Taiwan Elections: Kuomintang Party ... wants peace with China! (The other China).

[Vanoi]

And how many seats do they have?

Probably none but that's not relevant. In this case it's not whenever China only allows pro-Beijing parties as much as does China allow true opposition parties like the West and the answer is obviously no. You don't have political parties in China that are critical of the political system of China or even allows a party that is even allowed to openly criticize Xi Jinping and his leadership.

[conon394]

And how many seats do they have?

Few but they are not actively oppressed or denied the chance to run.

[Love Mountain]

Probably none but that's not relevant.

Yeah. it's not relevant because it's devastating to your argument.

In this case it's not whenever China only allows pro-Beijing parties as much as does China allow true opposition parties like the West and the answer is obviously no. You don't have political parties in China that are critical of the political system of China or even allows a party that is even allowed to openly criticize Xi Jinping and his leadership.

Probably because China is not a democracy and Hong Kong should probably stop entertaining the idea of secession. They are lucky enough to have Democracy over issues that don't involve secession. Because that's what being "anti-Beijing" party means.

[conon394]

Yeah. it's not relevant because it's devastating to your argument.

No its really not.

[Vanoi]

Yeah. it's not relevant because it's devastating to your argument.

Lol not really. They don't have seats because they can't get people to vote for them. Beijing will just suppress your party and throw you in jail.

Probably because China is not a democracy and Hong Kong should probably stop entertaining the idea of secession. They are lucky enough to have Democracy over issues that don't involve secession. Because that's what being "anti-Beijing" party means.

Yep it's so crazy how a territory that enjoyed democratic freedoms for decades and was guaranteed by a treaty that they would continue to enjoy those freedoms under Chinese rule now has thoughts of secession after China trampled over those rights. China just creating its own problems once again.

[Ludicus]

The Gist: Taiwan has elections in a few days...

It is necessary to first contextualize this issue: Taiwan is a state not recognized by the international community; it is only acknowledged by 12 countries: Belize, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, the Marshall Islands, Palau, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Tuvalu. Taiwan, until the seventies, functioned as the international representation of China, and then in the seventies, the international representation of China shifted to Beijing. Taiwan maintains significant tension with China, particularly holding the perspective, according to some within the country, of declaring its independence.

What we observe is that the reduction in support for Taiwan is increasingly progressive. Nauru has now left the list, leaving the twelve countries mentioned above. Nauru was one of the few Pacific islands supporting Taiwan. And let's say, the possibility of Taiwan gaining internationally recognized status is very limited. Especially since a significant part of international relations with China is based on the principle that there is only one China, and Taiwan is part of that China.
China threatens to achieve this annexation by force or, preferably, by the will of the Taiwanese. But it's a bit ironic to think that if the will of the Taiwanese doesn't align, China will do it by force.
China considers that by 2049 (the date marking the 100th anniversary of the reunification of mainland China and the founding of the People's Republic of China), it will eventually carry out a military intervention and force the annexation of Taiwan.

In Taiwan, there seem to be three sectors: one that advocates for independence (the elected president is someone who supports this stance, although not openly); then there is a line that advocates for some compromise with China, and there is certainly a third sector ready to accept annexation with China, which is a minority.
The US wants to maintain the status quo, aiming to keep the ambiguity that keeps Taiwan in limbo. Biden has explicitly stated that he is not in favor of the island's independence. China does not want the status quo, but it does not seem willing to trigger a military invasion in the short term.
Taiwan is a democracy.
However, the fact that it is a democracy does not give it the right to be internationally recognized as a state. This is an important point. It's unpleasant to say, but it has to be heard: democracies do not have more rights on the international stage than dictatorships. There is nothing that gives more rights to a democracy (except moral right). Dictatorships have as much right to exist as democracies, even the most sinister dictatorships. In the United Nations, there is room for everyone: democracies, dictatorships, and regimes that are neither one nor the other, and are, in fact, the majority.
In the case of Trump being elected, the conflicting relationship between the US and China will increase.

The US has no desire to enter into a war with China, even if they have the possibility of winning it. No one would know in what state the US and China would be, as it would be a suicidal war for both sides and for all of us, with an immense crisis on a global scale. If China attacks Taiwan, it is likely that the US will launch a muscular action to defend the positions of its allies in the region, such as taking the South China Sea, especially because China does not have the legal right to occupy it.
In recent times, Biden has advanced the idea that he would defend Taiwan (the US is in an election period, it is convenient to make strong statements), but it is not clear to what extent that would happen. Still, it does not seem that a global war with China will occur.

[Love Mountain]

Lol not really. They don't have seats because they can't get people to vote for them. Beijing will just suppress your party and throw you in jail.

Yeah man. Nobody likes the Chinese Communist Party. Must be why the Pro-Beijing camp won the Hong Kong election in 2016.

Of course Vanoi knew all about this.

And about polling done by Western institutions in China show that their government is incredibly popular with their citizens.

I mean why wouldn't Chinese citizens hate their government? All they do is oppress them all day and not improve their lives in any way whatsoever.

Yep it's so crazy how a territory that enjoyed democratic freedoms for decades and was guaranteed by a treaty that they would continue to enjoy those freedoms under Chinese rule now has thoughts of secession after China trampled over those rights. China just creating its own problems once again.

Yeah. It's so crazy how much Hong Kong hates China, yet manages to vote for the Pro-Beijing camp almost every single time in the last 20 years.

Truly astounding.

But again, I must've been confused by all the research I've done on China in the last 2-3 years. I should've just asked Vanoi, "Hey so Hong Kong absolutely hates Beijing right?"

Lmao.

[Vanoi]

Yeah man. Nobody likes the Chinese Communist Party. Must be why the Pro-Beijing camp won the Hong Kong election in 2016.

Of course Vanoi knew all about this.
And about polling done by Western institutions in China show that their government is incredibly popular with their citizens.

I mean why wouldn't Chinese citizens hate their government? All they do is oppress them all day and not improve their lives in any way whatsoever.

This is the part where Love makes up non-existent claims to argue against. Not once in the post you quoted did I say that no one in China or Hong Kong likes the CCP. Not once did I say the CCP wasn't popular with it's citizens. Nor did I claim China does nothing but oppress it's citizens all day.

Yeah. It's so crazy how much Hong Kong hates China, yet manages to vote for the Pro-Beijing camp almost every single time in the last 20 years.

Truly astounding.

But again, I must've been confused by all the research I've done on China in the last 2-3 years. I should've just asked Vanoi, "Hey so Hong Kong absolutely hates Beijing right?"

Lmao.

Again arguing against claims I never made and not addressing my post whatsoever.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019..._Kong_protests

Yes the policies of the pro-Beijing party in Hong Kong were so popular it caused the largest protests in the history of Hong Kong. Funny enough Love never mentions this in his entire post. Guess it's hard to paint the government of China as popular if you mention the fact that China had to pass a National Security Law to even stop the protests. This led to many Hong Kong protesters simply being arrested for demonstrating. Again Love makes no mention of this.

Is this really the best you got Love? Arguing against st claims I have never made will get you no where

[Love Mountain]

This is the part where Love makes up non-existent claims to argue against. Not once in the post you quoted did I say that no one in China or Hong Kong likes the CCP. Not once did I say the CCP wasn't popular with it's citizens. Nor did I claim China does nothing but oppress it's citizens all day.

Yeah, you didn't use those exact words. What of it? Glad you're smart enough not to argue the point.

Again arguing against claims I never made and not addressing my post whatsoever.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019..._Kong_protests

I'm not sure why you're bringing up the protests again. I think we already settled that you don't even know what they are about.

Yes the policies of the pro-Beijing party in Hong Kong were so popular it caused the largest protests in the history of Hong Kong. Funny enough Love never mentions this in his entire post. Guess it's hard to paint the government of China as popular if you mention the fact that China had to pass a National Security Law to even stop the protests. This led to many Hong Kong protesters simply being arrested for demonstrating. Again Love makes no mention of this.

How did I make no mentions of the protests? It's literally what I replied to.

And what does Beijing's popularity have to do with protets? Aagain, check my post. Pro-Beijing parties have won over and over in Hong Kong before the Security Law. "Largest protests" don't mean diddly squat. Did they run a referendum or something? How do you know that "the largest protests in the history of Hong Kong" genuinely represents the majorty of people in Hong Kong?

Is this really the best you got Love? Arguing against st claims I have never made will get you no where

But it did.

I also don't know why there is a "requirement" of you having to make a very specific claim for me to refute something. There isn't, but that's why you're typically a poor debater. Let me chew it down for you.

1. I brought up the popularity of the CCP because you keep bringing up "lack of opposition parties". Why is that even relevant in a thread abotu Taiwan or Hong Kong, when the CCP is incredibly popular in China?

2. Second, I brought up Pro-Beijing's political history of literally winning most elections because you implied that the people of Hong Kong want to secede after the imposition of the Security Law and their response to the protests. Why would they? Beijing has always been popular in Hong Kong. Also, these people were banned from elections because they kept entertaining secession, not the other way around lmao. They didn't crack down on National Security willy nilly.

[Vanoi]

Yeah, you didn't use those exact words. What of it? Glad you're smart enough not to argue the point.

Of course I didn't use those words as I didn't make those made up claims. We were talking about political parties and why some of them have no seats in government. You then went on to post irrelevant statistics about China.

Since you have admitted you purposely making up claims and not even bothering to address my post I think we'll stop here. Just because you can't argue against my points doesn't mean you gotta make up claims to argue against so you can "win".

[Love Mountain]

Of course I didn't use those words as I didn't make those made up claims. We were talking about political parties and why some of them have no seats in government. You then went on to post irrelevant statistics about China.

Actually, we were talking about Taiwan, Hong Kong, and China.

Since you have admitted you purposely making up claims and not even bothering to address my post I think we'll stop here. Just because you can't argue against my points doesn't mean you gotta make up claims to argue against so you can "win".

When did I say "I made up claims"?

Your points were refuted, you're just dodging. Run along now.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

it is only acknowledged by 12 countries: Belize, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, the Marshall Islands, Palau, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Tuvalu.

Honduras recently recognised the PRC actually. The Vatican is the 12th country.

[Roma_Victrix]

In recent times, Biden has advanced the idea that he would defend Taiwan (the US is in an election period, it is convenient to make strong statements), but it is not clear to what extent that would happen. Still, it does not seem that a global war with China will occur.

Yep it's so crazy how a territory that enjoyed democratic freedoms for decades and was guaranteed by a treaty that they would continue to enjoy those freedoms under Chinese rule now has thoughts of secession after China trampled over those rights. China just creating its own problems once again.

The sad part about Hong Kong is that it is not as economically relevant as it once was in terms of the growing importance of the biggest financial centers in mainland China, hence Beijing's brazen willingness in recent years to push them around and turn Hong Kong into a periodic riot zone instead of a stable hub for commerce. Beijing clearly made the cynical calculation that it can weather whatever damage it causes by reducing the might of Hong Kong, since the goal of crushing any idea of Chinese liberal democracy is paramount compared to making a bit more money than they are already making via taxation, commerce, banking, manufacturing, and tourism elsewhere.

The PRC clearly desires to reduce Taiwan to the same subservient role, but Taiwan as of 2023 is a nation of 23.8 million people with a GDP of $1.685 trillion ($72,485 per capita). Taiwan has three times as many people as Hong Kong (7.4 million) and thus has an economy that is naturally three times larger than that of Hong Kong's economy ($548.999 billion). More importantly, 15% of that GDP is represented by the production of microchips and semiconductor materials, as Taiwan supplies the global economy with 60% of all its semiconductors (including the vast majority of the most advanced ones), and most of this is handled by a single company: the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC). The economic importance of Taiwan cannot be understated, as this unique role in producing integrated circuits sets it apart even from the others in the Four Asian Tigers (Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea) or from Japan. So when President Biden comes out and says the US will defend Taiwan against the PRC in the nightmare doomsday scenario of two nuclear-armed powers engaging in a hot war, it involves a bit more calculation than just huffing and puffing in a campaign speech during election season.

To be clear, the idea of a war with China is utter madness given how it is the manufacturing giant of the globe. However, Taiwan would definitely be the only reason for diving into such a suicide pact, and it isn't very likely either. The PRC has definitely favored stable trade relations over war in recent decades, the last major conflict being its intervention in Vietnam (the war itself only taking place in 1979 and the last border clashes related to it ending in 1991 with a treaty for fixed borders). China is content in maintaining the status quo in the Korean peninsula; there shan't be a repeat of the Korean War (although a collapse of the DPRK is a worry for South Korea which would have far more trouble absorbing it than West Germany did with East Germany).

[Love Mountain]

The sad part about Hong Kong is that it is not as economically relevant as it once was in terms of the growing importance of the biggest financial centers in mainland China, hence Beijing's brazen willingness in recent years to push them around and turn Hong Kong into a periodic riot zone instead of a stable hub for commerce. Beijing clearly made the cynical calculation that it can weather whatever damage it causes by reducing the might of Hong Kong, since the goal of crushing any idea of Chinese liberal democracy is paramount compared to making a bit more money than they are already making via taxation, commerce, banking, manufacturing, and tourism elsewhere.

This is hyperbole and ignores the historical issues that Beijing had with Hong Kong (which are numerous, like Hong Kong's propensity for organized crimes for example), and the actual effect of the Security Law.

The PRC clearly desires to reduce Taiwan to the same subservient role, but Taiwan as of 2023 is a nation of 23.8 million people with a GDP of $1.685 trillion ($72,485 per capita). Taiwan has three times as many people as Hong Kong (7.4 million) and thus has an economy that is naturally three times larger than that of Hong Kong's economy ($548.999 billion). More importantly, 15% of that GDP is represented by the production of microchips and semiconductor materials, as Taiwan supplies the global economy with 60% of all its semiconductors (including the vast majority of the most advanced ones), and most of this is handled by a single company: the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC). The economic importance of Taiwan cannot be understated, as this unique role in producing integrated circuits sets it apart even from the others in the Four Asian Tigers (Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea) or from Japan. So when President Biden comes out and says the US will defend Taiwan against the PRC in the nightmare doomsday scenario of two nuclear-armed powers engaging in a hot war, it involves a bit more calculation than just huffing and puffing in a campaign speech during election season.

You're ignoring that Taiwan is de-jure still in the state of Civil War with PRC. It is by definition a breakaway province of China, a conflict that was very much actrive as recently as 1970 and was only stopped because Taiwan realized how futile their dreams of retaking the mainland were. So yes, China's aims are indeed to make Taiwan subservient to Beijing, much like Shenzen, Guandong, and Chongqing are.

Or, to draw a more relevant and recent exampe, how Texas is subservient to D.C.

To be clear, the idea of a war with China is utter madness given how it is the manufacturing giant of the globe. However, Taiwan would definitely be the only reason for diving into such a suicide pact, and it isn't very likely either. The PRC has definitely favored stable trade relations over war in recent decades, the last major conflict being its intervention in Vietnam (the war itself only taking place in 1979 and the last border clashes related to it ending in 1991 with a treaty for fixed borders). China is content in maintaining the status quo in the Korean peninsula; there shan't be a repeat of the Korean War (although a collapse of the DPRK is a worry for South Korea which would have far more trouble absorbing it than West Germany did with East Germany).

The PRC is not the one who disrupted the status quo in Taiwan. That was the accomplishment of Tsai-Ing Wen and the DPP. Cross-strait relations were actually getting friendlier prior to 2016. The red lines were always clear. Taiwan is not to entertain any official declaration of independence or secession.

[Roma_Victrix]

This is hyperbole and ignores the historical issues that Beijing had with Hong Kong (which are numerous, like Hong Kong's propensity for organized crimes for example), and the actual effect of the Security Law.

Are you suggesting organized crime does not also exist in mainland China? LOL. The mere existence of some organized crime is a pretty weak excuse for having Beijing handpick candidates to be elected for office in Hong Kong. It's also rather insulting to law enforcement agencies in Hong Kong to suggest that they or their local government weren't doing anything to combat organized crime, which is obnoxiously inaccurate (dare I say, hyperbole). Beijing's "historical issues" with Hong Kong before 1997 and the UK's transferring of the region to the PRC are also mostly irrelevant, except that one little part where China promised the UK that it would respect Hong Kong's unique system of self-governance.

You're ignoring that Taiwan is de-jure still in the state of Civil War with PRC. It is by definition a breakaway province of China, a conflict that was very much actrive as recently as 1970 and was only stopped because Taiwan realized how futile their dreams of retaking the mainland were. So yes, China's aims are indeed to make Taiwan subservient to Beijing, much like Shenzen, Guandong, and Chongqing are.

Or, to draw a more relevant and recent exampe, how Texas is subservient to D.C.

Although not a perfect analogy, US territories such as Puerto Rico or Guam would have made a lot more sense in this asinine comparison.

Texas, while formerly its own sovereign republic from 1836 to 1846, is a state within the union of the United States that has congressional representation of representatives and senators drafting legislation and participating in the federal government on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, and which has many delegates for general elections of presidents of the United States. The Republic of Texas also never went to war with the United States (quite the opposite, it was annexed and made a state, while the US declared war on Mexico which refused to acknowledge Texas' independence or its annexation into the union). Texans often toy with the idea of secession, but at the moment they enjoy full rights as US citizens and vote in federal elections that affect all other states.

I think you know that Texas is more than a bit different from Taiwan, which does not participate in policymaking in Beijing in any capacity. It barely fits into the Deng Xiaoping model of a "One Nation, Two Systems" (SC: 国两制; TC: 國兩制) agreement between the PRC, Hong Kong, and Macau. Taiwan is effectively wholly autonomous, with its own military, but technically has its official diplomacy/representation with other nations handled by the PRC (but not trade relations, it trades with whoever it wants and does not consult Beijing).

The PRC is not the one who disrupted the status quo in Taiwan. That was the accomplishment of Tsai-Ing Wen and the DPP. Cross-strait relations were actually getting friendlier prior to 2016. The red lines were always clear. Taiwan is not to entertain any official declaration of independence or secession.

At least now you are making an argument that kind of makes sense, since things were becoming warmer in 2008 with restoration of the "Three Links" (三通): postal, transportation, and trade networks. It's rather astonishing that all communication was essentially handled indirectly through intermediaries before that point. Regardless, if anything it just reinforces the fact that Taiwan was completely severed from the mainland up until very recently.

From what I understand, the state of Texas has been linked with the rest of the US since 1846 via the United States Post Office Department (established in 1792), and then with the United States Postal Service since 1971. Texas has thus enjoyed the Three Links with the US much longer than Taiwan has with mainland China.

[Laser101]

This is hyperbole and ignores the historical issues that Beijing had with Hong Kong (which are numerous, like Hong Kong's propensity for organized crimes for example), and the actual effect of the Security Law.



You're ignoring that Taiwan is de-jure still in the state of Civil War with PRC. It is by definition a breakaway province of China, a conflict that was very much actrive as recently as 1970 and was only stopped because Taiwan realized how futile their dreams of retaking the mainland were. So yes, China's aims are indeed to make Taiwan subservient to Beijing, much like Shenzen, Guandong, and Chongqing are.

Or, to draw a more relevant and recent exampe, how Texas is subservient to D.C.



The PRC is not the one who disrupted the status quo in Taiwan. That was the accomplishment of Tsai-Ing Wen and the DPP. Cross-strait relations were actually getting friendlier prior to 2016. The red lines were always clear. Taiwan is not to entertain any official declaration of independence or secession.

Actually, Taiwan's de jure situation is a bit complicated. While both the RoC and PRC claim that the island was supposed to be ceded to China after WW2 (having been a Japanese possession before that), none of the postwar treaties actually said that explicitly. During KMT one-party rule, Taiwanese independence advocates (including the precusors to the modern DPP) argued that RoC rule in Taiwan was illegitimate.

[swabian]

Taiwan can only be of worth to the international community with their semiconductor industry intact. If China attacks that island in an attempt to improve their miserable trade returns, then the international community truly has to ally and sink the entire Chinese fleet as it tries to get funny. It would be very easy and it should be risked.