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.
So let me get this straight, a group of people overwhelmingly wish to separate, and the government tries to prevent them from doing that, and you don't think that's imperialism? I bet you don't feel the same about separatism in Catalonia, Donbas, Kurdistan, or the Zapatistas. Classic tankie logic: imperialism good when done by purported "communists."
The Civil War was imperialism but it was good imperialism. Fascist breakaways are a bit different: the Union taking over the South was infringing on their self-governance, but that's a good thing, Confederates were pure evil. It's like after WWII and Axis powers became occupied, could you technically call that colonialism? Maybe, but they needed to be.
If Taiwan was blatantly fascistic, genocidal, had slavery, etc. I would support China colonizing them... but they aren't. They're neoliberal (much like China), which is lame, but they're not a Nazi state. Remind me, who was the first in Asia to legalize gay marriage?
And are they a military dictatorship today? Even when they were, they weren't a threat to world peace or humanity like the Confederacy or the Japanese Empire. By that logic do you think the US military should intervene in African military dictatorships?
The KMT was certainly a threat to Formosans, and to leftists living in the island they'd seized.
If the Confederacy had survived the war as rump state in Southern Florida and continued to claim to rule the entire US South and in the mid nineties claimed to be a democracy and then finally elected a non-military president in the aughts, would you call the US imperialist for not recognizing the Confederacy?
Okay, that's consistent. Given that the modern incarnation of Taiwan was founded as a fascistic & genocidal settler colony, what was the timepoint at which a decisive end to the Chinese Civil War shifted from acceptable to unacceptable in your eyes?
this is just not true. the overwhelming majority want a return to the status quo, a status quo that was very consistently gravitating towards china before the US decided to stir shit using its DPP puppets. the taiwanese people are perfectly capable of understanding which side their bread is buttered on and that their families cannot subsist on a diet of freedom and democracy.
If you actually read it you would know the vast majority either want to keep the self-governance or become fully independent (50%). Both of those are some form of separatism, even if most of them don't want anything radical that could trigger a war.
jfc, points for trying to turn this into a semantics game but sorry, fuck you
lets look at bbc, first result we get when we search "台独民意调查“ on google.hk because apparently google.tw is too spicy for google's techbro commissariat. whatever, close enough:
even tries to reframe it by breaking up de facto status quo supporters into two camps but plurality still supports status quo
how about cn language natopedia
2020, NCCU (same as the bbc study):
“尽快独立”占7.4%
“偏向独立”占27.7%，为历年最高
“永远维持现状”占23.6%
“维持现状再决定”的民众比例持续下降至28.7%
“尽快统一”占0.7%创下新低
2021, united news:
“尽快独立”占18%
“维持现况再独立”占16%
“永远维持现状”占51%
“维持现状再统一”占6%
“尽快统一”占4%
“无意见”占3%
2022, 'taiwanese public opinion foundation' (read: cia cutout):
“坚持台湾独立”占27.3%
“赞成但不坚持台湾独立”占22.8%
“维持现状但偏台湾独立”占11.3%
“永远维持现状”占8.4%
“维持现状但偏两岸统一”占6.0%
“赞成但不坚持两岸统一”占9.4%
“坚持两岸统一”占2.4%
look at how they progressively split the status quo category (the size of which does not demonstrably change) into smaller and smaller demos to try and push an agenda
let's give you the benefit of the doubt and more closely examine what is obviously the most compromised source here. this is the cia cutout's (shitty and completely unprofessional) paper from this year. they'd probably lose funding if they put something as damning as actual independence vs status quo numbers out there so they decided to go with plausibly deniable second order opinion sets and STILL get blown the fuck out
just take the L dude, taiwanese are completely cognizant of the fact they're being primed to be the next ukraine and most of them understandably want no part of that
No it isn't. The status quo is that Taiwan is a region of China, independently governed. This is the case for MANY places around the world, here in the UK for example we have Scottish and Welsh governments, independent of the UK government. Scotland has its own parliament. Does that make it independent? Fuck no it doesn't and there's no mechanism for it to leave either.
There are MORE people in Scotland that want Scottish independence than Taiwan. Chew on that for a bit.
This is semantics. You're playing with the difference between independent as a country and independent in governance, two different things. You're not participating in good faith, as per usual.
No it fucking doesn't, because that's what it is right fucking now. You can't be a "separatist" if you already have that. You're just a status quo-ist.
Fuck me talking to nazis hurts, you're all unbelievably uneducated.
Almost like the reason some of the population is because they stole from the Chinese people and fled to the island when the people fought back. The oppressor doesn’t deserve to get to pick to be independent
Wait, do you support Donbas self rule or not? Are they not allowed to invite their ally (Russia) to support them militarily in a war of aggression by their neighbor, Ukraine?
Muddied? There's this thing called "nuance." I support Donbas independence, I simply don't think it gives Russia the right to invade anywhere outside of Donbas, is that that complicated to understand?
So let me get this straight: if the US/Canada were hostile with each other, and the people of Alberta, Canada, were separatists that allied themselves with the US, but the Canadian government refused to recognize Alberta's sovereignty, you would support a full-scale, deadly American invasion of Canada?
To be clear, to be a true analog the province needs to be an ethnic minority which is being targeted by the national government.
Say Alberta was the only majority English speaking province, and Ottawa started putting up statues of a Quebecois terrorist leader from 80 years ago who lead the massacre of 100k English speakers and allied with Hitler during WW2, then they announced that English would be banned from all government facilities including primary schools, and when Alberta tried to secede they sent Nazi paramilitary death squads to harass them and started bombing them daily.
At that point, if the US interceded and went past the Albertan border to attack other military targets in Canada, you would consider that a war of aggression by America against Canada and not them defending their ally, Alberta?
At that point, if the US interceded and went past the Albertan border to attack other military targets in Canada, you would consider that a war of aggression by America against Canada and not them defending their ally, Alberta?
If America's massacring civilians in Ottawa and Toronto? Yes, of course I would. Any sane person would. Stay in Alberta.
You people call yourselves anti-war? I think you're the real liberals here.
Sounds like you're the one who's pro-war whenever it's convenient for you. When it's not convenient, you just say "that's different!" And refuse to elaborate.
How did Russia invade the Donbas by putting troops in it after being invited? Please admit that the answer is that you actually believe the Donbas is Ukraine and don't care about its people's self determination so I can quit asking you this question that you have been dodging for like an hour now.
If I considered it justified for the US to enter the war on the side of the separatists, I would absolutely say that it is then justified for the US to invade Canada proper.
When 99.9% of people who unironically use the word tankie, and think that 'fascist' means 'anything I don't like', also fiercely oppose Donbas independence, and when the one I'm talking to is also refusing to just give a clear answer, I'm not about to say I'm in the wrong for asking some clarifying questions.
Also, why doesn't it give Russia the right to invade? Was it wrong for the allies to invade Germany proper during WW2?
when the one I’m talking to is also refusing to just give a clear answer
I very clearly said I supported their independence, but okay.
Also, why doesn’t it give Russia the right to invade?
So let me get this straight, you support civilians being massacred and innocent lives being lost? You really think Ukraine is on the same level of Nazi fucking Germany? Honestly I wouldn't even much of a problem if they just invaded Donbas but they're invading the whole fucking country and causing so much death and destruction. How is that justified? How can you call yourself anti-war and anti-imperialism and justify a brutal invasion? Some true colors being shown...
I very clearly said I supported their independence, but okay.
But you are clearly being deceitful, just in this comment you basically admit that you don't actually support their independence.
Look:
Honestly I wouldn't even much of a problem if they just invaded Donbas
The DPR and LPR invited Russia. How could they have "just invaded Donbas."
Please explain
A) The Donbas isn't really independent and you consider it Ukrainian property. (Surely not, you insist that this isn't the case)
B) You consider soldiers who are in a foreign country to be invaders regardless of the relationship of the two states? (Can't be this or the US is invading half the planet right this second, including Taiwan)
C) ???
Please enlighten us.
This isn't even getting into the point that multiple people made that you've ignored for half an hour, that once you're in a war with someone who wants to conquer you, sending your soldiers into their territory isn't an act of aggression, otherwise the US and the Soviets aggressed against the Nazis, which only an actual Nazi would claim.
(To be clear, I don't think you're a Nazi, just an intellectually dishonest liberal).
you support civilians being massacred and innocent lives being lost?
no, this was why the people's republics of donetsk and luhansk invited military aid, and was the cause behind the Minsk agreements as well as Russia recognizing the Donbas republics
I bet you don't feel the same about separatism in Catalonia, Donbas, Kurdistan, or the Zapatistas.
Literally none of those are imperialism. Imperialism isn’t having a region want independence. Do you think Scotland not being allowed to have a vote is imperialism?
I think all regions deserve self-autonomy determined by democratic referendums, unlike the tankies that think the Republic of China should be re-annexed...
It doesn't seem like you do given you referred to the current war as an invasion by Russia and Ukraine has been shelling it's neighbors the LPR and DPR for nearly a decade.
Can you clarify why Russia shouldn't be involved in the war between Ukraine and its smaller neighbors?
That's good, so do I. But there are other people, people wearing totenkopfs and firing mortars into town squares full of people they call cockroaches for the language they speak, who feel quite differently than us. What is your solution to this, so that peace and democracy can prevail?
How can a country intrude into its own territory? These separatists need to be put in their places.
So let me get this straight, a group of people overwhelmingly wish to separate, and the government tries to prevent them from doing that, and you don't think that's imperialism? I bet you don't feel the same about separatism in Catalonia, Donbas, Kurdistan, or the Zapatistas. Classic tankie logic: imperialism good when done by purported "communists."
Was the United States Civil War imperialism?
The Civil War was imperialism but it was good imperialism. Fascist breakaways are a bit different: the Union taking over the South was infringing on their self-governance, but that's a good thing, Confederates were pure evil. It's like after WWII and Axis powers became occupied, could you technically call that colonialism? Maybe, but they needed to be.
If Taiwan was blatantly fascistic, genocidal, had slavery, etc. I would support China colonizing them... but they aren't. They're neoliberal (much like China), which is lame, but they're not a Nazi state. Remind me, who was the first in Asia to legalize gay marriage?
Your comparison is bad faith.
Wait, so China is Neoliberal and fascist and state capitalist!
And here I was thinking words had meanings.
Oh please you hexshits use fascist and neoliberal interchangeably all the time, and you're not wrong.
Please show me where I've used neoliberal and fascist interchangeably.
Not you particularly, but people obviously call the US/EU "fascist" sometimes and "neoliberal" other times.
And that's relevant here why?
because you hexshits are a monolith obviously
I see you also read PostingMachine
Taiwan AKA the Republic of China was founded as a settler colonial military dictatorship
And are they a military dictatorship today? Even when they were, they weren't a threat to world peace or humanity like the Confederacy or the Japanese Empire. By that logic do you think the US military should intervene in African military dictatorships?
The KMT was certainly a threat to Formosans, and to leftists living in the island they'd seized.
If the Confederacy had survived the war as rump state in Southern Florida and continued to claim to rule the entire US South and in the mid nineties claimed to be a democracy and then finally elected a non-military president in the aughts, would you call the US imperialist for not recognizing the Confederacy?
Okay, that's consistent. Given that the modern incarnation of Taiwan was founded as a fascistic & genocidal settler colony, what was the timepoint at which a decisive end to the Chinese Civil War shifted from acceptable to unacceptable in your eyes?
this is just not true. the overwhelming majority want a return to the status quo, a status quo that was very consistently gravitating towards china before the US decided to stir shit using its DPP puppets. the taiwanese people are perfectly capable of understanding which side their bread is buttered on and that their families cannot subsist on a diet of freedom and democracy.
Hmmm
i can't believe i enabled images for this
they're not even figures, they're just snippets of text from natopedia that somehow unequivocally support my claim
what am i supposed to do with this? gloat?
If you actually read it you would know the vast majority either want to keep the self-governance or become fully independent (50%). Both of those are some form of separatism, even if most of them don't want anything radical that could trigger a war.
and a plurality of people believe that maintaining the status quo == independence
where is the gotcha?
I said Taiwanese people are overwhelmingly separatists. Proved to be true, seeing only 18% want China having any control over them.
jfc, points for trying to turn this into a semantics game but sorry, fuck you
lets look at bbc, first result we get when we search "台独民意调查“ on google.hk because apparently google.tw is too spicy for google's techbro commissariat. whatever, close enough:
even tries to reframe it by breaking up de facto status quo supporters into two camps but plurality still supports status quo
how about cn language natopedia
2020, NCCU (same as the bbc study):
2021, united news:
2022, 'taiwanese public opinion foundation' (read: cia cutout):
look at how they progressively split the status quo category (the size of which does not demonstrably change) into smaller and smaller demos to try and push an agenda
let's give you the benefit of the doubt and more closely examine what is obviously the most compromised source here. this is the cia cutout's (shitty and completely unprofessional) paper from this year. they'd probably lose funding if they put something as damning as actual independence vs status quo numbers out there so they decided to go with plausibly deniable second order opinion sets and STILL get blown the fuck out
just take the L dude, taiwanese are completely cognizant of the fact they're being primed to be the next ukraine and most of them understandably want no part of that
I've never heard of the Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation. It's hard to find info about it.
You're putting Chinese character as if anyone here know how to read it.
The only thing in the website you linked show this:
No they don't. You are just flat out fucking wrong.
The "status quo" for most Taiwanese is de facto separation genius, and they don't want to do anything rash.
No it isn't. The status quo is that Taiwan is a region of China, independently governed. This is the case for MANY places around the world, here in the UK for example we have Scottish and Welsh governments, independent of the UK government. Scotland has its own parliament. Does that make it independent? Fuck no it doesn't and there's no mechanism for it to leave either.
There are MORE people in Scotland that want Scottish independence than Taiwan. Chew on that for a bit.
Removed by mod
This is semantics. You're playing with the difference between independent as a country and independent in governance, two different things. You're not participating in good faith, as per usual.
And my original comment was based on "separatism" which includes independent governance. Most Taiwanese hate China either way.
No it fucking doesn't, because that's what it is right fucking now. You can't be a "separatist" if you already have that. You're just a status quo-ist.
Fuck me talking to nazis hurts, you're all unbelievably uneducated.
do you know the history of how the KMT became the ROC or are you asking loaded questions without any knowledge of the history?
Countries change dumbass
settler-colonists remain settler-colonists. also if NATO support vanished overnight, reunification would be inevitable.
You do realize Xinjiang was started as a colony right?
what does that have to do with the price of butter?
Removed by mod
those words, you use them, but I don't think you know what they mean
Almost like the reason some of the population is because they stole from the Chinese people and fled to the island when the people fought back. The oppressor doesn’t deserve to get to pick to be independent
And how long ago was that exactly?
1949
Do you feel the same about the people of Donbas?
Uh, yes? I don't support the blatant invasion and warcrimes by Russia but I can recognize Ukraine has a fascist problem too.
Wait, do you support Donbas self rule or not? Are they not allowed to invite their ally (Russia) to support them militarily in a war of aggression by their neighbor, Ukraine?
I very clearly am saying I support Donbas but Russia has taken it too far and has become the larger aggressor.
How should Russia have defended their allies, the DPR and LPR without attacking their aggressor's supply lines?
Can you think of any wars in which both participants didn't attack least try to attack military supply chains?
You do support Donbas independence though?
Read the first two words of my comment tankie 🤣🤣
I did, but then I also read the rest of your comment, which muddied things a lot.
You're getting pretty damn hostile and evasive about this.
Muddied? There's this thing called "nuance." I support Donbas independence, I simply don't think it gives Russia the right to invade anywhere outside of Donbas, is that that complicated to understand?
So if you invade another country and as part of their defense of their country, their military enters your country, they're now the aggressors?
Do you apply that principal to all conflicts, or only against enemies of the West?
Huh? When did Ukraine invade Russia?
They've been shelling and raiding the Donbas, which you consider to be independent, for about 9 years.
Surely you are aware of this, it's pretty essential background on a political topic that you are highly opinionated about.
They invaded Donbas, who is allied with Russia.
So let me get this straight: if the US/Canada were hostile with each other, and the people of Alberta, Canada, were separatists that allied themselves with the US, but the Canadian government refused to recognize Alberta's sovereignty, you would support a full-scale, deadly American invasion of Canada?
What an awful analogy that misses any sort of context or nuance about the situation.
That's the problem with liberals like you, that you think things can be understood by imagining it as something superficially similar.
Do you understand what historical materialism is?
To be clear, to be a true analog the province needs to be an ethnic minority which is being targeted by the national government.
Say Alberta was the only majority English speaking province, and Ottawa started putting up statues of a Quebecois terrorist leader from 80 years ago who lead the massacre of 100k English speakers and allied with Hitler during WW2, then they announced that English would be banned from all government facilities including primary schools, and when Alberta tried to secede they sent Nazi paramilitary death squads to harass them and started bombing them daily.
At that point, if the US interceded and went past the Albertan border to attack other military targets in Canada, you would consider that a war of aggression by America against Canada and not them defending their ally, Alberta?
If America's massacring civilians in Ottawa and Toronto? Yes, of course I would. Any sane person would. Stay in Alberta.
You people call yourselves anti-war? I think you're the real liberals here.
What number of civilians have to die before your defensive war is an unacceptable war of aggression now?
Did the Allied counter offensive against the Nazis come in below that number? How about the Union during the US civil war?
You people are pro-war whenever it's convenient for you I guess. Those comparisons are out of line and clearly different as I already explained.
Sounds like you're the one who's pro-war whenever it's convenient for you. When it's not convenient, you just say "that's different!" And refuse to elaborate.
So you support America invading the Middle East when a hostile government oppresses separatists that ally themselves with the US there?
No. Why would I?
Because it's exactly like what Russia is doing in Ukraine.
So?
So what makes it different that you can support Russia's brutal invasion?
How did Russia invade the Donbas by putting troops in it after being invited? Please admit that the answer is that you actually believe the Donbas is Ukraine and don't care about its people's self determination so I can quit asking you this question that you have been dodging for like an hour now.
Show me where I said that.
You are bad faith, intellectually dishonest people.
Speak for yourself, you are the one trying to put words in my mouth.
If I considered it justified for the US to enter the war on the side of the separatists, I would absolutely say that it is then justified for the US to invade Canada proper.
When 99.9% of people who unironically use the word tankie, and think that 'fascist' means 'anything I don't like', also fiercely oppose Donbas independence, and when the one I'm talking to is also refusing to just give a clear answer, I'm not about to say I'm in the wrong for asking some clarifying questions.
Also, why doesn't it give Russia the right to invade? Was it wrong for the allies to invade Germany proper during WW2?
I very clearly said I supported their independence, but okay.
So let me get this straight, you support civilians being massacred and innocent lives being lost? You really think Ukraine is on the same level of Nazi fucking Germany? Honestly I wouldn't even much of a problem if they just invaded Donbas but they're invading the whole fucking country and causing so much death and destruction. How is that justified? How can you call yourself anti-war and anti-imperialism and justify a brutal invasion? Some true colors being shown...
But you are clearly being deceitful, just in this comment you basically admit that you don't actually support their independence.
Look:
The DPR and LPR invited Russia. How could they have "just invaded Donbas."
Please explain
A) The Donbas isn't really independent and you consider it Ukrainian property. (Surely not, you insist that this isn't the case) B) You consider soldiers who are in a foreign country to be invaders regardless of the relationship of the two states? (Can't be this or the US is invading half the planet right this second, including Taiwan) C) ???
Please enlighten us.
This isn't even getting into the point that multiple people made that you've ignored for half an hour, that once you're in a war with someone who wants to conquer you, sending your soldiers into their territory isn't an act of aggression, otherwise the US and the Soviets aggressed against the Nazis, which only an actual Nazi would claim.
(To be clear, I don't think you're a Nazi, just an intellectually dishonest liberal).
no, this was why the people's republics of donetsk and luhansk invited military aid, and was the cause behind the Minsk agreements as well as Russia recognizing the Donbas republics
You then added a lot of seeming qualifiers.
Please show me where I said this.
Please show me where I said this.
Please show me where I said this.
The true colours of yourself, having to lie about me to make your point.
Literally none of those are imperialism. Imperialism isn’t having a region want independence. Do you think Scotland not being allowed to have a vote is imperialism?
Not them, but fucking yes? Like, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales were literally conquered by imperialist England.
Germanic migrants were doing imperialism in Wales, you heard it here first folks
Yes fucking genius.
Tell me, what are your opinions on Crimea and the Donbas, CatholicSocialist?
I think all regions deserve self-autonomy determined by democratic referendums, unlike the tankies that think the Republic of China should be re-annexed...
So you oppose Ukrainian rule over Crimea and the Donbas?
No shit sherlock.
It doesn't seem like you do given you referred to the current war as an invasion by Russia and Ukraine has been shelling it's neighbors the LPR and DPR for nearly a decade.
Can you clarify why Russia shouldn't be involved in the war between Ukraine and its smaller neighbors?
So you oppose the Ukranian puppet government's use of fascist militias to commit ethnic cleansing there?
Um, I support peace and democracy.
That's good, so do I. But there are other people, people wearing totenkopfs and firing mortars into town squares full of people they call cockroaches for the language they speak, who feel quite differently than us. What is your solution to this, so that peace and democracy can prevail?