Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan's air defence zone on Wednesday accompanying five Chinese warships engaged in "combat readiness" patrols, the island's defence ministry said, the second such incursion this week.
Yeah, obviously it’s a glorified puppet state but there’s no point in arguing from that standpoint here. If a country is to exist, it should know about local air traffic, that’s all I’m saying.
The PRC wants a peaceful reunification, which would not be aided by them continuously flying military jets over the island. I, too, would prefer peaceful reunification, which means some level of cooperation and tolerance is necessary.
The RoC won’t give up their holdings in the interest of human benefit, but liberalism shows us that there are countless ways to skin a cat. The RoC is not autarkic and is very dependent on its NATO friends and its trading partners. As the US wanes and third world nations stand up, the support for Taiwanese nationalism will surely dwindle, and RoC leadership may be put in a position where their best offer is clearly to reunify.
I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China so that the US could us the island as a threat against China – as it also attempted to do in Korea when it had more-or-less complete control of the southern half. Taiwan spent about 40 years as a military dictatorship killing tens of thousands of dissidents, native Formosans, and others (this was called the “White Terror”), while their patron the US looked the other way while it pumped resources into the country (for the ruling class, mind you) to use the island as a sweatshop site in the interim. This legacy and its connections to fellow US puppet South Korea and US ally Japan go a long way to explaining its current capacity in manufacturing, which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.
Both Taiwan and SK have made various attempts to assert themselves (with some success in both cases), but with the pathetic diplomatic position of the former and the continued military occupation of the latter by the US, I think “puppet state” is a fair title for them, perhaps as much as Israel, but that’s its own can of worms.
I didn’t really intend on getting into litigating this topic, but I’m happy to discuss it as best I can.
Not only did the US turn a blind eye to the White Terror, but they were positively gleeful about it, as a key target of it was of course not only indigeneous-politics based, but fundamentally anti-communist.
Indeed a basic presupposition of the US providing you such extensive economic support, as a forward base in Asia against communism, is that you crush any opposition to its ‘proper’ functioning as such an economic and military asset. That supposes that you will crush any radical, labor, trade-union, let alone explicitly socialist or communist activity which appears to challenge the state.
I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China […] which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.
Yes, I know about its not-so-glorious past and the White Terror. Thousands of innocent civilians were killed. It was terrible. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on the “puppet state” part. I don’t think that Taiwan is a puppet state. The US sponsoring Taiwan is a thing of the past. Neither is a pathetic diplomatic position a good reason for being a puppet state.
if US support dropped overnight, reunification with the mainland would become inevitable. it’s a puppet state in the sense that it’s propped up by the might of the US/NATO military.
It’s kind of a weird way to define a puppet state IMO, because you could make the same case for a lot of countries. Like the US supports the Mexican government, and would have likely already been overthrown by the Sinoloa Cartel without US support. So is Mexico a puppet state?
Hey now that you mention this, it does kind of make less sense. But I think I should be taking a break from this horrible post. There is no use arguing with someone that is completely unwilling to change their mind. Look at my comment history. I’ve already wasted hours.
I didn’t see this reply before. The other commenter has it right that the relevance of its pathetic diplomatic position is that it is being propped up by the US/NATO and ultimately depends on them to exist apart from the PRC, which makes it very difficult to oppose them. Incidentally, does the US not sponsor Taiwan? Even just recently there was this, which sure seems like sponsorship to me.
I could have formatted it better, but the rest was focused on the puppet part and then I prefaced the sponsorship part with “Incidentally” to indicate changing over to an adjacent subject.
Taiwan is a rump state of the despotism that existed before the Maoist revolution. When the government fled to the island, the US backed them up and prevented the revolution from purging them from power and uniting the whole country under one flag. They exist today as they are because of western intervention, and is therefore a puppet state. I disagree with ‘glorified’ considering it’s taboo internationally to even call them a state.
Like asking yankoids what they want to do with “their land”, the question is pointless and only serves to legitimize a faulty preposition.
The ROC also still claims to be the legitimate government of all of China (plus Mongolia and a sizable chunk of Russia) so its not like they’re just sitting there minding their own business either.
The ROC also claims the South China Sea as its own and has build naval bases in there. Even the DPP doesn’t want to give up those naval bases. So, it’s the Republic of Taiwan to stick it to the Mainland commies, but “akctually, we’re the Republic of China, and the South China Sea is part of Chinese naval waters, so we get to build as many naval bases as we want” to Vietnam and Indonesia.
Do you even know why the pro-independence party (DPP) lost so badly in the local election for mayors? Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy, not because they didn’t agree with the foreign policies DPP was pushing! (Please note that I’m not saying most people agree.) In local elections, people are going to choose whoever they believe would be the best for the city/county, not the one whose views on China they agree with.
Additionally, if you look at the latest opinion poll for the presidental election next year, you’d be surprised to find out that the candidate from the pro-independence party is leading.
Source: am Taiwanese
ps. you made a typo in your comment. it was the 2022 local election, not 2020.
i am sure the success or failure of those domestic policies were not in the least contingent on international political conditions. the economic policies of an island that imports 97% of its energy with a food self sufficiency rate of around 30% and exports accounting for 70% of gdp can in no way be considered to be overexposed or at risk to trade fluctuations and even if that were the case, i am sure that foreign policy would not play an outsize role in determining the magnitude or periodicity of said trade fluctuations.
Because a poll asking a direct question is a hell of a lot more accurate in gauging how the population feels about the issue.
Political parties can lose elections for their stances/actions outside their main one – which seems to have been the case per the actual person from Taiwan that responded to your comment. It doesn’t matter what a party is called or what their main goals are if they’re bad at their job.
If and when the people of Taiwan decide they want reunification, it will happen. Thankfully Beijing isn’t going to be allowed to force the issue.
The majority of Taiwanese people has always wanted to remain status quo, as indicated by the two triangle data lines in the plot. Since declaring independence is basically asking China to attack and that peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population) either, the majority are of course pro-status quo. It does not line up with how DPP ate shit last year.
peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population)
Again, this was “forced” reunification in that poll, i.e. military takeover. Of course people oppose that. I think at least the plurality opinion is against peaceful reunification under the PRC too, but it’s not by as high a margin.
No, it was NOT “forced” reunification. The two reunification choices in that poll were “unification as soon as possible” and “maintain status quo, move towards unification,” neither of which is forced.
Lmao Taiwan existing is bad
Yeah, obviously it’s a glorified puppet state but there’s no point in arguing from that standpoint here. If a country is to exist, it should know about local air traffic, that’s all I’m saying.
It is not to exist. I don’t care about their air borders and I hope China flies wherever they please within Chinese territory like Chinese Taipei
The PRC wants a peaceful reunification, which would not be aided by them continuously flying military jets over the island. I, too, would prefer peaceful reunification, which means some level of cooperation and tolerance is necessary.
It’s going to require might and pressure and gunboat diplomacy, it’s denial and liberalism to pretend colonialists just give up their holdings
The RoC won’t give up their holdings in the interest of human benefit, but liberalism shows us that there are countless ways to skin a cat. The RoC is not autarkic and is very dependent on its NATO friends and its trading partners. As the US wanes and third world nations stand up, the support for Taiwanese nationalism will surely dwindle, and RoC leadership may be put in a position where their best offer is clearly to reunify.
A glorified puppet state? What do you mean?
I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China so that the US could us the island as a threat against China – as it also attempted to do in Korea when it had more-or-less complete control of the southern half. Taiwan spent about 40 years as a military dictatorship killing tens of thousands of dissidents, native Formosans, and others (this was called the “White Terror”), while their patron the US looked the other way while it pumped resources into the country (for the ruling class, mind you) to use the island as a sweatshop site in the interim. This legacy and its connections to fellow US puppet South Korea and US ally Japan go a long way to explaining its current capacity in manufacturing, which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.
Both Taiwan and SK have made various attempts to assert themselves (with some success in both cases), but with the pathetic diplomatic position of the former and the continued military occupation of the latter by the US, I think “puppet state” is a fair title for them, perhaps as much as Israel, but that’s its own can of worms.
I didn’t really intend on getting into litigating this topic, but I’m happy to discuss it as best I can.
Not only did the US turn a blind eye to the White Terror, but they were positively gleeful about it, as a key target of it was of course not only indigeneous-politics based, but fundamentally anti-communist.
Indeed a basic presupposition of the US providing you such extensive economic support, as a forward base in Asia against communism, is that you crush any opposition to its ‘proper’ functioning as such an economic and military asset. That supposes that you will crush any radical, labor, trade-union, let alone explicitly socialist or communist activity which appears to challenge the state.
Yes, I know about its not-so-glorious past and the White Terror. Thousands of innocent civilians were killed. It was terrible. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on the “puppet state” part. I don’t think that Taiwan is a puppet state. The US sponsoring Taiwan is a thing of the past. Neither is a pathetic diplomatic position a good reason for being a puppet state.
if US support dropped overnight, reunification with the mainland would become inevitable. it’s a puppet state in the sense that it’s propped up by the might of the US/NATO military.
ehh yeah I guess so
It’s kind of a weird way to define a puppet state IMO, because you could make the same case for a lot of countries. Like the US supports the Mexican government, and would have likely already been overthrown by the Sinoloa Cartel without US support. So is Mexico a puppet state?
Hey now that you mention this, it does kind of make less sense. But I think I should be taking a break from this horrible post. There is no use arguing with someone that is completely unwilling to change their mind. Look at my comment history. I’ve already wasted hours.
I didn’t see this reply before. The other commenter has it right that the relevance of its pathetic diplomatic position is that it is being propped up by the US/NATO and ultimately depends on them to exist apart from the PRC, which makes it very difficult to oppose them. Incidentally, does the US not sponsor Taiwan? Even just recently there was this, which sure seems like sponsorship to me.
Apparently being sponsored by a foreign state is now counted as being a puppet state?
That part was in response to you saying:
I could have formatted it better, but the rest was focused on the puppet part and then I prefaced the sponsorship part with “Incidentally” to indicate changing over to an adjacent subject.
Taiwan is a rump state of the despotism that existed before the Maoist revolution. When the government fled to the island, the US backed them up and prevented the revolution from purging them from power and uniting the whole country under one flag. They exist today as they are because of western intervention, and is therefore a puppet state. I disagree with ‘glorified’ considering it’s taboo internationally to even call them a state.
Taiwhat? I Thought it was called the Republic of China, and everyone’s been telling me China bad!
Cool, so lets ask the people living there (not those in power) what they want with their country.
… oh.
Like asking yankoids what they want to do with “their land”, the question is pointless and only serves to legitimize a faulty preposition.
The ROC also still claims to be the legitimate government of all of China (plus Mongolia and a sizable chunk of Russia) so its not like they’re just sitting there minding their own business either.
The ROC also claims the South China Sea as its own and has build naval bases in there. Even the DPP doesn’t want to give up those naval bases. So, it’s the Republic of Taiwan to stick it to the Mainland commies, but “akctually, we’re the Republic of China, and the South China Sea is part of Chinese naval waters, so we get to build as many naval bases as we want” to Vietnam and Indonesia.
It’s schrodinger’s China. Simultaneously an independent smol bean democracy and the only legitimate inheritor of a 4000 year old empire.
deleted by creator
How about you link to the 2020 Taiwanese local election where the pro-independence party got BTFO?
They’re more like pro japan party to me.
Do you even know why the pro-independence party (DPP) lost so badly in the local election for mayors? Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy, not because they didn’t agree with the foreign policies DPP was pushing! (Please note that I’m not saying most people agree.) In local elections, people are going to choose whoever they believe would be the best for the city/county, not the one whose views on China they agree with.
Additionally, if you look at the latest opinion poll for the presidental election next year, you’d be surprised to find out that the candidate from the pro-independence party is leading.
Source: am Taiwanese
ps. you made a typo in your comment. it was the 2022 local election, not 2020.
inciting conflict with your biggest trading partner does tend to have negative effects on the economy
Well yeah I guess, but really it’s more about the policies they had been pushing domesticlly
i am sure the success or failure of those domestic policies were not in the least contingent on international political conditions. the economic policies of an island that imports 97% of its energy with a food self sufficiency rate of around 30% and exports accounting for 70% of gdp can in no way be considered to be overexposed or at risk to trade fluctuations and even if that were the case, i am sure that foreign policy would not play an outsize role in determining the magnitude or periodicity of said trade fluctuations.
People forget that the PRC blocked various imports to the ROC after Pelosi pulled her stunt. The KMT is the “economics party” mostly because it knows not to rock the boat and maintain the status quo.
foreign policy is an area famously known for not having economic impacts
Because a poll asking a direct question is a hell of a lot more accurate in gauging how the population feels about the issue.
Political parties can lose elections for their stances/actions outside their main one – which seems to have been the case per the actual person from Taiwan that responded to your comment. It doesn’t matter what a party is called or what their main goals are if they’re bad at their job.
If and when the people of Taiwan decide they want reunification, it will happen. Thankfully Beijing isn’t going to be allowed to force the issue.
You want polls, how about this poll conducted by a Taiwanese university where the majority of Taiwanese want neither reunification nor independence, but the status quo? The majority of Taiwanese people wanting the status quo lines up with how the pro-independence party ate shit while the pro-status quo party made huge gains. The DPP got BTFO so hard the current DPP president Tsai Ing-wen had to resign as party head.
The majority of Taiwanese people has always wanted to remain status quo, as indicated by the two triangle data lines in the plot. Since declaring independence is basically asking China to attack and that peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population) either, the majority are of course pro-status quo. It does not line up with how DPP ate shit last year.
Again, this was “forced” reunification in that poll, i.e. military takeover. Of course people oppose that. I think at least the plurality opinion is against peaceful reunification under the PRC too, but it’s not by as high a margin.
No, it was NOT “forced” reunification. The two reunification choices in that poll were “unification as soon as possible” and “maintain status quo, move towards unification,” neither of which is forced.
Which poll was this? The last one I saw linked was garbage along these lines though I don’t think it was that exact one.
Thank you for mentioning me. Makes me feel like not all people on this thread is pro-China. :D
deleted by creator