TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) – China’s military sent 103 warplanes toward Taiwan in a 24-hour period in what the island’s defense ministry said Monday was a daily record in recent times.

  • YeetPics
    link
    237 months ago

    Why tf is west Taiwan so far up mainland Taiwan’s asshole?

  • @electrogamerman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    15
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Whats the deal with china and taiwan? Is it the same shit as russia and ukraine?

    Edit: why am i being downvoted? Am i not allowed to be uninformed?

    • @gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      22
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Taiwan was returned to the Republic of China (ROC), ruled by the nationalist KMT, after the defeat of Imperial Japan, which had occupied it. The KMT forces lost the civil war on the mainland against the communists and fled to Taiwan, claiming to be the true government of China. The ROC was a military dictatorship until the late 80s and responsible for the White Terror. At first, the communist People’s Liberation Army (PLA) couldn’t follow and invade Taiwan because they lacked a navy, and soon after, the ROC got US protection (Taiwan was in important US military base during the Korean war).

      In the 70s, Nixon recognized the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in Beijing as the legitimate government of China, and un-recognized Taipei. He also signed an agreement with the PRC stating that there is one China, and that Taiwan is part of China. White House spokespeople reaffirm this regularly when asked. They never actually properly committed to this though: In practice the US treats Taiwan almost like it is independent, but they avoid calling it that officially. So the US is arguably in breach of its agreement with China on this point, and always was (though I think this was understood by all sides at the time of signing).

      In this agreement, the US also promised to work towards reunification and to demilitarize Taiwan. They did in fact remove US troops from Taiwan and scaled down weapons deliveries. Lately though, they are increasingly breaking these promises with more weapons deliveries, more US military personnel on Taiwan, and open support for pro-independence positions and politicians.

      The PRC for its part promised to work towards peaceful reunification and not use military force. So far they haven’t, so this is currently a one-sided breach of the agreement by the US. Why is the US breaking an agreement that so far has prevented a military conflict?

      Both Beijing, as well as the majority of people on Taiwan, are in favor of continuing the status quo for a while longer. But Beijing has made it clear that they will not accept Taiwan declaring independence, and they certainly do not want a hostile military presence so close to the Chinese mainland and important port cities. The PRC has threatened to blockade/invade Taiwan if independence is declared or if there is a military buildup.

      • @Murais@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        77 months ago

        This mostly correct.

        But the US isn’t responsible for Taiwan’s increased interest in independence. Taiwan is.

        After the Sunflower Movement and witnessing what happened to HK, young Taiwanese are overwhelmingly in favor of independence. So much so that independence has become all but stated as the platform of the DPP. The KMT is now the pro-unification party, but outside of the last mid-terms, they have been getting slaughtered in elections and had to tone down their pro-China rhetoric.

        Status quo is definitely still the overall majority, but that is going to change with demographics and the next generation overwhelmingly favor independence.

        As they should. China was not the first owner of Taiwan, and over the course of Taiwan’s history, their control of the island was relatively short. This is not even speaking of the Indigenous Taiwanese who are always left out of the conversation about Taiwan and have never been citizens of China or had Chinese heritage.

      • @Anonbal185@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        -8
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        If China wanted peaceful unification they can have it tomorrow.

        Cede all power to Taiwan and they can be one country. They definitely won’t be bullied by Taiwan and unlike China Taiwan would accept differing opinions. It’s been done successfully before to a large extent. East and West Germany joined together as one country without the need for border fences or two systems in one country. Just imagine what a basket case of a country if it happened the other way around. 2 systems, border fences different currencies, declining standings on corruption, political freedom etc.

        But of course they’ll never do that. Because deep down it’s not the country they care about. They only care about the CCP itself.

        Edit: looks like the wumaos are in force, not surprising as a large number of them are otherwise unemployed now 😂

    • TheOneCurly
      link
      fedilink
      English
      67 months ago

      During the Communist revolution the republic government was losing pretty badly and fell back to the very defensible island. They’ve been there ever since with their official name: the Republic of China. So there’s some civil war tension there and a lot of claims of who’s the rightful ruler of China.

      • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        77 months ago

        Please don’t skip the critical pieces of information:

        The British and USA sent war ships to defend the KMT on Taiwan because they had been trading and negotiating junior status with the KMT and did not want the West to lose access to Chinese markets, labor, and natural resources.

        The KMT immediately launched a 40-year terror campaign, called the White Terror, on the island of Taiwan and killed native Islanders as well as Han Chinese who argued that the war should be ended. The European powers funded, traded, and armed this terror.

        Taiwan has been part of the nation of China for centuries. It could be argued that the distinct cultural group of native Islanders could get its own autonomous administration region, but the natives don’t have much population on the island. The island has been Chinese and is inhabited by Chinese who lost the civil war and tried to secede under the protection of the Europeans, with the Europeans motivated by having a fully dependent neo-colony by prolonging the civil war and supporting the fascist terror.

        • OKRainbowKid
          link
          fedilink
          -37 months ago

          Since you are talking about historic precedence, what is called “China” today should be called West-Taiwan because the Republic of China aka Taiwan is the original China, preceding the "P"RC.

          • @barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            57 months ago

            “West Taiwan” is silly because Tawian is an island. If you want to use the term then in the sense of “Tainan is in West Taiwan” because it is, indeed, on the western coast.

            How about “autonomous mainland provinces”.

      • @Murais@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        Taiwan’s position is no longer that it is the rightful ruler of China. That notion died with Chiang Kai-shek and nobody with a shred of a brain truly believes it.

        The PRC won the fight over who “legitimate China” is when the UN gave them the seat for China. Also, one of these is an international superpower and the other is Taiwan.

    • @CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      In a short TLDR; Taiwan wants independence, China doesnt want Taiwan to be independent, claim Taiwan belongs to China

  • @Mateoto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    7
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    China still fears economic and military repercussions in the event of an invasion of Taiwan.

    As long as its economy is ill due to current factors like inflation, banking instability, and the inflated real estate market, we can assume that a war would be an economic and political shock right now that even Xi might struggle to navigate.

    Edit: for everyone disagreeing, every foreign expert is expecting a war, and even the current US deterrence (criticized here as escalation) is not enough for most experts.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/08/us-military-deterrence-china-taiwan-war-east-asia/

    • @MrNesser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      20
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Are you kidding, this is when China is starting to be most dangerous.

      Internal strife of a country has always been the biggest factor on when that country goes to war. Creating a distraction for the populace and a bogeyman for them to hate is part of the autocratic playback.

      Look back at the trump administration and how eager he was to bomb Iran and start a war. Or the current invasion of ukraine and the economic issues in Russia before the invasion.

      It’s not the sole driver but it’s a big one.

      • @Mateoto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        67 months ago

        I understand your point, but I respectfully disagree. An internal strife alone doesn’t necessarily lead to military action.

        A military conflict involving Taiwan would have global implications, affecting regional stability and the world economy. Xi is fully aware of that and knows that his political power extends only as far as his economy remains stable. Looking at the last BRICS meeting, we see that China is eager to compensate for any economic embargoes with a stable structure and demand from its partners – which, as of today, is still a work in progress.

        Furthermore, the Ukrainian war has shown, the West can swiftly mitigate major impacts on its economy (see Germany moving completely away from gas exports from Russia). China is aware of that too and knows that while devastating, the west will work closely together to compensate such an economic distaster and cut ties with China completly.

        While the current situation requires vigilance and preparation for the worst, we can at least see that China remains in absolute need of its Western allies, and a military intervention would be a complete disaster, even for Xi.

        That’s likely why he’s consolidating power by eliminating political opponents and critics, but history has shown that being blinded by power, as Putin is in the case of Ukraine, leads to devastation.

        • @Anonbal185@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          17 months ago

          It’s not even internal strife. It all comes down to it’s now or never. If they let this opportunity slip by they will never get Taiwan.

          Their population is declining and there’s nothing that can be done about it in any meaningful way. Nothing has worked to get people to have more children. As they get older people of military age will decline.

          Right now this generation the males outnumber the females. Which means expendable soldiers. These people will never marry and benefit the state in anyway.

          The leverage China has is it’s consumers it’s one of the largest markets. But the Chinese buying things to support international companies is quite minuscule as a percentage of the population and will decline as time goes on, they get all the media attention that’s all . They’ve been struggling to boost internal consumption for years.

          And it isn’t that surprising. Chinese people are one of the most tightarse people ever. They haggle everything and that’s even if they get to the point of actually going to buy it. Spending money to make money usually doesn’t factor in.

          • @Blursty@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            47 months ago

            These are unhinged fantasies. You psychos can’t wait to start another war.

            And it isn’t that surprising. Chinese people are one of the most tightarse people ever. They haggle everything and that’s even if they get to the point of actually going to buy it. Spending money to make money usually doesn’t factor in.

            Mask off there.

            • @shalafi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              -47 months ago

              Yes, all the foreign policy experts in the linked story are unhinged. So, tell us where you got your foreign relations degree and field experience.

              • @Blursty@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                47 months ago

                These “foreign policy experts” are all Americans and their puppets right? And the policy they’re expert in is their warmongering on the other side of the planet from their settler colony, right?

                I know anything at all about American blood soaked history which makes me an expert in geopolitics.

                • @shalafi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -27 months ago

                  Do you honestly think America wants WWIII with their #1 trading partner? The partner with, arguably, the 2nd most powerful military on the planet?

                  This isn’t like the CIA taking over a banana republic in the 50’s.

      • @Blursty@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        Internal strife of a country has always been the biggest factor on when that country goes to war.

        American imperialism in modern history has always been the biggest factor on when that country goes to war. Same as Ukraine.

      • rastilin
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        How much worse is their internal strife going to be once they lose a war? Russia was tooling along before attacking Ukraine, but now they might actually for real topple within a few years.

      • @Reddit_Is_Trash@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        -27 months ago

        Lol, I’d be surprised if any of the jets China flies in its “airforce” are even capable of firing weapons without falling apart. Their military infrastructure is a joke, relying on technology far above their manufacturing capabilities.

    • @joekar1990@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      57 months ago

      Agreed. They’d also have to be pretty sure they’d make up the deficit from potential sanctions/lost exports. [https://trendeconomy.com/data/h2?commodity=TOTAL&reporter=China&trade_flow=Export,Import&partner=World&indicator=TV,YoY&time_period=2021,2022](20% of their GDP is exports ) with the US, Japan, and Korea making up close to 25% of that.

      It’s probably why they are watching Russia so closely and investing in Africa heavily.

  • @Blursty@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    07 months ago

    China, which claims Taiwan as part of its territory, has conducted increasingly large military drills in the air and waters around Taiwan as tensions have grown between the two and with the United States. The U.S. is Taiwan’s main supplier of arms and opposes any attempt to change Taiwan’s status by force.

    Can you imagine China constantly patrolling around Hawaii and threatening the USA? Stirring up tensions and trying to paint the US as the aggressor?

    • Arcity 🇵🇸🇺🇦
      link
      fedilink
      137 months ago

      I love how tankies excuse imperialism for their favorite dictatorships. Y’all can’t even tell the difference between Taiwan and Hawaii.

      • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Most of the dimensions along which Taiwan and Hawaii differ in their relation to the mainland regional hegemon are net positive for the tankie position.

        1. Hawaii is much farther away from the USA mainland than Taiwan to the Chinese mainland. This makes Chinese naval exercises around the island of Taiwan much less threatening to the USA than USA naval exercises around the island of Taiwan. (Taiwan and Key West are much more comparable on distance)

        2. The USA is illegally occupying Hawaii according to its own laws and international laws. The island of Taiwan has been part of the nation of China for centuries.

        3. The Chinese people have been on Taiwan for centuries. White settlers have been on Hawaii for much less time.

        4. The island of Taiwan is occupied by the loser in a civil war that the USA and UK protected and armed while they conducted a 40-year terror campaign called the White Terror where the purged all of their ideological opponents through mass murders, mass executions, and fascist oppression. The USA and UK happily protected, funded, and supported this. By contrast, the islands of Hawaii are occupied by settler colonists and the most violent and destructive military in world history while the original inhabitants of the island are still there and still trying to assert their sovereignty against the illegal occupation.

        5. China has more experience running one country with multiple autonomous regions than any country in the history of the world. These autonomous regions have settler colonial legal structures coexisting with Chinese legal structures because China has no interest in brutal domination. By contrast, the USA brutally dominates Hawaii, denying all indigenous systems of government, and actively destroying their environment, buying up their land like cultures, and is engaged in the classic settler colonial project of indigenous genocide.

        6. Taiwan is collaborating with the UK, Japan, and USA, all countries that have been actively attempting to dominate China and the Chinese people for centuries. There is no legitimate way to express Taiwanese secession that isn’t establishing it even further as a neo-colony of violent fascists. Hawaii, on the other hand, has no history of collaboration with the enemies of the USA and return of indigenous sovereignty does not mean encirclement of the continental USA.

        Essentially, if China was doing naval exercises near Hawaii it would be far less offensive than the USA doing them near Taiwan, and yet, we all know the USA would be screaming bloody murder and beating the war drums louder than ever.

        The fact that you think the false equivalency is in your favor shows just how ignorant of history you are.

        • @randint@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          57 months ago

          I don’t really agree with all the points you listed, but I want to say thank you for not employing the Hexbear approach to defend your position. I gave you an upvote.

          ps. before anyone berates me for not also listing reasons to defend myself: I’m tired of arguing online.

          • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            -17 months ago

            People are allowed to disagree without engaging, engaging takes effort, labor. Hopefully that same recognition can be extended to the Hexbears. They don’t have an obligation to engage, engagement takes effort and it’s exhausting to do it over and over and over again against the same tired, uninformed, ignorant, bigoted, propagandized positions. When you’re a leftist online, it’s exhausting to have millions of people tell you you’re brainwashed for believing something counter to the dominant narrative we all grew up with. It’s just so ridiculous and engagement becomes laborious.

            But, it’s important to provide a counterweight to the overwhelming force of Western propaganda, so the Hexbears have adopted a strategy of psy ops to both express extreme conflict with liberal positions without having to engage in a way that’s laborious. In fact, dunking on liberals and making them uncomfortable becomes a form of self expression that rejuvenates the psyche.

            So, don’t apologize, thank you for expressing your disagreement and for keeping yourself safe from engaging in a way that harms you.

        • @TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          27 months ago

          Honestly a pretty good write up, my only mild rebuttal would be involving the following quotes.

          The island of Taiwan has been part of the nation of China for centuries.

          The island was first colonized by Europeans, then the han, the Japanese, the qing, and finally back to the han via ROC. It kinda predates the notion of modern nation states, and thus is difficult to to claim that it’s been part of the Nation of China for centuries.

          The Chinese people have been on Taiwan for centuries. White settlers have been on Hawaii for much less time.

          Europeans were colonizing Taiwan before the Han, I don’t think that really justifies the colonialism any more.

          These autonoumous regions have settler colonial legal structures coexisting with Chinese legal structures because China has no interest in brutal domination.

          I think co-existing is granting the government a little more grace than what really exist. The settler colonial structures are just the window dressing for the same colonialism practiced throughout human history.

          The Chinese government violently overthrows the ruling government and sets up an “autonomous” government filled with party loyalist. They then subsidize immigration until the native population is a minority to Han immigrants.

          I think one of the problem we have in the left is that there is an a knee jerk reaction to excuse the imperialism we see in leftist states by comparing it to the imperialism of the west. Which is understandable, the west has done some horrific stuff.

          However a lot of these actions are only somewhat justified in juxtaposition to the same types of actions from people like the US. It’s the same tactic that the US does when they juxtapose themselves against the actions of literal nazi. It’s kind of a low bar we keep running into.

          I just don’t think criticisms of any leftist nation should automatically be followed by people calling them shills or libs. Self criticism is an essential tenant of Marxism, and it just doesn’t seem to be allowed anymore.

            • @TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              37 months ago

              Colonized my dude… not occupied. The dutch colonized the island in 1624. The first Chinese populations were brought to the island as forced labour by Europeans.

          • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Believing that what China is doing is imperialism is completely at odds with the critical analysis of what imperialism is. If you hold this position, you’re going to have to defend it with substantial argument. Right now, the two dominant sources of this position are chauvinist Western Europeans and ultra leftists like Hoxhaists.

            Autonomous zones do not see any massive influx of Han attempting to replace indigenous peoples. The tibetan autonomous regions does not see this, Xinjiang does not see this. Instead the autonomous zones see a flourishing of indigenous culture, language, teachings, religions, cuisine, etc. The fact that there are party leaders participating in the management of the autonoumous zone is literally the exact way you would make an autonomous zone and not in anyway imperialist or colonialist. The party leaders exist as a leadership conduit and collaboration between the state and the region and they work to resolve conflict between the region and the state in a way that does not necessitate dominance.

            You say “the same colonialism that has existed throughout human history”. This is a dehistoricalization, that is to say, it is a line of thought that actively divorces the discourse from history. Colonization as we know it is distinctly European. Even the Japanese colonization efforts are quite explicitly an effort on the part of the Japanese to emulate the European system. China does not have colonies, it does not engage in colonialism, and it is actively working to dismantle the history of colonialism in its sphere - history that is exclusively European.

            As for Marxists, we engage in self criticism all the time. The position on China emerged from self criticism. The idea that parroting USA state department propaganda is self criticism is delusion. The idea that fighting against these narratives is somehow blind automaticity is a combo strawman and ad hominem.

            China itself engaged in self criticism when it acknowledged it’s action in Southeast Asia as chauvinistic and they changed their policies to incorporate this criticism.

            As for the USA juxtaposing itself against the Nazis, it’s not quite the same, because the Nazis were emulating the USA, and when the USA took control over the victory negotiations they incorporated Nazis into their society, built a transnational nuclear military and staffed it with Nazis, built Nazi leave-behind forces all throughout Europe, supported the Nazis in their battles against the USSR, and intervened at the UN to prevent Nazis from coming under scrutiny.

            Juxtaposing China against the USA isn’t to say that China is better than the USA, it’s to say they are engaged in fundamentally different projects of state craft and that China’s project necessarily involves the opposition to and dismantling of the American project.

            The false equivalency of Chinese actions with USA actions is not self criticism, it’s lazy.

            • @TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              17 months ago

              China is doing is imperialism is completely at odds with the critical analysis of what imperialism is.

              Lol, okay semantic dispute time I guess. What exactly is your definition of a “critical analysis of imperialism”.

              Autonomous zones do not see any massive influx of Han attempting to replace indigenous peoples. The tibetan autonomous regions does not see this, Xinjiang does not see this. Instead the autonomous zones see a flourishing of indigenous culture

              “Han and Uyghurs made up respectively 6.2 and 82.7 percent of Xinjiang’s population. Since 1982, the percentages have changed, to ca. 39–41 percent and 46–51 percent, respectively.”

              “The Han Chinese population share has increased sharply in the TAR, encouraged by massive subsidies from the central government that exceeded 100 percent of the TAR GDP from 2010 onwards”

              Yeah, spending more than 100% of the TARs entire gdp on subsidizing migration… not insidious at all.

              The fact that there are party leaders participating in the management of the autonoumous zone is literally the exact way you would make an autonomous zone and not in anyway imperialist or colonialist.

              Lol, and how many of these ethnic minority leaders have ever been in charge of their region?

              “In PRC history, ethnic minority leaders have never made it onto the Politburo Standing Committee, the de facto nexus of power in China. For the five ethnic minority autonomous provinces (the Tibetan Autonomous Region, the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, and the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region), the region’s top post of Party secretary has been given to a Han Chinese over the past 35 years, reflecting Beijing’s firm grip on power in minority-populated political units.”

              Colonization as we know it is distinctly European. Even the Japanese colonization efforts are quite explicitly an effort on the part of the Japanese to emulate the European system. China does not have colonies, it does not engage in colonialism, and it is actively working to dismantle the history of colonialism in its sphere - history that is exclusively European.

              Again, this is just a semantic dispute surrounding the meaning of colonialism. Even if colonialism was invented by the west, you yourself admit it was imported and practiced by the Japanese. China is obviously not in a vacuum of influence and is perfectly able to modify western colonialism to suit their needs.

              As for Marxists, we engage in self criticism all the time.

              Lol, okay… sure. You just spent a page defending imperialism, but sure.

              The idea that parroting USA state department propaganda is self criticism is delusion. The idea that fighting against these narratives is somehow blind automaticity is a combo strawman and ad hominem.

              Ahh yes, highlighting data made public by the 2020 Chinese census , automatically means I’m working for the state department.

              China itself engaged in self criticism when it acknowledged it’s action in Southeast Asia as chauvinistic and they changed their policies to incorporate this criticism.

              I’m guessing your talking about their invasion of Vietnam? The one that had running conflicts until the 90s, the one that is still hampering Sino-Vietnamese relations till today?

              How is that any different than Tibet, other than Vietnam could actually defend itself?

              As for the USA juxtaposing itself against the Nazis, it’s not quite the same, because the Nazis were emulating the USA

              I would have to partially agree with this to a degree, America has always had fascist leanings. But, it’s be a lot more accurate to say that they were emulating Italy.

              My rebuttal to this would be that the CCP also emulated the United States when they switched to a socialized market economy.

              it’s to say they are engaged in fundamentally different projects of state craft and that China’s project necessarily involves the opposition to and dismantling of the American project.

              Ahh, were bad because you made us be bad… makes more sense when applied to the soviets… not so much when applied to Asia. What American scheme required dismantling in Tibet or any of the autonomous regions?

              The false equivalency of Chinese actions with USA actions is not self criticism, it’s lazy.

              Again, my point was that we should develop criticism that are not automatically juxtaposed to western imperialism… and you just can’t allow it.

              Real big self criticism moment there bud.

              • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Part 1

                Lol, okay semantic dispute time I guess. What exactly is your definition of a “critical analysis of imperialism”.

                Definitely not purely a semantic dispute. Have you read Lenin? Lenin’s analysis of imperialism still stands as the dominant critical analysis of imperialism, though there has been some recent attempts to update it to adapt to the new form imperialism caused by unipolar hegemony under the name superimperialism or hyperimperialism.

                “The Han Chinese population share has increased sharply in the TAR, encouraged by massive subsidies from the central government that exceeded 100 percent of the TAR GDP from 2010 onwards”

                The context of that sentence in the report shows that in culturally Tibetan regions outside the Tibet Autonomous Region are showing opposite trends, meaning that “ethnic minorities” are becoming majorities. Clearly this is not a program of Han supremacy but of social integration. Autonomous regions are not meant to be insular, but integrated into one country with multiple systems. Compare this to actual colonialism, where colonists use rape, child separation, enslavement, cultural repression, starvation, land fractionalization, and other techniques to dilute and dismantle ethnic minorities. China is doing none of this. In the TAR, the Tibetan language is used to conduct nearly all business and all education, from grade school through university. That is not colonialism.

                Yeah, spending more than 100% of the TARs entire gdp on subsidizing migration… not insidious at all.

                It’s only insidious if you presuppose the intent.

                Lol, and how many of these ethnic minority leaders have ever been in charge of their region?

                Well, considering that the top position of party secretary is the only referenced in your quotation, and considering the autonomous regions experience a significant amount of indigenous cultural practices on all dimensions, we must imagine that a Han Chinese party secretary can’t possibly be anyone that has the requisite social history to be responsible for that flourishing. Given that, we come to the conclusion that, in fact, the indigenous members of the autonomous regions wield significant influence over their regions and that the party secretary does exactly what a party secretary that is correctly managing an autonomous region would do - ensuring alignment with the state’s core strategic direction. That means ensuring the autonomous regions are not infiltrated by Western spoilers, elevating compradors to positions of influence or power, and ensuring party resources are allocated in ways that maintain good relations with the region. If this was not what was happening, then you would be seeing separatists and sympathizers all over the place. Instead what we see is separatists are almost exclusively associated with Western programs for destabilization and most of the population in the autonomous regions are aware of the need for protecting their region against these interests. When the US is training Tibetan terrorists and air lifting them into the region to conduct acts of violence and build terror networks, it’s pretty important to maintain a counter-intelligence posture even in autonomous regions.

                Again, this is just a semantic dispute surrounding the meaning of colonialism. Even if colonialism was invented by the west, you yourself admit it was imported and practiced by the Japanese. China is obviously not in a vacuum of influence and is perfectly able to modify western colonialism to suit their needs.

                I don’t think you understand what I’m saying. I’m not saying that the West invented colonialism. I’m saying the colonialism you are talking about is explicitly a phenomenon of Western society. Japan adopting it doesn’t stop it from being a Western social project, that would be race essentialism. China is actively working to undo the damage of colonialism qua the Western social phenomenon. It cannot do so by replicating it.

                But more to the point, you assume that China would get the same benefit of colonialism that the West did and is therefore incentivized to engage in Western colonialism. This is where your belief about the world does not match the reality of the world. The reality is that Western colonialism is fatally flawed and those countries that engaged in it are being undone by it. China is aware of this and is actively working to bring about the conditions that ensure the contradictions of Western society move inexorably towards the resolution of those contradictions by the undoing of the colonial project. If China were to then begin its own colonial project, it would be doing so with the full knowledge that it would ultimately destroy China. This is what Western chauvinists can’t seem to grasp. The anti-imperialist movement is fully aware of how unsustainable the North Atlantic project is. They have no desire to emulate it. Western chauvinists just think that imperialism worked really well and now all the anti-imperialists just want to become imperialists in their own right, because obviously your opponents are guilty of the same things you are guilty of, right? But that’s just projection. Modern anti-imperialists movements are based on Marxism-Leninism and Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and are fully aware of the absolute death trap that imperialism is. Their understanding of the world and how it works is that if they engage in imperialism, they will collapse, just like the West is collapsing. Don’t project your bad behavior onto China.

                Lol, okay… sure. You just spent a page defending imperialism, but sure.

                You don’t know what imperialism is. Your definition of imperialism is so anemic that it cannot distinguish between imperialism and anti-imperialism.

                (Continued in Part 2)

                • @TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  37 months ago

                  Definitely not purely a semantic dispute. Have you read Lenin? Lenin’s analysis of imperialism still stands as the dominant critical analysis of imperialism

                  I mean you’re entire argument is based upon a different understanding of the word imperialism, I’d say that’s pretty semantic.

                  And yes, I have read Lenin. And while I agree with a lot of the overarching theory of imperialism seen through a capitalist lens, I think it fails to explain the nuance of a lot of historic and modern conflicts. For one I believe that it fails to recognize historic form of imperialism that happened before the industrial age. It’s overarching themes can be forced into perspective, but it requires the use of a very plastic definition of capitalism. Secondly, I think that Lenin’s theory of imperialism being a stage of capitalism is a product of its time, and is thus is a extremely eurocentric view of history and geopolitics.

                  The context of that sentence in the report shows that in culturally Tibetan regions outside the Tibet Autonomous Region are showing opposite trends, meaning that “ethnic minorities” are becoming majorities. Clearly this is not a program of Han supremacy but of social integration.

                  I do t quite see how you’ve made that you interpretation? It just sounds like the native people of Tibet are being pushed out of their own homeland. How does directing more funding to immigration than the entire autonomous regions gdp equate to social integration?

                  where colonists use rape, child separation, enslavement, cultural repression, starvation, land fractionalization, and other techniques to dilute and dismantle ethnic minorities

                  And there isn’t a history of reeducation camps that have been accused of rape, family separation, and cultural repression in any autonomous zones?

                  In the TAR, the Tibetan language is used to conduct nearly all business and all education, from grade school through university. That is not colonialism.

                  Lol, that’s like saying the US didn’t colonize Puerto Rico because they still use Spanish as the official language. China has jailed and killed hundreds of priest and nuns in the country, going as far as disappearing their religious leader.

                  only insidious if you presuppose the intent.

                  It’s only not insidious if you ignore the possibility of ill intent. If the US started funding immigration to Puerto Rico for white people, to the point that it exceeded Puerto Rico s entire gdp… would you hold your judgment until you understood their intent?

                  Well, considering that the top position of party secretary is the only referenced in your quotation, and considering the autonomous regions experience a significant amount of indigenous cultural practices on all dimensions

                  You can’t substantiate that claim? There’s been plenty of evidence to suggest that indigenous cultures have plenty of limitations imposed by the state.

                  we must imagine that a Han Chinese party secretary can’t possibly be anyone that has the requisite social history to be responsible for that flourishing.

                  Again, this statement is predicated on an unsubstantiated claim.

                  Given that, we come to the conclusion that, in fact, the indigenous members of the autonomous regions wield significant influence over their regions and that the party secretary does exactly what a party secretary that is correctly managing an autonomous region would do - ensuring alignment with the state’s core strategic direction.

                  You are basing your entire argument on a post hoc fallacy, you have not substantiated the claim that indigenous people are flourishing.

                  If this was not what was happening, then you would be seeing separatists and sympathizers all over the place. Instead what we see is separatists are almost exclusively associated with Western programs for destabilization and most of the population in the autonomous regions are aware of the need for protecting their region against these interests.

                  Lol, okay so your logic is that if there were oppression going on that it would cause separatist movements, but according to you all separatist movements were started by western powers … very convenient.

                  Japan adopting it doesn’t stop it from being a Western social project, that would be race essentialism.

                  Yes, my point is that china is not immune to adopting certain aspects of western colonialism.

                  China is actively working to undo the damage of colonialism qua the Western social phenomenon.

                  That’s another unsubstantiated claim.

                  you assume that China would get the same benefit of colonialism that the West did

                  Ahh yes, now you get to make claims for me. I sense a strawman argument coming around the corner…

                  China is aware of this and is actively working to bring about the conditions that ensure the contradictions of Western society move inexorably towards the resolution of those contradictions by the undoing of the colonial project. If China were to then begin its own colonial project, it would be doing so with the full knowledge that it would ultimately destroy China.

                  That would be if the Chinese were practicing the same extraction based colonialism, which is not a claim I’ve made. I believe the type of colonialism we have seen is more of a slow boil version of Americas expansion west, which involves more assimilation and subjection, and placation until the he local popular can be replaced.

                  You don’t know what imperialism is. Your definition of imperialism is so anemic that it cannot distinguish between imperialism and anti-imperialism.

                  You don’t get to define imperialism as you see fit, Lenin was a brilliant man, but his ideologies aren’t all encompassing. Theories like historic materialism may be the best overarching theory of the motives of human conflict, but it leaves a lot to be desired when you try to utilize it to explain every conflict. Yes material needs might be the inherent reason for the racism that started the first war, but the fighters of the following reactionary wars aren’t going recognize that, or even remember the material needs being the base for their own racism.

              • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                -1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Part 2:

                Ahh yes, highlighting data made public by the 2020 Chinese census , automatically means I’m working for the state department.

                Just because you regurgitate propaganda doesn’t mean you work for them. I would never accuse you of having the requisite skills to work for the US State Department. You cherry picked data from the 2020 census and repeated a narrative around those isolated facts that fits the Western narrative. It’s not my fault you can’t see through the bullshit.

                I’m guessing your talking about their invasion of Vietnam? The one that had running conflicts until the 90s, the one that is still hampering Sino-Vietnamese relations till today? How is that any different than Tibet, other than Vietnam could actually defend itself?

                If you don’t know the answer to this question, then you don’t really have any business talking about this. Ignorance is not a position that must be respected. Your position is based on ignorance, not research and analysis. In essence, you can’t tell the difference between Vietnam and Tibet because your analysis is based purely on vibes and moralizing. Suffice to say, Han chauvinism regarding Vietnam was based on the idea that China knows best, whereas the TAR is based on the rectification of that idea that national security and foreign policy have wholly different qualities than domestic policy and that autonomous regions are a dialectical unity between the need for national security and the need for cultural autonomy.

                I would have to partially agree with this to a degree, America has always had fascist leanings. But, it’s be a lot more accurate to say that they were emulating Italy.

                No, it wouldn’t. Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that one of his goals was to bring the American system of apartheid and dominance to the Slavs. It would not be more accurate to say the 3rd Reich was emulating Italy. The 3rd Reich openly studied Jim Crow, American eugenics, frontier and border town strategies, the Indian reservation system, etc. The 3rd Reich literally grew from the Western European project that the USA perfected and helmed. When the 3rd Reich fell, the movement was absorbed back into the USA where it continued to develop.

                My rebuttal to this would be that the CCP also emulated the United States when they switched to a socialized market economy.

                Which again is more vibes than anything else. If you actually read Chinese party publications, 5-year plans, and everything else they publish, you would see that nothing could be further from the truth. China is not emulating the US, they are arranging their economic policies to ensnare Western bourgeoisie. In fact, that phase is nearly over, having successfully convinced the Western bourgeoisie to put their capital into China to develop China beyond the West while simultaneously convincing the West to deindustrialize. There is no equivalent to Mein Kampf in China, nothing that analyzes the American or European system as effective or better or something worth reproducing and advancing. There is nothing similar in China to Japan’s wholesale adoption of the Western imperialism program (though there is that interesting point in Japanese history where they wholesale adopted the Chinese system of social organization and then tailored it to their context).

                Ahh, were bad because you made us be bad… makes more sense when applied to the soviets… not so much when applied to Asia. What American scheme required dismantling in Tibet or any of the autonomous regions?

                Oh boy. I don’t know if we can have this conversation. I’m not really equipped to be your teacher here. Your question, rephrased is “Why did China make autonomous regions and what does it have to do with America?” The first problems is that you see America as the background but America is the foreground, the background is the North Atlantic project of Euro-centric imperialism through racialized capitalism. If you look at the history of the North Atlantic in the Asia-Pacific region, you’re going to see a lot of the things China has done are very closely matched to things that the North Atlantic countries have done. Vietnam was a French colony, and America took the torch from them. The Philippines were occupied by the Spanish, and America took over from them. America turned half of Korea into a wasteland and the other half into a nuclear base, but it took it over from the Japanese who had made Korea a colony. The UK was in India and doing all sorts of anti-communist fuckery at the time but also had spent a century building their imperialism and especially their dominance of China. And then of course you have everything happening in the “Middle East” by the USA, UK, France, and other European imperialists, and that’s yet-another-front through which to isolate, encircle, and destabilize China.

                China isn’t doing anything “bad”. There is no “bad”. The moral framing is a useless one. My sentence was “China’s project necessarily involves the opposition to and dismantling of the American project.” There’s a lot to understand from that. First, when China pushes the USA, UK, and Japan out of their space, it’s not imperialism, it’s anti-imperialism. Second, what China is doing is explicitly NOT replicating what the West did and then tuning it to meet their context. What China is doing is finding a path that involves exactly not replicating the colonialist and imperialist structures that are going to destroy the West because China doesn’t want to be destroyed like the West is being destroyed. The fact that you think I was saying “China is bad because other people made them bad” shows you have no idea what China is actually doing.

                Again, my point was that we should develop criticism that are not automatically juxtaposed to western imperialism… and you just can’t allow it.

                You can’t develop self crit from a position of abject ignorance. Stop trying to figure out how to be morally superior by engaging in criticism of the fantasy China that you have not investigated at all and start trying to develop criticism of China by studying it thoroughly and with intellectual honesty. There are plenty of things to criticize China for from a Marxist perspective. You haven’t found a single one of those things.

                • @TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  37 months ago

                  You cherry picked data from the 2020 census and repeated a narrative around those isolated facts that fits the Western narrative. It’s not my fault you can’t see through the bullshit.

                  Did you want me to just cite the entire census? Of course I picked data that supported my argument, that’s how debate works… now it is your job to rebuttal my argument, which isnt just throwing ad hominems btw.

                  you don’t know the answer to this question, then you don’t really have any business talking about this. Ignorance is not a position that must be respected.

                  Lol, you only specified actions in South East Asia. It’s of my opinion that there are plenty of actions commuted by china in South East Asia that could be interpreted as negative.

                  In essence, you can’t tell the difference between Vietnam and Tibet because your analysis is based purely on vibes and moralizing.

                  Lol, Tibet is not in South East Asia my dude.

                  Suffice to say, Han chauvinism regarding Vietnam was based

                  Ahh, okay I was right. You were just being sassy.

                  Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that one of his goals was to bring the American system of apartheid and dominance to the Slavs. It would not be more accurate to say the 3rd Reich was emulating Italy. The 3rd Reich openly studied Jim Crow, American eugenics, frontier and border town strategies, the Indian reservation system, etc. The 3rd Reich literally grew from the Western European project that the USA perfected and helmed. When the 3rd Reich fell, the movement was absorbed back into the USA where it continued to develop.

                  Again, I’m not defending America? I agree that he studied and utilized American system of oppression, but the way he organized his economy and structural hierarchy was more influenced by the actions of mousselines Italian fascism.

                  Which again is more vibes than anything else. If you actually read Chinese party publications, 5-year plans, and everything else they publish, you would see that nothing could be further from the truth. China is not emulating the US, they are arranging their economic policies to ensnare Western bourgeoisie

                  And a lot of people seem to think that utilizing capitalism to destroy capitalism is like trying to put out a house fire by drowning it in gasoline. I think there are some pretty valid criticism laid out in from victory to defeat by Pao-yu Ching.

                  There’s a lot to understand from that. First, when China pushes the USA, UK, and Japan out of their space, it’s not imperialism, it’s anti-imperialism.

                  Lol, that implies that they have some sort of manifest destiny over territories they’ve never historically controlled… Tibet is their space? You just reiterated yourself without actually explaining how they justified their expansion. That’s unless you are claiming they preemptively expanded their territory to deny possible future western intent.

                  China doesn’t want to be destroyed like the West is being destroyed

                  Again, you are utilizing an unsubstantiated definition of imperialism that requires the unnecessary prerequisite of a specified type of capitalist intent.

                  Stop trying to figure out how to be morally superior by engaging in criticism of the fantasy China that you have not investigated at all and start trying to develop criticism of China by studying it thoroughly and with intellectual honesty.

                  My dude, just because we came to different conclusions doesn’t mean I haven’t investigated it at all. I could make the same dramatic claims about the willfull ignorance of obvious human rights violations committed against indigenous populations, but of course it would be justified as Western propaganda.

                  There are plenty of things to criticize China for from a Marxist perspective. You haven’t found a single one of those things.

                  And they would be? You keep making large sweeping claims and then just using a series of logical fallacies to justify them. You haven’t really expanded on your claims, You’ve just regurgitated party platitudes. It’s like I’m criticizing US foreign policy and you keep utilizing memos from the state department to justify them. The whole point is I don’t believe the state department to be a dependable narrator.

                  Have a great one, but I don’t really feel like breaking down anymore logical fallacies. Nor do I really feel like explaining the historic racial schisms of the east to white people who have never been to the continent. But as a fun experiment, next time you meet a Han from mainland China, ask their opinions about Manchu people. It should be a fun learning experience!

        • @astral_avocado@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          You missed point 7 which is that Taiwan is populated entirely by a people who already believe they’re an independent country, and want to be an independent country, and have a government that is not China and operates autonomously from China.

          • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            -57 months ago

            Yeah, and America is made up of people who believe America is a Christian nation and the English think Spain is a county and the white Australians think they have a right to live on that continent at all. People believing something doesn’t make it true.

            Besides, if you were in a community that spent 40 years undergoing a fascist purge that murdered anyone who said anything good about the mainland or reintegration, do you think your community might exhibit some statistical bias in their beliefs about the world and their place in it?

            And finally, should 1.4 billion people simply accept a nuclear missile base inches from their homes piloted by the most violent nation in the world simply because some of their fellow countrymen fell for the fascist propaganda of the most violent countries in the history of the planet? I would propose to you that the answer is no, and that “one country - two systems” is the only peaceful way forward from a game theory perspective. The other option means giving the USA and the North Atlantic exactly what they need to dominate the Asia-Pacific for another 600 years.

        • Arcity 🇵🇸🇺🇦
          link
          fedilink
          -47 months ago
          1. Feeling threatened is no justification for invasion
          2. Why does legality inform your morality. Especially laws from a country you despise?
          3. This is blood and soil rhetoric
          4. Current day Taiwan is able to outgrow its fascist past by being free from its current day fascist neighbour.
          5. Tell that to Hong Kong, Tibet and the Uyghurs.
          6. Taiwan, just like any political entity should be able to associate with whichever country it wants. Advocating otherwise is arguing to colonize Taiwan.
          • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            -47 months ago

            Feeling threatened is no justification for invasion

            You think countries have feelings? Being threatened is absolutely a justification for invasion. Especially in the nuclear context of encirclement and first-strike capabilities.

            Why does legality inform your morality. Especially laws from a country you despise?

            Why are you arguing from morality at all? You said that the situation with Taiwan and Hawaii are super different and I agreed and I’m giving how they are different and show the situation with the US behavior towards Taiwan has so much less justification than the situation with China’s behavior towards the island of Taiwan which is part of the nation of China.

            This is blood and soil rhetoric

            LOL. No it’s not. You don’t even know what that means. Foolish attempt at a Godwin.

            Current day Taiwan is able to outgrow its fascist past by being free from its current day fascist neighbour.

            Also fucking hilarious to suggest China is fascist. Fascism as you know it is a purely European invention, developed by the Western powers, perfected by the USA, extended by the Third Reich in a way that hurt white Europeans (which is why Europe had to shut it down), and then reabsorbed and extended by the US. Taiwan maintaining it’s proxy vassal status with the UK and US is what brings it closer to fascism.

            Tell that to Hong Kong, Tibet and the Uyghurs.

            FFS, you’re just a ignoramus. Hong Kong was brutally occupied by the British and the British did everything it could to establish a separatist movement to attempt to turn Hong Kong into a UK proxy. Despite that, China still has not changed the vast majority of Hong Kong’s laws and Hong Kong still gets to operate under a separate system and China isn’t forcing them to change it. China was far gentler to the protestors in Hong Kong, who were fighting to literally prevent China from enacting national security laws, than France, UK, Spain, and the US are to their protestors.

            In Tibet and Xinjiang, the indigenous people speak their native language from birth through all levels of schooling, practice their native religions, and exercise their native cultures. In the US, there are many lost native languages, and those that aren’t lost have very few fluent speakers, because the US is still prosecuting an active genocide against them and their cultures. The fate of Tibetans and Uyghuyrs is far and away better than the fate of any minority group the North Atlantic have ever encountered.

            Taiwan, just like any political entity should be able to associate with whichever country it wants. Advocating otherwise is arguing to colonize Taiwan.

            Abject ignorance again. No, it’s not colonialism. The Confederacy didn’t have an inherent right to associate with whichever country it wanted to by virtue of it being a political entity. There are countless examples of sovereign nations attempting to do whatever they want even in domestic policies, let alone foreign, that resulted in the North Atlantic countries obliterating them, couping them, assassinating them, occupying them, torturing them, and collectively punishing them, so whatever imagined right you think inheres to political entities doesn’t have any evidence for its existence.

            The reality is that Taiwan, as a political entity, is a construction of the North Atlantic countries. It was a losing army in a civil war in a nation that included Taiwan as territory, and the UK and US physically severed the administration of Taiwan by the mainland using war ships. Taiwan is not a political entity, it is a proxy in the anti-communist war led by the USA and UK. It only exists because the West desires to colonize and dominate China. It is not a sovereign nation by any measure whatsoever.

            Further, foreign policy inherently involves every other nation on the planet. National security is not something that is built in isolation it is a relationship between nations. What Taiwan does affects the national security of China and vice versa. What Canada does affects the national security of the USA and vice versa. What Ireland does affects the national security of England and vice versa. It’s a totally liberal fantasy that nations have rights the same way individuals have rights, and this fantasy is used in the exact same way - selectively inventing rights and then using them to justify war and atrocities against strategic enemies.

            You are a fool with no basis for your position except white vibes.

          • @freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            -67 months ago

            No, it’s not. The only people who believe this are pro-European colonialism. The ONLY reason Taiwan wasn’t immediately reintegrated through the final defeat of the KMT is because Britain and the USA intervened to protect the KMT for the express purpose of turning them into neocolonial vassal. They are not a de facto state, the are a de defacto neo-colony that needs to be severed from the West’s bloody fascist hands.

      • @Blursty@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        -187 months ago

        “Imperialism”? What the fuck are you talking about?

        Whoever taught the lib masses to mindlessly repeat this word needs to get the wall.

    • krolden
      link
      fedilink
      -117 months ago

      Hawaii was taken by force by white american capitalists. I think Hawaii might embrace Chinese protection. USA can’t even keep the island from burning or bring proper temporary housing for the victims.