province. My personal feeling is that prosperity/education levels in China will be the primary safeguard against undue influence from the mainland government on Taiwan.
After that, China will probably want to simplify and update its constitution and then actually enforce it for once. This is probably the time period for China to also allow election candidates from SAR regions and the SAR regions should allow Chinese nationals to also become candidates. I'd also prefer that corporate donations and the like are insta-banned but that's not related to unification problems.
Enforcement goals on the constitution should be the primary milestones for further integration. And in fact, I would say that all regions have to hit those milestones and prove it. That requirement would kick in for Taiwan and Hong Kong and Macao only much later, when you have to start proving your elections are clean.
Total expected time to finish is probably 50 years, given a mostly optimistic outlook.
Ultimately, I structure the process based on German re-unification problems and adapt it for the unique case of Taiwan-China (the Germans didn't fight a civil war). I structure the end result more on Canada's system with Quebec (Quebec doesn't share the same constitution as the rest of Canada... but they just kinda use it anyway because that's a useful basis for your rights). I'm not sure on foreign influences. Canada, for instance, has to deal with France declaring its support for Quebec independence which is hell annoying but I don't think anything similar exists for Taiwan. There's no "Chinese"-ish country outside of China.
edited 1st Dec '12 10:21:28 PM by breadloaf
If Taiwan reunites into China, it wouldn't be joining PRC. It would be joining the concept of China itself. Both PRC and ROC would have to replace their current states with this new state of "China". And to do this, it's apparent that there needs to be much, much more cooperation from PRC than its island neighbor. It should stop threatening its fellow "Chinese" with missiles and stop acting like it's the sole representative of China, because a reunited China belongs to neither state.
That's why I don't think Taiwan should be a SAR of PRC; it's simply not part of it. Now it would be a nice gesture from PRC for Taiwan to send representatives to National People's Congress without losing anything (and without having those representatives held hostage); that's a free lunch ROC would get. But if it means ROC has to end any hopes of diplomatic relations, then I don't think the Taiwanese would support that.
If this suggestion was taken seriously:
1) Relations between China and the UK will turn extremely hostile, most likely leading to outright war. The situation will be equivalent to or perhaps even worse than Israel and the Middle East.
2) The Hong Kong people themselves will not stand for it. Their main incentive for rejoining China was the political and economic benefits of being part of a great power; what reason could they have for joining Taiwan? They might as well declare independence and manage their own affairs.

I'm not sure what there is to accept here but an American/Western view that Taiwan should become a country. You keep saying I'm ignoring the point of democracy and I am not. There has been no indication that the majority of Taiwanese want independence. They are independent right now because that is the only viable mode of operation given their actual majority views. They can't take back all the territories of China and they can't go independent without relinquishing their claims and future prospects, so they sit tight and wait. It might be like that for a long time.
You're trying to say "well they're de facto independent, therefore they should just go forward and become their own country. Why not?" Because they don't want to. I don't think that talking about what the Taiwanese people want and then shove on them your view that they should become independent makes any sense.
For Trivalis' point, there's no point I am ignoring. I lay out large arguments and they're simply dismissed as "I hate PRC" or "PRC had crimes in the past". Those are the points of other people. So I bring up that ROC also committed crimes in the past. The legitimacy is questionable for anyone. Both factions, the Communists and the Nationalists, were original components of the first ROC established by Sun Yat Sen. All I see are unreasonable examples of "better dead than red" Cold War propaganda being pushed. The Nationalists were horrible. They were well known for a multitude of crimes that affected and hurt hundreds of millions of people other than their direct campaigns of murder of innocents. What is it the history that you've read? Communists bad, not-communists good! American history is littered with example after example that all it ever did was back brutal dictatorships that were anti-communists, not because they were democratic.
The primary reason that the Taiwanese enjoy so many rights is because of wealth. Prosperity is the primary driver of political power. Democracy costs money. Why would a local government official have a person arrested for writing a subversive blog compared to the West? Because if you were in Canada writing about a communist revolution, we can sit on it with police resources doing low-level surveillance if the threat level were perceived to be somewhat credible. If you don't have the police resources? Just throw the guy in jail.
Look at, for instance, death penalties. Want a 10% wrongful conviction rate? Costs about several million dollars per person to get through the trials. Want it lower? Spend more money. China would never be able to afford anything close to that, so people just get executed and likely many have been wrongfully convicted.
If we really want to help Taiwan, we should be focused on improving their prospects of prosperity. The Taiwanese didn't get rid the military dictatorship in their country by remaining poor or constantly funnelling money into the military. Those programs directly reduce their quality of life and democracy. Unification with China is better for everyone in Taiwan and on the mainland. Besides, imagine it to be like Quebec where China starts getting most of its awesome politicians from the island like how Canada gets all its best politicians from Quebec.
edited 29th Nov '12 6:18:48 PM by breadloaf