5 ms·

The case can certainly be made, but the independence of Tibet only took place because of the collapse of the Qing, both the PRC and the ROC had the intent to re

The case can certainly be made, but the independence of Tibet only took place because of the collapse of the Qing, both the PRC and the ROC had the intent to retake Tibet once the civil war was concluded. One may say that Tibet is entitled to independence, but its annexation doesn’t represent some sort of aggressive territorial expansion beyond chinas historical borders.

throwaway12245 4y ago
Didn't Mao attack Tibet "aggressively"?
- comte7092 4y ago
  >beyond Chinas historical borders. A civil war tends to be aggressive.
  - throwawaylinux 4y ago
    Yes the Russian civil war is rather vigorous at the moment.
    - comte7092 4y ago
      You jest but that’s pretty much exactly how Russia sees it. It’s also a pretty ridiculous comparison at the same time. China suffered a century of invasions from western powers from Britain to Japan, had a several hundred year dynasty collapse, and fought a civil war for over 20 years. China is becoming more belligerent as it has risen in power, but the ink spilled about its actions/outside threats vastly outstrips reality.
      - throwawaylinux 4y ago
        > You jest but that’s pretty much exactly how Russia sees it. I don't jest, I'm saying that because it's pretty equivalent. > It’s also a pretty ridiculous comparison at the same time. China suffered a century of invasions from western powers from Britain to Japan, had a several hundred year dynasty collapse, and fought a civil war for over 20 years. Everyone has suffered centuries of invasions by western and other powers, including the west and including conquest by various Chinese dynasties. Doesn't make imperialism any different or morally justifiable.
        comte7092 4y ago
        I’m not justifying imperialism. There are reasonable arguments to be made against Chinas actions. The matter of fact here is that all of those regions listed: Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan. There are or were fought over as a direct result of external imperialism. Tibet had been a part of the Chinese empire for over a thousand years, and only emerged as an independent nation after a total collapse and state failure. There was a power vacuum for almost 40 years, and once a new government emerged, it retook Tibet. Hong Kong and Macau only exist because of western imperialism. It has been government policy for both the PRC and the ROC that Taiwan is a part of China for the last 70 years, only recently has Taiwan started to break from that. All that said, I am now here trying to justify actions. Rather I am looking to contextualize. In the west we couch everything into a narrative of good vs evil, with the west being the good and moral force, and our enemies being the evil side. Reality isn’t so clean. And I am personally very disappointed to see the tenor of conversation around US China relations these days. Neither country is perfect and both countries have done things I think are wrong. I would hope that we can engage each other in a productive way rather than a destructive one, but more and more things seem to be going in the opposite direction.
        taskforcegemini 4y ago
        that would be great, but can't rely on that as long as some cultures consider playing nice as a weakness
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        This is pretty laughable really I'm sorry. You can't cherry pick a few actions by a few countries and say "oh this is why things are the way they are and therefore ...". China might be a province of Imperial Japan today if it were not for "the west". I'm personally very pleased to see more western liberal democracies waking up and recognizing China for the brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that it is. There's still a lot of western politicians and business people corrupted and twisted by all the money that's to be had sadly, but things are changing slowly.
AbrahamParangi 4y ago
If you consider the current Chinese state to have continuity of legitimacy with the previous Chinese states, then you might also consider that all of those states expanded by taking chunks out of their neighbors for thousands of years. To quote from the wikipedia article on Chinese Expansionism[1] "Chinese expansionism over the last four thousand years has been a central feature of the history of East Asia." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_expansionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_expansionism
- comte7092 4y ago
  You could basically say the same thing about any super power: the US, the UK, the USSR, etc. None of those has the same longevity of empire as does China however.

throwaway12245 4y ago

Didn't Mao attack Tibet "aggressively"?

comte7092 4y ago
>beyond Chinas historical borders. A civil war tends to be aggressive.
- throwawaylinux 4y ago
  Yes the Russian civil war is rather vigorous at the moment.
  - comte7092 4y ago
    You jest but that’s pretty much exactly how Russia sees it. It’s also a pretty ridiculous comparison at the same time. China suffered a century of invasions from western powers from Britain to Japan, had a several hundred year dynasty collapse, and fought a civil war for over 20 years. China is becoming more belligerent as it has risen in power, but the ink spilled about its actions/outside threats vastly outstrips reality.
    - throwawaylinux 4y ago
      > You jest but that’s pretty much exactly how Russia sees it. I don't jest, I'm saying that because it's pretty equivalent. > It’s also a pretty ridiculous comparison at the same time. China suffered a century of invasions from western powers from Britain to Japan, had a several hundred year dynasty collapse, and fought a civil war for over 20 years. Everyone has suffered centuries of invasions by western and other powers, including the west and including conquest by various Chinese dynasties. Doesn't make imperialism any different or morally justifiable.
      - comte7092 4y ago
        I’m not justifying imperialism. There are reasonable arguments to be made against Chinas actions. The matter of fact here is that all of those regions listed: Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan. There are or were fought over as a direct result of external imperialism. Tibet had been a part of the Chinese empire for over a thousand years, and only emerged as an independent nation after a total collapse and state failure. There was a power vacuum for almost 40 years, and once a new government emerged, it retook Tibet. Hong Kong and Macau only exist because of western imperialism. It has been government policy for both the PRC and the ROC that Taiwan is a part of China for the last 70 years, only recently has Taiwan started to break from that. All that said, I am now here trying to justify actions. Rather I am looking to contextualize. In the west we couch everything into a narrative of good vs evil, with the west being the good and moral force, and our enemies being the evil side. Reality isn’t so clean. And I am personally very disappointed to see the tenor of conversation around US China relations these days. Neither country is perfect and both countries have done things I think are wrong. I would hope that we can engage each other in a productive way rather than a destructive one, but more and more things seem to be going in the opposite direction.
        taskforcegemini 4y ago
        that would be great, but can't rely on that as long as some cultures consider playing nice as a weakness
        throwawaylinux 4y ago
        This is pretty laughable really I'm sorry. You can't cherry pick a few actions by a few countries and say "oh this is why things are the way they are and therefore ...". China might be a province of Imperial Japan today if it were not for "the west". I'm personally very pleased to see more western liberal democracies waking up and recognizing China for the brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that it is. There's still a lot of western politicians and business people corrupted and twisted by all the money that's to be had sadly, but things are changing slowly.

AbrahamParangi 4y ago

If you consider the current Chinese state to have continuity of legitimacy with the previous Chinese states, then you might also consider that all of those states expanded by taking chunks out of their neighbors for thousands of years. To quote from the wikipedia article on Chinese Expansionism[1] "Chinese expansionism over the last four thousand years has been a central feature of the history of East Asia." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_expansionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_expansionism

comte7092 4y ago
You could basically say the same thing about any super power: the US, the UK, the USSR, etc. None of those has the same longevity of empire as does China however.