• diablexical@lemm.ee
    ·
    hace 1 año

    The dispute at this point is over how we define a country, especially because Taiwan clearly falls in a grey area within that definition. I claim that they are fundamentally unable to exercise their sovereignty given they aren’t formally recognized as a country by even their greatest allies and benefactors, thus they fail. You claim that they can fulfill the roles of the state, have a national identity, and have various semantic work-arounds for that fundamental illegitimacy, thus they pass.

    I am willing to agree with you (albeit with some rephrasing there) if you were at least consistent. So, do you consider Palestine to be sovereign or not. I consider them sovereign. I am consistent. For you to be consistent in your views would require you to view Palestine to lack sovereignty. Mind you China recognizes Palestine as sovereign. If you say yes they have sovereignty then it demonstrates you're just trying to bring politics into semantics which in truth is what's going on in this whole thread. A political faction is attempting to coop the language to suit their narrative whether it requires logical consistency or not.

    • barrbaric [he/him]
      ·
      hace 1 año

      Given that Israel is militarily occupying and actively colonizing Palestine, I would say that Palestine is unable to exercise its sovereignty. Should it be granted more sovereignty? Yes, but that seems as though it will require either the radical reformation or outright destruction of Israel.

      • diablexical@lemm.ee
        ·
        edit-2
        hace 1 año

        "unable to exercise its sovereignty" is falling a bit short so if you'll allow me to put words in your mouth:

        Palestine is not a sovereign state.

        • barrbaric

        I think most of the hex bear posters in this thread would not make this statement so kudos to you for being consistent, we agree to disagree on the meaning of sovereign and whether Taiwan and Palestine meet that mark.