china/taiwan news

Status
Not open for further replies.

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
No, you are mistaken. I said nothing about separatism;
You said: "23 million people get their way over 1.4 billion? What a Western dream.", in the hypothetical scenario of China being a democratic country. Most democratic country's constitutions do not have provisions for secession. Therefore, there is no way that would happen in a democracy, unless it is the will of the people.

I said it is inefficient and results in incompetence as seen in massive populations like India. It also causes a nation's politicians to waste time infighting for an election, broadcasting their views to enemy powers in the attempt to win over the uneducated masses. It's not a system for China and the West has no choice but to accept that.
People have argued for thousands of years against democracy. Heck, even one of Western culture's most influential thinkers, Plato, was against democracy. If China has found a system that works better for herself and her people, more glory to China.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
You said: "23 million people get their way over 1.4 billion? What a Western dream.", in the hypothetical scenario of China being a democratic country. Most democratic country's constitutions do not have provisions for secession.
OK, cool. Don't care, not a democracy, not going to be one. China's system also does not allow for secession. Got that covered.
Therefore, there is no way that would happen in a democracy, unless it is the will of the people.
That contradicts your assertion that there is no provision for secession if a vote can make it happen but who cares? All this is meaningless ranting. China's not a democracy.
People have argued for thousands of years against democracy. Heck, even one of Western culture's most influential thinkers, Plato, was against democracy. If China has found a system that works better for herself and her people, more glory to China.
We have, thanks. Stop trying to convert us; it's annoying.
 

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
That contradicts your assertion that there is no provision for secession if a vote can make it happen but who cares? All this is meaningless ranting. China's not a democracy.
People can vote to change the constitution. But I agree, no point to pursue this further.
 

weig2000

Captain
All - I understand Taiwan is a very emotional and at times explosive issue/button for many of us here. But please stay calm, and discuss rationally even if we don't necessarily agree with each other.
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
Various Taiwan administrations, particularly under DPP, have tried all kinds of tricks to distance them from One China, including those under Lee Tenghui, Chen Shuibian, and now Tsai Yingwen. But all of them dare not to change the most important thing, the ROC constitution article that specifically states that Taiwan and mainland China are part of one China. There are various efforts by the Taiwan Independence supporters to hold referendum to change that or declare formal Taiwan Independent, but none of them is successful to have one. Most people with some common sense know the severe consequence of even holding one.

I had touched on this subject in another thread and was about to post something to this effect. Because of ROC constitution is meant to be the constitution of all of China, not just the constitution of Taiwan, it would require constitutional amendment to declare independence.

Now my question, when is the the exact mechanism this is accomplished? Can the ROC legislature members do this on their own, or would it require citizens' direct referendum?

If it is the latter, then I don't think this has any real meaning. As we can roughly surmise, politics in most democratic countries is usually 1/3 strongly on one side, 1/3 strongly on another, and 1/3 no real strong feelings. This is pretty much the same in Taiwan where 1/3 is always "strongly Chinese" and hasn't changed in decades. The TI side would need to convince people without strong political beliefs to essentially commit suicide for their benefit.

Furthermore, if Crimea and Georgia are any examples
1. Western Intervention will not happen if there is any real danger of expanded conflict
2. Local population is unlikely to resist if there is no unity in purpose (as above, 1/3 of the population would actively work against the faction that would declare independence)
 

chlosy

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think China is fully prepared to deal with the US/Japan military intervention in the war of Taiwan unification. They have been preparing all these years. Without going into the details, I think even the US knows that the chance that it can intervene successfully is slim now, unless it escalates to the thermal nuclear level, in which case we all know there will be no winner. The bottom line is that China's will is much, much stronger when it comes to Taiwan, simply because it's Chinese territory. And the capability is in place now too, and grows stronger by the day.

Taiwan once had good chance to negotiate some good terms. Mainland China was ready and willing to concede a lot if Taiwan came to the negotiating table. This was particularly true in the early to mid-90's when the relative power balance between the two was most favorable to Taiwan (Taiwan's GDP was 45% of mainland's at its peak around that time; last year it was 4%). That chance has slipped away.

China's official standing policy for Taiwan is still "One Country, Two Systems" which started in the early '80s. But it is increasingly viewed in China as out-of-date and out of sync with reality. The OCTW policy was initially created for Taiwan, but had been implemented in Hong Kong first. China made huge concessions for the smooth return of Hong Kong, because it had a much weaker hand then. The lessons learned from Hong Kong's returning and since suggest that the unification with Taiwan must be predominately on China's terms for the better future governance of Taiwan (and the logical conclusion would be that the unification process might not be all that peaceful after all, but might be better in the long term...). DPP's brainwashing on Taiwan's new generation in the last 25 years has also made peaceful unification increasingly hopeless. The late Singapore prime mister and Singapore's founding father, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who had very good relationships with both Chinese and Taiwanese leaders, once commented that DPP was very irresponsible and even cruel to instill the idea and sense of Taiwan independence into Taiwan's younger generation, because they would have a very hard and painful time to adjust when it is reunified with mainland China. Clearly, Mr. Lee believes Taiwan will be reunified with China.

OK, all these may be too complex to talk about here. I don't know how familiar you and people here are with Taiwan and/or Hong Kong issues. One thing is clear, if people mostly follow western media coverage on Taiwan, you will get a very limited or even wrong picture. Here is a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Taiwan, the author is an American living in Taiwan, who speaks Chinese and is staunchly anti-PRC/CCP. Even he feels something uneasy beyond the superficial western coverage of Taiwan.

As recently as a few years ago, I read an editorial in The Economist - I think it was around January 2017 issue, but am not too sure. It advised that China should leave Taiwan alone, and in exchange, China is allowed to have the right to reach nuclear parity with the US. Something like that. I was shocked. The Economist, as a premier western journal, clearly has no idea what Taiwan meant for China. The editorial was partly motivated by the feeling of increasingly powerful presence of China on the world stage and the palpable pressure of China's willingness to bring Taiwan to the fold. Yet it still talks about China so naively and condescendingly.

The Economist is very anti-China, very pro West led order. That's why I cancelled my subscription :)
 

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
There are a fundamental differences between the people of mainland and the Taiwanese: Mainlanders are doers, Taiwanese are naggers. Sure they have grievances against the KMT, but so did the mainlanders! Yet all them Taiwanese ever do is bitching about it. Mainlanders, on the other hand, took up arms overthrew their KMT asses.
To their credit, the Taiwanese tried to do so in 1947, but they didn’t stand a chance. Despite their desperate appeals, the US chose to ignore them and turned a blind eye to the massacre that followed the landing of mainland reinforcements.
 

montyp165

Junior Member
To their credit, the Taiwanese tried to do so in 1947, but they didn’t stand a chance. Despite their desperate appeals, the US chose to ignore them and turned a blind eye to the massacre that followed the landing of mainland reinforcements.

It's more complicated than that, Chiang's deputy acted on his own accord against Chiang's intentions (and was executed for it), while the Taiwanese protestors had many pro-Japanese sympathizers and agitators amongst themselves, so the US also had another reason not to bother.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top