4 ms·

Taiwan has never been under control of the Qing dynasty. The Ming dynasty pushed out the Dutch. 200 years of Qing rule did nothing with Taiwan. At the end of th

Taiwan has never been under control of the Qing dynasty. The Ming dynasty pushed out the Dutch. 200 years of Qing rule did nothing with Taiwan. At the end of the Qing dynasty they decided to call Taiwan a province to deter Japan from invading. When japan invaded they threw their hands in the air and handed Taiwan over. Japan was not even convinced Taiwan belonged to China. The Qing dynasty had to convince Japan by claiming there are other parts of the world where tribes live even tho the country is ruled. Before 1943 the CCP called Taiwan an independent nation and nationality. They advocated for Taiwan independence. Mao said they would help Korea and Taiwan seek independence. It wasn’t until the allied forces asked KMT to adminster Taiwan until a later date that the CCP decided Taiwan belonged to them. Taiwans claims to China are due to KMT writing the constitution. The reality is people in Taiwan don’t consider China part of Taiwan. Taiwan is its own country and they don’t care about China. They want to continue to live their life in peace.

ssnistfajen 4y ago
>Taiwan has never been under control of the Qing dynasty 131 citations and 86 sources say you were wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_under_Qing_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_under_Qing_rule Yes most of the eastern parts were unclaimed because the concept of nation sovereignty had yet to reach East Asia, but the era of Qing rule is very much integral to the history of Taiwan because majority ethno-cultural group directly descended from those who lived under Qing rule. >Mao said they would help Korea and Taiwan seek independence. Mao also said his home province of Hunan should also seek independence: https://www.jstor.org/stable/652585 https://www.jstor.org/stable/652585. Sun Yat-sen wanted to drive out all Manchus in his original revolutionary manifesto yet happily accepted the new multi-ethnic ROC that completely inherited most of the land that were not historically inhabited by ethnic Han. People change their views all the time, especially politicians who have much to gain from having flexible views. And yes "reunification" is a direct translation of PRC political jargon that carries the (false) connotation of Taiwan being a breakaway province when in reality it was the CCP who broke away from the ROC in a rebellion to create their own country. Revisionist history is bad history no matter which side it comes from.
- philliphaydon 4y ago
  Your Wikipedia link doesn’t dispute anything I said. Taiwan was not under control or rule for the majority of the Qing dynasty. People were not allowed to freely travel to the island until 1875. It was called a province for ~10 years. The Qing dynasty rule of Taiwan was shorter than Japanese rule on Taiwan. By saying that it belonged to the Qing dynasty, we are saying that Russias occupation of regions of Ukraine is legal and legit. They are there so therefore they must own it. Despite the people not wanting to be ruled by Russia.
  - ssnistfajen 4y ago
    >Taiwan was not under control or rule for the majority of the Qing dynasty. Clearly you did not comprehend the linked article. Surely a regime that appointed bureaucrats to be stationed locally in their administrative areas for nearly 200 years means it was Terra Nullius all along! By your logic British rule in India didn't begin until 1858 when the British has been colonizing India for 100 years prior. Good job being a disingenuous revisionist. >People were not allowed to freely travel to the island until 1875. It was called a province for ~10 years. The very fact that the Qing dynasty had effective immigration controls over a land they supposedly did not "control" or "rule" is a testament to them actually exercising control over a land they managed to govern. The Qing Dynasty did not exercise immigration controls over the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia, because they did control those lands. That is not the case with Taiwan. The existence of immigration control is proof of governance. The PRC had strict internal immigration controls for the first 30 years of its existence, modelled after the Soviet Union. Would you say either of these countries did not effectively "control" or "rule" the very territories that formed them? >By saying that it belonged to the Qing dynasty, we are saying that Russias occupation of regions of Ukraine is legal and legit. Your nonsensical comparison to Ukraine just further reaffirms that. Nobody said a word about Ukraine until you tried to shoehorn it with gross disregard of the history of Ukraine. >They are there so therefore they must own it. The Qing Dynasty ceased to exist 100+ years ago and they have very little to do with the ROC or the PRC of today despite the ROC technically having legally suceeded the Qing Dynasty. So whether the Qing Dynasty "owned" Taiwan has nothing to do with cross-strait politics of today. Would you deny Tsarist Russia "owned" what is modern day Ukraine? And are you aware whether Tsarist Russia "owned" what is modern day Ukraine has absolutely nothing to do with Vladimir Putin's personal claims? I'm talking about the rampant historical revisionism seen run amok in every English language discussion about Taiwan that is ultimately infantilizing the real issues faced by Taiwan, not whether the PRC "must own it" (hint: the PRC has never "owned it" and never deserves to "own it").

ssnistfajen 4y ago

>Taiwan has never been under control of the Qing dynasty 131 citations and 86 sources say you were wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_under_Qing_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_under_Qing_rule Yes most of the eastern parts were unclaimed because the concept of nation sovereignty had yet to reach East Asia, but the era of Qing rule is very much integral to the history of Taiwan because majority ethno-cultural group directly descended from those who lived under Qing rule. >Mao said they would help Korea and Taiwan seek independence. Mao also said his home province of Hunan should also seek independence: https://www.jstor.org/stable/652585 https://www.jstor.org/stable/652585. Sun Yat-sen wanted to drive out all Manchus in his original revolutionary manifesto yet happily accepted the new multi-ethnic ROC that completely inherited most of the land that were not historically inhabited by ethnic Han. People change their views all the time, especially politicians who have much to gain from having flexible views. And yes "reunification" is a direct translation of PRC political jargon that carries the (false) connotation of Taiwan being a breakaway province when in reality it was the CCP who broke away from the ROC in a rebellion to create their own country. Revisionist history is bad history no matter which side it comes from.

philliphaydon 4y ago
Your Wikipedia link doesn’t dispute anything I said. Taiwan was not under control or rule for the majority of the Qing dynasty. People were not allowed to freely travel to the island until 1875. It was called a province for ~10 years. The Qing dynasty rule of Taiwan was shorter than Japanese rule on Taiwan. By saying that it belonged to the Qing dynasty, we are saying that Russias occupation of regions of Ukraine is legal and legit. They are there so therefore they must own it. Despite the people not wanting to be ruled by Russia.
- ssnistfajen 4y ago
  >Taiwan was not under control or rule for the majority of the Qing dynasty. Clearly you did not comprehend the linked article. Surely a regime that appointed bureaucrats to be stationed locally in their administrative areas for nearly 200 years means it was Terra Nullius all along! By your logic British rule in India didn't begin until 1858 when the British has been colonizing India for 100 years prior. Good job being a disingenuous revisionist. >People were not allowed to freely travel to the island until 1875. It was called a province for ~10 years. The very fact that the Qing dynasty had effective immigration controls over a land they supposedly did not "control" or "rule" is a testament to them actually exercising control over a land they managed to govern. The Qing Dynasty did not exercise immigration controls over the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia, because they did control those lands. That is not the case with Taiwan. The existence of immigration control is proof of governance. The PRC had strict internal immigration controls for the first 30 years of its existence, modelled after the Soviet Union. Would you say either of these countries did not effectively "control" or "rule" the very territories that formed them? >By saying that it belonged to the Qing dynasty, we are saying that Russias occupation of regions of Ukraine is legal and legit. Your nonsensical comparison to Ukraine just further reaffirms that. Nobody said a word about Ukraine until you tried to shoehorn it with gross disregard of the history of Ukraine. >They are there so therefore they must own it. The Qing Dynasty ceased to exist 100+ years ago and they have very little to do with the ROC or the PRC of today despite the ROC technically having legally suceeded the Qing Dynasty. So whether the Qing Dynasty "owned" Taiwan has nothing to do with cross-strait politics of today. Would you deny Tsarist Russia "owned" what is modern day Ukraine? And are you aware whether Tsarist Russia "owned" what is modern day Ukraine has absolutely nothing to do with Vladimir Putin's personal claims? I'm talking about the rampant historical revisionism seen run amok in every English language discussion about Taiwan that is ultimately infantilizing the real issues faced by Taiwan, not whether the PRC "must own it" (hint: the PRC has never "owned it" and never deserves to "own it").