7 ms·

The Republic of China are a nation of people that ran away and started their own place after the PRC drove them out. Putting whether China is the rightful owner

The Republic of China are a nation of people that ran away and started their own place after the PRC drove them out. Putting whether China is the rightful owner of Taiwan aside, that's a lot of politics and back and forth. But how would Taiwan be the rightful owner of Hong Kong in any case?

baby 5y ago
At least they would have been culturally closer and the integration would have been less bloody.
tomjen3 5y ago
If we assume RoC is the rightful government for China as a whole, it stands to reason that they are also the rightful owner of Hong Kong, no? And since one is a democratic government and the other is a totalitarian state actively comiting genocide, then I know whom I would want as my government.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  But the question of whom you would want has nothing to do with who is the "rightful owner" or the one who enjoys the support of the people they claim to govern.
  - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
    "rightful owner" is a funny ol' concept. Basically, whichever power is able to hold it at the time is essentially the "rightful owner". I can't seem to get past this nihilism as the correct answer.
  - GauntletWizard 5y ago
    There are two theories of government: One says that they rule by divine right, the other says that they rule by the consent of the governed. One does not recognize human rights, the other does. I know which one I want to live under; I hope that those that argue the other never have the misfortune of experiencing their wish.
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      Let’s run with the second. Do you actually think the majority of the people who live in the PRC wish for their government to be overthrown? It is obvious to me that that is not the case.
      - MathYouF 5y ago
        If only there was a mechanism by which one could find out which leaders the people would like to be governed by.
        emodendroket 5y ago
        I think it's pretty foolish to assume that just because a government is not elected means it doesn't enjoy substantial support, especially in the face of a galvanizing force like a foreign country seeking to destabilize it. Polling in China has some obvious limitations but would suggest high levels of satisfaction. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/23/913650298/as-u-s-views-of-china-grow-more-negative-chinese-support-for-their-government-ri https://www.npr.org/2020/09/23/913650298/as-u-s-views-of-chi...
        MathYouF 5y ago
        Your chatty, polite tone doesn't compensate for or conceal the fact that you're trying to provide justification for why a government that has suspended the democratic rights of its citizenry to choose its own government and their rights to freedom of expression isn't that bad. What exactly is the aim of your litany of past comments in support of the CCP? Am I to believe you just genuinely think democracy and individual liberties are not the preferred method of governance by most people around the world, and that you think the world is better off without them being campaigned for? Under which form of government do you currently find yourself?
        emodendroket 5y ago
        My polite tone is not meant to compensate for or conceal anything. Am I supposed to be rude and combative, especially in an environment where I'm well aware that my mostly-sympathetic view of China is unpopular? The aim of my "litany of past comments in support of the CCP" (how far are you digging? I post about all kinds of topics) is just sharing my opinion and the facts as I see them. In particular, I think our (i.e., the US, to answer your other personal questions) sudden turn on China is unwise. I think it's probably true that many or most people like democracy and individual liberties, but I think it's equally true that these are not the sole criteria by which they decide which government they support. If they were, and that meant that China were ripe for regime change, Singapore would only be a little behind. I think the world is better off without them being "campaigned for" if "campaigning for" is instituting a big global chess game where we try to destabilize certain governments (and an honest accounting of those rarely ends up favoring one side as purely as we'd like to flatter ourselves).
mannerheim 5y ago
The ROC officially still claims to be the legitimate government of all of mainland China.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  They also claim all of Mongolia, so maybe that should be given to them as well?
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  In truth they don't but it's one of China red lines. If the ROC drops its claim on the mainland and just tries to be an independent country (things which the ROC wants to do), China said they will see it as casus belli and invades. China bullies Taïwan a lot but the rest of the world remains spinless in front of it.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    The remarks supposedly uttered by Trump on this topic [0] are one of the truer things he said: "Taiwan is like two feet from China. We are eight thousand miles away. If they invade, there isn’t a fucking thing we can do about it." There's a lot of talk about standing up to China, but in concrete terms, what does that mean? It's hard to see how any "kinetic" action doesn't go nuclear. I think we should just stop poking the hornet's nest; the Chinese would be quite happy leaving the 1992 Consensus alone. [0] https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vpqb/trump-wasnt-going-to-do-a-fucking-thing-if-china-invaded-taiwan-a-new-book-says https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vpqb/trump-wasnt-going-to-...
    - abraae 5y ago
      Ignoring the author of that quote, that sounds pretty realpolitik to me. What other option is there anyway?
      - emodendroket 5y ago
        “Limited” nuclear war is one people are talking about, or else first use that’s so devastating that it removes the Chinese ability to respond. I think they’re ill considered but I suppose they are options.
bpodgursky 5y ago
The ROC nationalists "ran away" because they did almost all the anti-Japanese fighting during WWII, while the communists sat back and conserved their strength for the coming civil war. Which they proceeded to win. Edit: It's true. Go read a book or something: https://thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-ccp-didnt-fight-imperial-japan-the-kmt-did/ https://thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-ccp-didnt-fight-imperial... > This would be the trend of the entire war. As two scholars note, “From 1937 to 1945, there were 23 battles where both sides employed at least a regiment each. The CCP was not a main force in any of these. The only time it participated, it sent a mere 1,000 to 1,500 men, and then only as a security detachment on one of the flanks.There were 1,117 significant engagements on a scale smaller than a regular battle, but the CCP fought in only one. Of the approximately 40,000 skirmishes, just 200 were fought by the CCP, or 0.5 percent.”
- torstenvl 5y ago
  Based on the downvote patterns in this thread, it's pretty obvious CCP trolls with HN accounts are highly active.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    Well, it could be that there is an army of paid trolls targeting this relatively small and specialized forum, but it strikes me as much more likely that this is a contentious issue and not everyone feels the same way about it.
    - monksy 5y ago
      There are financial incentives to push propaganda on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
      - emodendroket 5y ago
        Considering how frequently I find people who just don't like what I have to say accusing me of being bought off by some state, company, or other entity, I find such accusations less than compelling when thrown around on so little evidence.
CWuestefeld 5y ago
Wait a minute - circa 1930, "China" included both the mainland and the island of Formosa. Then there was a civil war in which the Communists forcibly took over the mainland portion but weren't able to wrest control of Formosa. So as far as I can tell, the mainland is now the "rogue province" that isn't honoring the legit government that still remains over there in Taiwan. And thus we should be thinking of the PRC as "West Taiwan".
- coronasaurus 5y ago
  They didn't take it over "forcibly", they took it over with popular support from the Chinese people. If that doesn't grant you legitimacy I honestly don't know what would.
  - CWuestefeld 5y ago
    Popular support would be democratic elections. That's not what happened - it was a civil war, fighting the KMT supporters.
  - strogonoff 5y ago
    The reason it had popular support is because USSR gave them money and resources, presumably just for this reason.
- CogitoCogito 5y ago
  Formosa wasn't a part of China in the 1930s it was a part of Japan.
- brobinson 5y ago
  The Qing Dynasty lost Formosa to Imperial Japan in 1895.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ravel-bar-foo 5y ago
The treaty of Nanjing which gave HK to the UK was made between the Queen of England and the Emperor of China. The Republic of China was the successor state to the empire. The present official Chinese copy of the treaty is kept in the National Palace Museum in Taipei. Historically, the People's republic of China had to lobby the UN quite hard to take over the treaties and privileges (UN security council membership) which the Republic had assumed.

baby 5y ago

At least they would have been culturally closer and the integration would have been less bloody.

tomjen3 5y ago

If we assume RoC is the rightful government for China as a whole, it stands to reason that they are also the rightful owner of Hong Kong, no? And since one is a democratic government and the other is a totalitarian state actively comiting genocide, then I know whom I would want as my government.

emodendroket 5y ago
But the question of whom you would want has nothing to do with who is the "rightful owner" or the one who enjoys the support of the people they claim to govern.
- BLKNSLVR 5y ago
  "rightful owner" is a funny ol' concept. Basically, whichever power is able to hold it at the time is essentially the "rightful owner". I can't seem to get past this nihilism as the correct answer.
- GauntletWizard 5y ago
  There are two theories of government: One says that they rule by divine right, the other says that they rule by the consent of the governed. One does not recognize human rights, the other does. I know which one I want to live under; I hope that those that argue the other never have the misfortune of experiencing their wish.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    Let’s run with the second. Do you actually think the majority of the people who live in the PRC wish for their government to be overthrown? It is obvious to me that that is not the case.
    - MathYouF 5y ago
      If only there was a mechanism by which one could find out which leaders the people would like to be governed by.
      - emodendroket 5y ago
        I think it's pretty foolish to assume that just because a government is not elected means it doesn't enjoy substantial support, especially in the face of a galvanizing force like a foreign country seeking to destabilize it. Polling in China has some obvious limitations but would suggest high levels of satisfaction. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/23/913650298/as-u-s-views-of-china-grow-more-negative-chinese-support-for-their-government-ri https://www.npr.org/2020/09/23/913650298/as-u-s-views-of-chi...
        MathYouF 5y ago
        Your chatty, polite tone doesn't compensate for or conceal the fact that you're trying to provide justification for why a government that has suspended the democratic rights of its citizenry to choose its own government and their rights to freedom of expression isn't that bad. What exactly is the aim of your litany of past comments in support of the CCP? Am I to believe you just genuinely think democracy and individual liberties are not the preferred method of governance by most people around the world, and that you think the world is better off without them being campaigned for? Under which form of government do you currently find yourself?
        emodendroket 5y ago
        My polite tone is not meant to compensate for or conceal anything. Am I supposed to be rude and combative, especially in an environment where I'm well aware that my mostly-sympathetic view of China is unpopular? The aim of my "litany of past comments in support of the CCP" (how far are you digging? I post about all kinds of topics) is just sharing my opinion and the facts as I see them. In particular, I think our (i.e., the US, to answer your other personal questions) sudden turn on China is unwise. I think it's probably true that many or most people like democracy and individual liberties, but I think it's equally true that these are not the sole criteria by which they decide which government they support. If they were, and that meant that China were ripe for regime change, Singapore would only be a little behind. I think the world is better off without them being "campaigned for" if "campaigning for" is instituting a big global chess game where we try to destabilize certain governments (and an honest accounting of those rarely ends up favoring one side as purely as we'd like to flatter ourselves).

mannerheim 5y ago

The ROC officially still claims to be the legitimate government of all of mainland China.

emodendroket 5y ago
They also claim all of Mongolia, so maybe that should be given to them as well?
WastingMyTime89 5y ago
In truth they don't but it's one of China red lines. If the ROC drops its claim on the mainland and just tries to be an independent country (things which the ROC wants to do), China said they will see it as casus belli and invades. China bullies Taïwan a lot but the rest of the world remains spinless in front of it.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  The remarks supposedly uttered by Trump on this topic [0] are one of the truer things he said: "Taiwan is like two feet from China. We are eight thousand miles away. If they invade, there isn’t a fucking thing we can do about it." There's a lot of talk about standing up to China, but in concrete terms, what does that mean? It's hard to see how any "kinetic" action doesn't go nuclear. I think we should just stop poking the hornet's nest; the Chinese would be quite happy leaving the 1992 Consensus alone. [0] https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vpqb/trump-wasnt-going-to-do-a-fucking-thing-if-china-invaded-taiwan-a-new-book-says https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7vpqb/trump-wasnt-going-to-...
  - abraae 5y ago
    Ignoring the author of that quote, that sounds pretty realpolitik to me. What other option is there anyway?
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      “Limited” nuclear war is one people are talking about, or else first use that’s so devastating that it removes the Chinese ability to respond. I think they’re ill considered but I suppose they are options.

bpodgursky 5y ago

The ROC nationalists "ran away" because they did almost all the anti-Japanese fighting during WWII, while the communists sat back and conserved their strength for the coming civil war. Which they proceeded to win. Edit: It's true. Go read a book or something: https://thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-ccp-didnt-fight-imperial-japan-the-kmt-did/ https://thediplomat.com/2014/09/the-ccp-didnt-fight-imperial... > This would be the trend of the entire war. As two scholars note, “From 1937 to 1945, there were 23 battles where both sides employed at least a regiment each. The CCP was not a main force in any of these. The only time it participated, it sent a mere 1,000 to 1,500 men, and then only as a security detachment on one of the flanks.There were 1,117 significant engagements on a scale smaller than a regular battle, but the CCP fought in only one. Of the approximately 40,000 skirmishes, just 200 were fought by the CCP, or 0.5 percent.”

torstenvl 5y ago
Based on the downvote patterns in this thread, it's pretty obvious CCP trolls with HN accounts are highly active.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  Well, it could be that there is an army of paid trolls targeting this relatively small and specialized forum, but it strikes me as much more likely that this is a contentious issue and not everyone feels the same way about it.
  - monksy 5y ago
    There are financial incentives to push propaganda on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      Considering how frequently I find people who just don't like what I have to say accusing me of being bought off by some state, company, or other entity, I find such accusations less than compelling when thrown around on so little evidence.

CWuestefeld 5y ago

Wait a minute - circa 1930, "China" included both the mainland and the island of Formosa. Then there was a civil war in which the Communists forcibly took over the mainland portion but weren't able to wrest control of Formosa. So as far as I can tell, the mainland is now the "rogue province" that isn't honoring the legit government that still remains over there in Taiwan. And thus we should be thinking of the PRC as "West Taiwan".

coronasaurus 5y ago
They didn't take it over "forcibly", they took it over with popular support from the Chinese people. If that doesn't grant you legitimacy I honestly don't know what would.
- CWuestefeld 5y ago
  Popular support would be democratic elections. That's not what happened - it was a civil war, fighting the KMT supporters.
- strogonoff 5y ago
  The reason it had popular support is because USSR gave them money and resources, presumably just for this reason.
CogitoCogito 5y ago
Formosa wasn't a part of China in the 1930s it was a part of Japan.
brobinson 5y ago
The Qing Dynasty lost Formosa to Imperial Japan in 1895.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

ravel-bar-foo 5y ago

The treaty of Nanjing which gave HK to the UK was made between the Queen of England and the Emperor of China. The Republic of China was the successor state to the empire. The present official Chinese copy of the treaty is kept in the National Palace Museum in Taipei. Historically, the People's republic of China had to lobby the UN quite hard to take over the treaties and privileges (UN security council membership) which the Republic had assumed.