Everybody knows about the backstory, there was a civil war, KMT fled to Taiwan creating two Chinas sort of, maybe, neither recognises the other, whole thing. ROC (Taiwan) ended up transitioning from military rule to a multi-party democracy, while the PRC (mainland China) didn’t do that (they did reform economically, “socialism with Chinese characteristics” and all that, but still a one-party state, not a multi-party democracy). The status quo right now is that Taiwan is in the grey area of statehood where they function pretty much independently but aren’t properly recognised, and both sides of the strait are feeling pretty tense right now.
Taiwan’s stance on the issue is that they would like to remain politically and economically independent of mainland China, retaining their multi-party democracy, political connections to its allies, economic trade connections, etc. Also, a majority of the people in Taiwan do not support reunification with China.
China’s stance on the issue is that Taiwan should be reunified with the mainland at all costs, ideally peacefully, but war is not ruled out. They argue that Taiwan was unfairly separated from the mainland by imperial powers in their “century of humiliation”. Strategically, taking Taiwan would be beneficial to China as they would have better control of the sea.
Is it even possible for both sides to agree to a peaceful solution? Personally, I can only see two ways this could go about that has the consent of both parties. One, a reformist leader takes power in the mainland and gives up on Taiwan, and the two exist as separate independent nations. Or two, the mainland gets a super-reformist leader that transitions the mainland to a multi-party democracy, and maybe then reunification could be on the table, with Taiwan keeping an autonomous status given the large cultural difference (similar to Hong Kong or Macau’s current status). Both options are, unfortunately, very unlikely to occur in the near future.
A third option (?) would be a pseudo-unification, where Taiwan becomes a recognised country, but there can be free movement of people between the mainland and Taiwan, free trade, that sort of stuff (sort of like the EU? Maybe?). Not sure if the PRC would accept that.
What are your thoughts on a peaceful solution to the crisis that both sides could agree on?
edit: Damn there are crazies in both ends of the arguments. I really don’t think giving Taiwan nukes would help solve the problem.
I think the current best solution, looking at the more reasonable and realistic comments, seems to be to maintain the status quo, at least until both sides of the strait are able to come into some sort of agreement (which seems to be worlds away right now given their current very opposing stances on the issue)
I suspect they do not actually want the return of a KMT government in China. But I haven’t asked them.
You likely regard anyone who opposes in any way the Chinese, Iranian or Cuban governments as being inherently far-right.
He directly stated that the Republic of China is the legitimate ruler of all of China, mainland and Taiwan included. When someone directly tells you something, why on Earth are you suspecting them of lying? Further, no, I don’t consider anyone who opposes China’s, Iran’s, or Cuba’s government in any way to be far-right. You seem extraordinarily comfortable with inventing views for other people.
The ROC is not, currently, a one-party dictatorship. I would project he would want their system of governance. That said, it’s obviously all fantastical and he’s likely just venting/ragebaiting certain people here.
I don’t really have any reason to trust your assessment of him.
The ROC is a dictatorship of capital, similar to the US, Japan, ROK, etc. He is directly stating that he wants the ROC as the legitimate government of the entire mainland, rather than the socialist system set up and chosen by the mainland itself. You have no evidence of him wanting anything other than what I said, and are simply running interference for another right-winger, calling his expressed views “fantastical.” Would you do the same if a Neo-Nazi called for exterminating all Jewish people in the United States, claiming it’s “unrealistic” and simply “rage-baiting?”
Right, so this is what I mean when I say that you would portray anyone who wants China (the PRC) to fall as far-right. Or anyone who supports continued Taiwanese existence as an independent state as ‘far-right’. I’m not bound by your ideological presuppositions regarding “dictatorship of capital” on this point. We’re not going to agree on this.
Well that is both unrealistic, and rage-baiting - but it is also appalling in a way that calling for the collapse of a regime is not appalling. Calling for the slaughter of an ethnic and cultural group is however, unlikely as it is, morally repugnant. So the difference is pretty self-evident.
Calling for the collapse of socialism in the PRC is absolutely appalling. When the USSR dissolved, there was an estimated 7 million excess deaths due to skyrocketing poverty. Wanting the restoration of capitalism and the destruction of socialist democracy in China is wanting the same to happen to an even greater number of people than were impacted by the dissolution of the USSR.
Taiwan is not independent. It is neither a fully incorporated territory of the PRC, nor an independent state. Independence implies something new, something the ROC itself does not recognize. The ROC considers itself to be the rightful ruler of the mainland, not an independent state, which is why maintaining the status quo is popular there, as people neither want independence nor to be fully incorporated.
Can you honestly answer why you run interference for right-wingers?
I think in their head, they imagine a peaceful and quick and painless transition. Realistic? Obviously not. Laughable. People also call for the collapse of the US government which in reality would bring in a possible violent and poor period just like the collapse of any other mega-state would., like China. It’s likely they have, or expressed an idealised view of how they think such a regime collapse would happen. It’s probably ultimately not that deep in-so-far as they are expressing it.
It’s a farce. A gentleman’s agreement that most of the world acknowledges. Taiwan is de facto independent, and only doesn’t aspire towards official international recognition because of not wanting to antagonise China. That’s it.
“Maintaining the status quo” is also the far safer option in terms of not upsetting their neighbour. I don’t think the Taiwanese believe that it’s possible to somehow unify with the mainland on any grounds that they would find acceptable, and nor is it possible that they can somehow convert the Chinese mainland into a state that they would likely merge into, or convince them to join Taiwan. So it’s mostly done to keep the peace as the conditions of ‘status quo’ are considered reasonable enough. Most Taiwanese people identify as Taiwanese now, not Chinese. They’ve simply moved on. But China forces them to keep up this charade.
Loaded question. Ignored.
You keep inventing views for people you’ve never met, and didn’t even bother to check his profile to notice that he uses he/him pronouns and was born in the PRC.
The major difference here being that people call for revolutionary overthrow of the US Empire, which would save millions of lives globally and would dramatically uplift the living standards of the Statesian working classes. Advocating a return to capitalism and a collapse of socialism in China would have the opposite effect.
Incorrect. Taiwan is de facto not independent, and is in many ways incorporated into the PRC already beyond formal measures. Both de facto and de jure, Taiwan is neither fully independent nor fully incorporated.
And in the coming decades, demographics will shift. The US Empire is dying away, and China is rising. The most likely outcome is that the US pulls out of Taiwan and Taiwanese people willingly join with the PRC in the long run, which is why the PRC has no intention to intervene unless provoked.
Important question dodged, discussion over.
I just use “they” and “their” generally habitually. In any case, I see no reason to think he actually wants Chinese people to suffer.
“The major difference is that I want the US to fall and agree with the people who say this”. Okay bro.
“In the collapse of the USA that I imagine, it would go perfectly and no-one would suffer - but the collapse of China, that you imagine - it would go badly and everyone would suffer”.
Trust me bro. Literally just blatant holding people to entirely different standards that you don’t hold others to. Completely transparently partisan.
Completely disagree on the de facto part.
This is literally just cope and “just trust me bro”, but at least this is as close to an acknowledgement that I can see that you agree that in Taiwan now, the people don’t want to be part of the PRC.
I will reply all the same. I don’t answer to “When did you stop beating your wife?” type questions.