5 ms·

> an attempt at secession. Please. Taiwan is not a part of the PRC. What would they be seceding from? They're a sovereign State founded by the losers of China'

> an attempt at secession. Please. Taiwan is not a part of the PRC. What would they be seceding from? They're a sovereign State founded by the losers of China's civil war. (That the Nationalists lost is one of China's great tragedies given the horrors that Mao and the ruling party inflicted on the Chinese people and their traditions). Anyway, take Japan and the Senkaku islands as another example of Chinese bellicose jingoism fueled by a policy of nationalism designed to detract from threats to its legitimacy.

dnomad 9y ago
This is pure nonsense. It's remarkable how such ignorance propagates through the Western media. I wonder is it deliberate? Talk to the Taiwanese themselves. Both the ROC and the PRC view Taiwan as part of China and view themselves as the legitimate government of all of China.
- mafribe 9y ago
  Anecdata: I have spent a great deal of time in Taiwan, and have not met a Taiwanese person who wanted to unify with the mainland, especially as long as the mainland was governed by the communist party. Let's not forget that a great deal of Taiwanese fled from the communists. What is true is that many Taiwanese fear the mainland and think peaceful surrender is preferable to a military invasation by the mainland. Many Taiwanese fear that nobody will defend them if/when the Mainland invades. Note also that the Taiwanese look to Hong Kong, and observe the slow erosion of the vestiges of democracy there.
  - dis-sys 9y ago
    > Note also that the Taiwanese look to Hong Kong, and observe the slow erosion of the vestiges of democracy there. Did UK allowed residence of HK to elect their own governor or at least its local legislative entity? Sorry to hurt your feeling but the truth is that all Governors of HK under the British HK era were WHITE colonists directly appointed by the Queen. People of HK was never allowed to directly elect their local legislative entity or top officials. In fact, you have to be WHITE to become a high level police officer there by the 1970s. You got to be completely brainwashed to call that democracy. Oh, let's have a quick look at a full list of all WHITE governors of HK "democratically" appointed by the Queens - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Hong_Kong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Hong_Kong Now let's have a look at the all WHITE Commissioner of HK police "democratically" forced onto the people of HK - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissioner_of_Police_(Hong_Kong) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissioner_of_Police_(Hong_K... Is this the democracy you were talking about? Get yourself some help.
    - mafribe 9y ago
      I'm quite aware of HK's status under British rule. I'm also aware that it was dramatically better than Mao's rule. What I was referring to was the erosion of rights since the takeover of HK by the PRC. Looking at your commenting history here on HN, I see quite a bit of love for dictatorships, and hatred for democracy. For this reason, I assume that you knew very well that I was referring to the erosion of rights since the takeover of HK, but decided to derail the thread, so as to avoid discussing the anti-democratic nature of the current PRC government, and the threat this poses to Taiwan. > WHITE governors of HK I'm a bit unhappy about your blatant racism. Please ponder the following question: how many non-Chinese General Secretaries of the Communist Party of China can you point me towards? Note that UK governors did a much better job of ruling HK than did Mao and his cronies in China. Note that it was only when Deng Xiaoping decided to copy the UK model that was trialled in HK and Singapore, that Mainland China stopped being a basket case.
- gurkendoktor 9y ago
  > Talk to the Taiwanese themselves. I have to ask, have you actually done this? From a random 2017 poll[1]: >> Three quarters of Taiwanese people think Taiwan and China are two separate countries, while only about 14 per cent believe they are both part of one nation Or[2]: >> For Taiwanese younger than 40, pro-independence support reaches 84 percent. Perhaps most startling, 43 percent of the under-40 generation would support independence even if it meant China would attack Taiwan under the risk of war. Polls conducted by pro-China and pro-Taiwan media typically have slightly different numbers, but the trend across polls is crystal clear, and matches my experience from living there for ~4 years. It's true that the ROC constitution claims all of the mainland for historical reasons. The thing is, if Taiwan were to give up that claim, they'd probably trigger the PRC's anti-secession law and get sucked into a war. Holding up this territorial claim as a proof that the Taiwanese see themselves as a part of China is extremely cynical. [1] http://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/2099286/most-taiwanese-consider-taiwan-china-separate-countries http://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/209... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/02/yes-taiwan-wants-one-china-but-which-china-does-it-want/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/0...
  - dnomad 9y ago
    To your point I think attitudes have recently shifted a lot. As little as 10 years ago my experience was that many Taiwanese regarded themselves as Chinese even though they regarded the PRC as wholly illegitimate. It's still the case, I believe, that no major political party has declared independence as part of their platform. Whether this is because such a position would be wholly unconstitutional or because China would invade is debatable. As you point out, the Taiwanese government from the very beginning, and as recorded in the constitution, has regarded themselves as the true rulers of China and not viewed themselves as a separate nation state. Given this the PRC position that Taiwan is a breakaway province and is part of China is understandable.
    - gurkendoktor 9y ago
      > As you point out, the Taiwanese government from the very beginning, and as recorded in the constitution, has regarded themselves as the true rulers of China and not viewed themselves as a separate nation state. When the ROC was established in 1912, Taiwan was not a part of China. It's misleading to refer to that as the very beginning of the Taiwanese government. The ROC government has only been indicative of the will of the Taiwanese people since democratization in the 1990s. > It's still the case, I believe, that no major political party has declared independence as part of their platform. Whether this is because such a position would be wholly unconstitutional or because China would invade is debatable. It's a bit of a tautology that declaring independence would be unconstitutional, because the constitution is the key piece of what needs to be updated. IANAL, but I think it's even possible to achieve independence within the framework of the current constitution since it guarantees the right to referendums. The government would need to change the scope of referendums by passing a law (see [1]), and then the referendum would have to succeed. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_China#Referendums_and_constitutional_reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_o...
- factsaresacred 9y ago
  > Both the ROC and the PRC view Taiwan as part of China and view themselves as the legitimate government of all of China. Right, that's not what we're talking about though. The point is that Taiwan is not a part of the PRC and so the idea of 'seceding' from anything is absurd.
wyattpeak 9y ago
> Taiwan is not a part of the PRC According to Taiwan. How does this theory play with the American civil war? The confederate states didn't consider themselves part of the union. Was the North therefore imposing sovereignty on a foreign nation? They were both fighting for sovereignty of all of China. After the war they both continued to consider themselves to be sovereign to all China. Indeed, to this day they both make that claim. For what it's worth, I agree that to all practical intents they are separate nations and should be such. I think both nations should drop their claims on each other. But only due to the fact that it's been the de facto situation for seventy years. I see no reason why the losing side of a civil war is instantly granted nationhood on cessation of fighting.
- mafribe 9y ago
  The ROC is doing itself no favours by sticking to its interpretation of the One China Policy which entails that the ROC leadership is the solve legitimate ruler of the mainland, too! When the PRC was weak, there was probably an opening where the ROC could have dropped its pretensions towards ruling the mainland, in exchange for PRC acceptance of ROC nationhood. But I suspect its too late now, since the PRC is so powerful now. I also think the real reason why the PRC leadership is bullying the ROC is that the ROC is a clear example that democracy, wealth and Chinese culture are perfectly compatible -- thus falsifying the communist's party's justification of its claim to power.
  - wyattpeak 9y ago
    I agree, I really don't see what they get out of it. It seems only to legitimise the PRC's claim on Taiwan by making it a mutual disagreement. I don't know about the concerns re democracy, the Chinese people I hear speaking about it don't seem to have much interest in Western democracy whether or not they could live under it, but I don't have a strong enough understanding of the issue to really claim to understand. And I suppose the fact that their people don't care wouldn't necessarily assuage a sufficiently paranoid government.
    - YorkshireSeason 9y ago

dnomad 9y ago

This is pure nonsense. It's remarkable how such ignorance propagates through the Western media. I wonder is it deliberate? Talk to the Taiwanese themselves. Both the ROC and the PRC view Taiwan as part of China and view themselves as the legitimate government of all of China.

mafribe 9y ago
Anecdata: I have spent a great deal of time in Taiwan, and have not met a Taiwanese person who wanted to unify with the mainland, especially as long as the mainland was governed by the communist party. Let's not forget that a great deal of Taiwanese fled from the communists. What is true is that many Taiwanese fear the mainland and think peaceful surrender is preferable to a military invasation by the mainland. Many Taiwanese fear that nobody will defend them if/when the Mainland invades. Note also that the Taiwanese look to Hong Kong, and observe the slow erosion of the vestiges of democracy there.
- dis-sys 9y ago
  > Note also that the Taiwanese look to Hong Kong, and observe the slow erosion of the vestiges of democracy there. Did UK allowed residence of HK to elect their own governor or at least its local legislative entity? Sorry to hurt your feeling but the truth is that all Governors of HK under the British HK era were WHITE colonists directly appointed by the Queen. People of HK was never allowed to directly elect their local legislative entity or top officials. In fact, you have to be WHITE to become a high level police officer there by the 1970s. You got to be completely brainwashed to call that democracy. Oh, let's have a quick look at a full list of all WHITE governors of HK "democratically" appointed by the Queens - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Hong_Kong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_of_Hong_Kong Now let's have a look at the all WHITE Commissioner of HK police "democratically" forced onto the people of HK - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissioner_of_Police_(Hong_Kong) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissioner_of_Police_(Hong_K... Is this the democracy you were talking about? Get yourself some help.
  - mafribe 9y ago
    I'm quite aware of HK's status under British rule. I'm also aware that it was dramatically better than Mao's rule. What I was referring to was the erosion of rights since the takeover of HK by the PRC. Looking at your commenting history here on HN, I see quite a bit of love for dictatorships, and hatred for democracy. For this reason, I assume that you knew very well that I was referring to the erosion of rights since the takeover of HK, but decided to derail the thread, so as to avoid discussing the anti-democratic nature of the current PRC government, and the threat this poses to Taiwan. > WHITE governors of HK I'm a bit unhappy about your blatant racism. Please ponder the following question: how many non-Chinese General Secretaries of the Communist Party of China can you point me towards? Note that UK governors did a much better job of ruling HK than did Mao and his cronies in China. Note that it was only when Deng Xiaoping decided to copy the UK model that was trialled in HK and Singapore, that Mainland China stopped being a basket case.
gurkendoktor 9y ago
> Talk to the Taiwanese themselves. I have to ask, have you actually done this? From a random 2017 poll[1]: >> Three quarters of Taiwanese people think Taiwan and China are two separate countries, while only about 14 per cent believe they are both part of one nation Or[2]: >> For Taiwanese younger than 40, pro-independence support reaches 84 percent. Perhaps most startling, 43 percent of the under-40 generation would support independence even if it meant China would attack Taiwan under the risk of war. Polls conducted by pro-China and pro-Taiwan media typically have slightly different numbers, but the trend across polls is crystal clear, and matches my experience from living there for ~4 years. It's true that the ROC constitution claims all of the mainland for historical reasons. The thing is, if Taiwan were to give up that claim, they'd probably trigger the PRC's anti-secession law and get sucked into a war. Holding up this territorial claim as a proof that the Taiwanese see themselves as a part of China is extremely cynical. [1] http://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/2099286/most-taiwanese-consider-taiwan-china-separate-countries http://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/209... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/02/yes-taiwan-wants-one-china-but-which-china-does-it-want/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/0...
- dnomad 9y ago
  To your point I think attitudes have recently shifted a lot. As little as 10 years ago my experience was that many Taiwanese regarded themselves as Chinese even though they regarded the PRC as wholly illegitimate. It's still the case, I believe, that no major political party has declared independence as part of their platform. Whether this is because such a position would be wholly unconstitutional or because China would invade is debatable. As you point out, the Taiwanese government from the very beginning, and as recorded in the constitution, has regarded themselves as the true rulers of China and not viewed themselves as a separate nation state. Given this the PRC position that Taiwan is a breakaway province and is part of China is understandable.
  - gurkendoktor 9y ago
    > As you point out, the Taiwanese government from the very beginning, and as recorded in the constitution, has regarded themselves as the true rulers of China and not viewed themselves as a separate nation state. When the ROC was established in 1912, Taiwan was not a part of China. It's misleading to refer to that as the very beginning of the Taiwanese government. The ROC government has only been indicative of the will of the Taiwanese people since democratization in the 1990s. > It's still the case, I believe, that no major political party has declared independence as part of their platform. Whether this is because such a position would be wholly unconstitutional or because China would invade is debatable. It's a bit of a tautology that declaring independence would be unconstitutional, because the constitution is the key piece of what needs to be updated. IANAL, but I think it's even possible to achieve independence within the framework of the current constitution since it guarantees the right to referendums. The government would need to change the scope of referendums by passing a law (see [1]), and then the referendum would have to succeed. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_China#Referendums_and_constitutional_reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_o...
factsaresacred 9y ago
> Both the ROC and the PRC view Taiwan as part of China and view themselves as the legitimate government of all of China. Right, that's not what we're talking about though. The point is that Taiwan is not a part of the PRC and so the idea of 'seceding' from anything is absurd.

wyattpeak 9y ago

> Taiwan is not a part of the PRC According to Taiwan. How does this theory play with the American civil war? The confederate states didn't consider themselves part of the union. Was the North therefore imposing sovereignty on a foreign nation? They were both fighting for sovereignty of all of China. After the war they both continued to consider themselves to be sovereign to all China. Indeed, to this day they both make that claim. For what it's worth, I agree that to all practical intents they are separate nations and should be such. I think both nations should drop their claims on each other. But only due to the fact that it's been the de facto situation for seventy years. I see no reason why the losing side of a civil war is instantly granted nationhood on cessation of fighting.

mafribe 9y ago
The ROC is doing itself no favours by sticking to its interpretation of the One China Policy which entails that the ROC leadership is the solve legitimate ruler of the mainland, too! When the PRC was weak, there was probably an opening where the ROC could have dropped its pretensions towards ruling the mainland, in exchange for PRC acceptance of ROC nationhood. But I suspect its too late now, since the PRC is so powerful now. I also think the real reason why the PRC leadership is bullying the ROC is that the ROC is a clear example that democracy, wealth and Chinese culture are perfectly compatible -- thus falsifying the communist's party's justification of its claim to power.
- wyattpeak 9y ago
  I agree, I really don't see what they get out of it. It seems only to legitimise the PRC's claim on Taiwan by making it a mutual disagreement. I don't know about the concerns re democracy, the Chinese people I hear speaking about it don't seem to have much interest in Western democracy whether or not they could live under it, but I don't have a strong enough understanding of the issue to really claim to understand. And I suppose the fact that their people don't care wouldn't necessarily assuage a sufficiently paranoid government.
  - YorkshireSeason 9y ago