3 ms·

What's the end-goal? Tibet cannot be a separate country (or in that respect, Hong Kong) very much like Quebec cannot be a separate country from Canada. You ca

by liuliu 7y ago

What's the end-goal? Tibet cannot be a separate country (or in that respect, Hong Kong) very much like Quebec cannot be a separate country from Canada. You can say that China becomes arrogant, but what exactly West expect other than a total war that rewrite much of the world nation borders? --- Although way passed the point to convince anyone, my comment above and below conditioned on "after WW2 (breaking up any large geographical country is unlikely)".

nrp 7y ago
Quebec is not the best example. There have been two referendums on this, the second of which was extremely close to passing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sovereignty_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sovereignty_movement The Supreme Court of Canada went on to confirm that a referendum is a legal method for Quebec to initiate secession: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Re_Secession_of_Quebec https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Re_Secession_of_Queb...
- liuliu 7y ago
  True. It is just hard to rewrite nation borders once it is set and done for a country of China's size. Realistically, the West probably hope of USSR type of breakdown. To me, that is extremely unlikely given the desire of the Chinese people to remain as a united group.
  - hjklhlkjh 7y ago
    Westerner here. I'd settle for allowing Muslims to build nice minarets on mosques in XJ without getting jailed, and for Hong Kongers to be able to choose who leads them (really choose: not from a list of candidates preselected by the Party) until 2047. The motivation? A belief that humans are entitled to at least a modicum of political self-determination.
    - liuliu 7y ago
      True. But the topic here is "One-China" policy.
      - sachdevap 7y ago
        The "One-China" policy is way beyond just geographical. It has very strong cultural ambitions too. You cannot talk of the geographical policies in isolation.
      - NicoJuicy 7y ago
        It is related.. They want 1 hive mind, including religion
    - Linq123 7y ago
      You clearly from a country which never experienced neither local muslim's terror nor post colonial separatism.
  - gruez 7y ago
    >True. It is just hard to rewrite nation borders once it is set and done for a country of China's size Can you expand on that? In particular, how that justifies governing those people against their will.
    - liuliu 7y ago
      it is hard to comment in this limited space without attracting a ton of downvotes. I am a futurist, and looking into 100-year from now, won't there be a united government just like what we saw in Star Trek? The rule-based global system is a relatively new thing. if you look back pass WW2, it is obvious without the United States as the solo superpower, it is barbarian politics between countries, not so much for "rule-based system". Thus, what many really expect to see, when they think about national self-determination, it is envisioned as many smaller countries with one superpower, that is the United States, with globally projected military power. That is certainly possible, but there are many questions left, for example, how that many smaller countries counter-balance the desire of the United States? Alternatively, can the E.U. be an example? It is certainly possible as well, but we have to ask, at which point, the E.U. will act more like one nation, where is the boundary? All these discussions are orthogonal to the authoritarian discussions. I am certainly sad to see people view the Chinese as unable to pursuit their own democratic process without breaking the whole country.
      - oska 7y ago
        > I am a futurist, and looking into 100-year from now, won't there be a united government just like what we saw in Star Trek? No, that is extremely unlikely. Not just unlikely, I would view it as pretty much impossible.
  - gridlockd 7y ago
    > ...the desire of the Chinese people to remain as a united group. You must be talking about the Han people, certainly not the Tibetans or the Uighurs. Those clearly have separatist ambitions, but they don't have the power and the support to make it happen. As for Taiwan, Hong Kong or Macau - none of these want to be united politically with the PRC either, even though they are mostly Han. A soviet-style political breakdown could be the best thing to happen to the people of the PRC, considering that those smaller Chinese countries are very successful.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - grecy 7y ago
    Sudan did it. Up until that point it was the largest country in Africa.
  - infamia 7y ago
    > To me, that is extremely unlikely given the desire of the Chinese people to remain as a united group. Who are you grouping under auspices of "the Chinese people"? Clearly there are large groups of people within China who want nothing to do with the One China policy. There is no telling what will happen when the economic gravy train comes to an end, especially if it were to do so in a jarring way. I suspect this is one of the reasons why Xi has become more authoritarian recently.
  - eschaton 7y ago
    You don’t think Singapore and Malaysia are part of China too, do you?
eschaton 7y ago
Sure it can. Especially since Tibet is a separate country; invasion is no longer recognized as a way for a country to increase its area.
- barnesto 7y ago
  Crimea says hello
  - LoSboccacc 7y ago
    Georgia sends regards
oska 7y ago
Obviously Tibet can be a separate country (and was very recently). And if Singapore is viable as a separate country, why not Hong Kong too? Chinese empires have broken up many times in the past. I don't expect the fate of this current empire will be any different.
AnimalMuppet 7y ago
Why can't it? It once was, why can't it be again? Especially if the people of Tibet want it to be. [Edit: oska beat me to it, and said it better besides.]

by liuliu 7y ago

nrp 7y ago

Quebec is not the best example. There have been two referendums on this, the second of which was extremely close to passing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sovereignty_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sovereignty_movement The Supreme Court of Canada went on to confirm that a referendum is a legal method for Quebec to initiate secession: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Re_Secession_of_Quebec https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_Re_Secession_of_Queb...

liuliu 7y ago
True. It is just hard to rewrite nation borders once it is set and done for a country of China's size. Realistically, the West probably hope of USSR type of breakdown. To me, that is extremely unlikely given the desire of the Chinese people to remain as a united group.
- hjklhlkjh 7y ago
  Westerner here. I'd settle for allowing Muslims to build nice minarets on mosques in XJ without getting jailed, and for Hong Kongers to be able to choose who leads them (really choose: not from a list of candidates preselected by the Party) until 2047. The motivation? A belief that humans are entitled to at least a modicum of political self-determination.
  - liuliu 7y ago
    True. But the topic here is "One-China" policy.
    - sachdevap 7y ago
      The "One-China" policy is way beyond just geographical. It has very strong cultural ambitions too. You cannot talk of the geographical policies in isolation.
    - NicoJuicy 7y ago
      It is related.. They want 1 hive mind, including religion
  - Linq123 7y ago
    You clearly from a country which never experienced neither local muslim's terror nor post colonial separatism.
- gruez 7y ago
  >True. It is just hard to rewrite nation borders once it is set and done for a country of China's size Can you expand on that? In particular, how that justifies governing those people against their will.
  - liuliu 7y ago
    it is hard to comment in this limited space without attracting a ton of downvotes. I am a futurist, and looking into 100-year from now, won't there be a united government just like what we saw in Star Trek? The rule-based global system is a relatively new thing. if you look back pass WW2, it is obvious without the United States as the solo superpower, it is barbarian politics between countries, not so much for "rule-based system". Thus, what many really expect to see, when they think about national self-determination, it is envisioned as many smaller countries with one superpower, that is the United States, with globally projected military power. That is certainly possible, but there are many questions left, for example, how that many smaller countries counter-balance the desire of the United States? Alternatively, can the E.U. be an example? It is certainly possible as well, but we have to ask, at which point, the E.U. will act more like one nation, where is the boundary? All these discussions are orthogonal to the authoritarian discussions. I am certainly sad to see people view the Chinese as unable to pursuit their own democratic process without breaking the whole country.
    - oska 7y ago
      > I am a futurist, and looking into 100-year from now, won't there be a united government just like what we saw in Star Trek? No, that is extremely unlikely. Not just unlikely, I would view it as pretty much impossible.
- gridlockd 7y ago
  > ...the desire of the Chinese people to remain as a united group. You must be talking about the Han people, certainly not the Tibetans or the Uighurs. Those clearly have separatist ambitions, but they don't have the power and the support to make it happen. As for Taiwan, Hong Kong or Macau - none of these want to be united politically with the PRC either, even though they are mostly Han. A soviet-style political breakdown could be the best thing to happen to the people of the PRC, considering that those smaller Chinese countries are very successful.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- grecy 7y ago
  Sudan did it. Up until that point it was the largest country in Africa.
- infamia 7y ago
  > To me, that is extremely unlikely given the desire of the Chinese people to remain as a united group. Who are you grouping under auspices of "the Chinese people"? Clearly there are large groups of people within China who want nothing to do with the One China policy. There is no telling what will happen when the economic gravy train comes to an end, especially if it were to do so in a jarring way. I suspect this is one of the reasons why Xi has become more authoritarian recently.
- eschaton 7y ago
  You don’t think Singapore and Malaysia are part of China too, do you?

eschaton 7y ago

Sure it can. Especially since Tibet is a separate country; invasion is no longer recognized as a way for a country to increase its area.

barnesto 7y ago
Crimea says hello
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  Georgia sends regards

oska 7y ago

Obviously Tibet can be a separate country (and was very recently). And if Singapore is viable as a separate country, why not Hong Kong too? Chinese empires have broken up many times in the past. I don't expect the fate of this current empire will be any different.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago

Why can't it? It once was, why can't it be again? Especially if the people of Tibet want it to be. [Edit: oska beat me to it, and said it better besides.]