One China or Free Taiwan?

[Lhagatse]

Crockerland asked whether ISIS should exist with popular support.

To which the person I questioned answered in the affirmative.

I'm arguing that his question itself is inherently fallacious on grounds of (a) ISIS is being presented as a distasteful option, implicitly on grounds of shocking human rights abuses and (b) ISIS not actually enjoing domestic support because of said abuses.

The fact of the matter is that the very abuses ISIS perpetuates, that permits it to be presented as the distasteful option, innately precludes it from actually having said support from the populace.

Not inherently correct, the Gaza strip voted in favor of Hamas.

ISIS, almost inherently, cannot have the support of the populace save by threat of force. It is an illogical hypothetical that cannot ocurr, and by positing it in a way that forces one to equivicate supporting Taiwan with dupporting ISIS, you're asking a tremendously unfair question.

I never equivocated supporting Taiwan with supporting ISIS. I support Taiwan, and I don't support ISIS.

I said, as I have already clarified, that the claim that the only thing that needs to be considered in a state's independence is the view of the majority of that state's residents would lead to a support for ISIS independence if the majority of the people in territory controlled by the Islamic State supported it. And again, as I have already pointed out, Salandriagado, who I said this to, agreed with me.

Asking if he'd support a widely-supported ISIS is not at all like asking if he supports Taiwanese independence.

I guess if you take that completely out of context and ignore the conversation that was occurring then yes, I guess it would be.

Crockerland was attemtping to undermine his position with an illogical hypothetical. Crockerland's question is like asking a McDonald's frycook if he would torture dogs to death because they do torture dogs at Yulin dog meat festival, and the frycook also works with meat.

If the frycook had said that killing animals for food was okay because the majority of people in America supported it, and had confirmed that he would torture dogs to death if the majority of people in China supported it, then that would be an equivalent question.

Clearly ISIS is a very different situation,

The entire point of my post being that ISIS and Taiwan are not similar, but that the method used by Salandriagado could easily make them similar if support for ISIS independence rose in the area it controlled.

and to be asked fairly, thq question requires some nuance instead of drawing crude parallels that forces us to endorse a group that engages in ethnic cleansing on sheer hypothetical.

Again, as I have already explained, the entire point of my post was that they are not the same, and even if they both had the majority of their populations supporting them, Taiwan is the only one of the two that should be free in my opinion.

You're still not getting my point; I understand that the question was initially asked to raise a moral quandary, as to why the single criterion of "if the people will it" is invalid. I'm saying that the question itself, however, is fallacious. The question is posed in a way where ISIS is implicitly understood to be distasteful. But, as we've seen via news filtering in from the Middle-East, ISIS' nature--the atrocities that it commits-- render it fundamentally impossible for ISIS to cultivate popularity with a significant portion of the population.

Crockerland's question then implies that by supporting self-determination, one must logically be able to support ISIS, despite ISIS being a fringe group with little domestic support in all but the most fringe and rural populations (and a tenuous support even there). ISIS, by its nature, cannot actually meet Salandriagado's criterion in the real world. Hypothetically, yes, ISIS could win popular support in Iraq and Syria, but without a significant shift in its treatment of locals, (the same treatment that both defines our hatred towards and cultivates local fear towards ISIS) it's a ridiculous hypothetical at best. Either the nature of the people living under ISIS control must turn exceptionally radicalised and masochistic, or the nature of ISIS must fundamentally change for there to be said popular mandate.

I suppose what I'm trying to get at here is that ISIS isn't a good counterfactual to use here, because it implies that ISIS is somehow able to cultivate the local support it needs to govern and be considered legitimate in Salandriagado's eyes, which a reasonable person would probably not consider as rational while typing Salandriagado's initial assertion. I understand that as a hypothetical, it doesn't need to pass all levels of scrutiny, and then I might just be pedantic here, but I still maintain that the question itself is flawed. I would've taken no issue with, say, if posed as a question of national security, or of the 17 secession movements rocking modern-day Spain, in which case I would've probably agreed that mandate of the people isn't enough to justify the fragmentation of a nation.

I don't believe I hit all of your points in my former post, but I think it does cover my views on most of them.

[Cetacea]

um I did read it and still don't think its valid. This is page 12 of a discussion on Taiwan Nationhood and raising ISIS ignores the fact that ISIS isn't a nation and has no 'people'. I agree with his/her Yes if the majority of people in a nation overwhelmingly want a certain outcome then it should be granted (I stated earlier that 80% of the people of Taiwan consider themselves Taiwanese and that to me is the only criterion)

It would be the same criterion for Daesh - if 80% of the people living in the area they control identify themselves as ISILites and overwhelmingly want to be a state then sure. That doesn't mean Daesh can't still be condemned for human rights abuses and foreign nations can't still attempt exterminate them with extreme prejudice. Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Cuba, Israel even North Korea have a right to exist...

One of these states is not like the others
One of these states has LGBT rights, womens' rights, a score of "free" from freedom house, and a democratically elected government.

Yes and that was largely the point of including it. Each of the examples I gave are nations in their own right covering a wide spectrum of assholeness, however none of them are similar to Daesh precisely because ISIL is not a nation and has no people who identify with it as an Ethnic/National category.

Lhagaste has gone over why raising ISIL is invalid so I wont repeat it.

The fact of the matter is that the very abuses ISIS perpetuates, that permits it to be presented as the distasteful option, innately precludes it from actually having said support from the populace.

Not inherently correct, the Gaza strip voted in favor of Hamas.

see what I mean:) The people of Gaza have an ethic identity beyond Hamas

[Dwalin]

The PRC is the one and only China, that isn't much of a question really, but before one continues on the matter lets have a look at some of the stuff revolving the two China's.
Both the PRC as the ROC claim all of China and both claim to be the one and only true China. Now opposed to the ROC, the PRC made one thing very clear to the world, you only recognize one China, meaning that whoever would recognize the ROC would automatically lose all ties with the PRC.
Now i do support a Free Taiwain, but it all starts at the very core, and that is the point where Taiwan, also known as the ROC, needs to revoke its claims on China and rename itself something else than China. Only when they do so we can talk about looking into recognizing Taiwan, but still alot will depend on the reaction of the PRC.

[Noraika]

Its a complicated relationship, but overall Taiwan is China.

No it's not

Taiwan is no more China than Tibet or Vietnam is China

Both countries are China. They both see themselves as China, and the only question then is how China, as a whole, is represented. The Peoples Republic and the Republic of China are both China, and their people are both Chinese. There is shared history and identity, as Chinese.

[Tuthina]

The PRC is the one and only China, that isn't much of a question really, but before one continues on the matter lets have a look at some of the stuff revolving the two China's.
Both the PRC as the ROC claim all of China and both claim to be the one and only true China. Now opposed to the ROC, the PRC made one thing very clear to the world, you only recognize one China, meaning that whoever would recognize the ROC would automatically lose all ties with the PRC.
Now i do support a Free Taiwain, but it all starts at the very core, and that is the point where Taiwan, also known as the ROC, needs to revoke its claims on China and rename itself something else than China. Only when they do so we can talk about looking into recognizing Taiwan, but still alot will depend on the reaction of the PRC.

You might be surprised to learn that PRC actually threaten ROC with violence in order to prevent it from revoking its claim on the mainland.

[Cetacea]

No it's not

Taiwan is no more China than Tibet or Vietnam is China

Both countries are China. They both see themselves as China, and the only question then is how China, as a whole, is represented. The Peoples Republic and the Republic of China are both China, and their people are both Chinese. There is shared history and identity, as Chinese.

No, as I stated earlier 80% of the people there consider themselves Taiwanese and get pissed off if others insist they are Chinese as only around 8% of the citizens of Taiwan consider themselves Chinese. There is a strong Taiwanese identity and an increasing appreciation of the indigenous population (which is Austronesian not Han) furthermore the Chinese interest in Taiwan dates only to the 17th Century and the Qing who were Manchu invaders.
The fact is the Dutch were in Taiwan before the Chinese were and thus they have just as much claim.

The Taiwanese are not Han Chinese. http://www.sdh-fact.com
Dr. Lin Mali, professor of hematology at Mackay Memorial Hospital in Taipei, conducted a hematological survey analyzing human lymphocytes of the Taiwanese population, she discovered that the genetic makeup of Taiwanese is completely different from that of Han Chinese.
she states:

When Japanese rule of Taiwan began in 1895, Taiwan’s population was 2.5 million. During the subsequent 50-year period, there was almost no influx of Chinese from the mainland. The population increased in a normal way, reaching 6 million by 1945. When the Japanese withdrew from Taiwan that year, there was an exodus of 400,000 Japanese nationals. Before their departure the population was 6,400,000. That figure may have included some Chinese, but not many.

[Dwalin]

The PRC is the one and only China, that isn't much of a question really, but before one continues on the matter lets have a look at some of the stuff revolving the two China's.
Both the PRC as the ROC claim all of China and both claim to be the one and only true China. Now opposed to the ROC, the PRC made one thing very clear to the world, you only recognize one China, meaning that whoever would recognize the ROC would automatically lose all ties with the PRC.
Now i do support a Free Taiwain, but it all starts at the very core, and that is the point where Taiwan, also known as the ROC, needs to revoke its claims on China and rename itself something else than China. Only when they do so we can talk about looking into recognizing Taiwan, but still alot will depend on the reaction of the PRC.

You might be surprised to learn that PRC actually threaten ROC with violence in order to prevent it from revoking its claim on the mainland.

That indeed comes as a suprise to me. Would you mind providing me with a source for it?
In any way, my point still stands though, there cannot be a free Taiwain as long as it claims all of China or even claims to be China.

[Lhagatse]

You might be surprised to learn that PRC actually threaten ROC with violence in order to prevent it from revoking its claim on the mainland.

That indeed comes as a suprise to me. Would you mind providing me with a source for it?
In any way, my point still stands though, there cannot be a free Taiwain as long as it claims all of China or even claims to be China.

"At the same time, Hu and the PRC continued a military missile buildup across the strait from Taiwan while making threats of military action against Taiwan should it declare independence or if the PRC considers that all possibilities for a peaceful unification are completely exhausted. ^[1]"

[The Conez Imperium]

Choose a side in the civil war if you want because that's basically what the decision is cemented in - The Chinese civil war.

[Laeral]

The RoC is the legitimate China. They have a democratic government, good environmental standards, and good human rights, in contrast with the PRC's military dictatorship, awful environment, and widespread human rights abuses. If anything, the RoC has earned the right to US support rather than having the US propping up a corrupt dictatorship like the PRC.

Taiwan Yes!

[Lhagatse]

The RoC is the legitimate China. They have a democratic government, good environmental standards, and good human rights, in contrast with the PRC's military dictatorship, awful environment, and widespread human rights abuses. If anything, the RoC has earned the right to US support rather than having the US propping up a corrupt dictatorship like the PRC.

Taiwan Yes!

I support Taiwanese independence, but the PRC is hardly a military dictatorship; the PLA is strictly under the control of party elites.

[Cetacea]

The RoC is the legitimate China. They have a democratic government, good environmental standards, and good human rights, in contrast with the PRC's military dictatorship, awful environment, and widespread human rights abuses. If anything, the RoC has earned the right to US support rather than having the US propping up a corrupt dictatorship like the PRC.

Taiwan Yes!

sadly earning US support has absolutely nothing to do with human rights standards or good government. Indeed quite a few dictatorship have been created by the USA

[Tuthina]

You might be surprised to learn that PRC actually threaten ROC with violence in order to prevent it from revoking its claim on the mainland.

That indeed comes as a suprise to me. Would you mind providing me with a source for it?
In any way, my point still stands though, there cannot be a free Taiwain as long as it claims all of China or even claims to be China.

It is a logical conclusion that revoking its claim on mainland China would, in effect, reestablish itself as Taiwan, an independent polity that is not part of the ongoing civil war. In PRC, it is called "de jure Taiwanese independence", and I think it is quite obvious what PRC would do (or at least threaten to do) when that occurs.

The independence of Taiwan as its own entity requires PRC to give up its claim on Taiwan first and foremost, which is unlikely to happen until its nationalist fervor is subdued.

[Genivaria]

The RoC is the legitimate China. They have a democratic government, good environmental standards, and good human rights, in contrast with the PRC's military dictatorship, awful environment, and widespread human rights abuses. If anything, the RoC has earned the right to US support rather than having the US propping up a corrupt dictatorship like the PRC.

Taiwan Yes!

I support Taiwanese independence, but the PRC is hardly a military dictatorship; the PLA is strictly under the control of party elites.

Is more like a Plutocratic Oligarchy at this point....which is highly ironic.

[Sabara]

-snip-

Taiwan using a different name and declaring "independence" won't change the fact that it's considered a core province by both parties.

[The Interstellar Federation]

I wouldn't be surprised if China has hundreds of missiles pointed at both Taiwan and Japan. China is keeping a close eye on both.

[Tuthina]

I wouldn't be surprised if China has hundreds of missiles pointed at both Taiwan and Japan. China is keeping a close eye on both.

Considering the relative ease of changing targets for modern missile systems, I am not sure if that is relevant anymore, not to mention by the same logic, there would also be many missiles from Taiwan pointing towards the mainland, and the only reason Japan does not is that they do not have surface-to-surface missiles of that purpose.

[The Interstellar Federation]

I wouldn't be surprised if China has hundreds of missiles pointed at both Taiwan and Japan. China is keeping a close eye on both.

Considering the relative ease of changing targets for modern missile systems, I am not sure if that is relevant anymore, not to mention by the same logic, there would also be many missiles from Taiwan pointing towards the mainland, and the only reason Japan does not is that they do not have surface-to-surface missiles of that purpose.

China would likely have more en masse.

[Tuthina]

Considering the relative ease of changing targets for modern missile systems, I am not sure if that is relevant anymore, not to mention by the same logic, there would also be many missiles from Taiwan pointing towards the mainland, and the only reason Japan does not is that they do not have surface-to-surface missiles of that purpose.

China would likely have more en masse.

Well yes, consider it is significantly larger in many ways.

[The Interstellar Federation]

China would likely have more en masse.

Well yes, consider it is significantly larger in many ways.

The way I see it; China has a son: Japan, because China influenced Japanese culture so much and even gave them a significant portion of their language. In the Sino-Japanese Wars, the son (Japan) hit his father when he was weak. But now, as China has become more powerful, the father is ready to discipline the rebellious son.

[Yugoslav Memes]

Well yes, consider it is significantly larger in many ways.

The way I see it; China has a son: Japan, because China influenced Japanese culture so much and even gave them a significant portion of their language. In the Sino-Japanese Wars, the son (Japan) hit his father when he was weak. But now, as China has become more powerful, the father is ready to discipline the rebellious son.

more like the neighbouring kid stole china's shit

[The Interstellar Federation]

The way I see it; China has a son: Japan, because China influenced Japanese culture so much and even gave them a significant portion of their language. In the Sino-Japanese Wars, the son (Japan) hit his father when he was weak. But now, as China has become more powerful, the father is ready to discipline the rebellious son.

more like the neighbouring kid stole china's shit

The ROC really fell when the Sino-Japanese wars happened.

[Mandicoria II]

China being a unified entity is quite baffling as a concept.

[Genivaria]

China being a unified entity is quite baffling as a concept.

Most of China's history as a nation was as a unified whole.

[Lhagatse]

China being a unified entity is quite baffling as a concept.

Most of China's history as a nation was as a unified whole.

That depends somewhat on what you define as "China." Several parts of contemporary China didn't have much historical precedent as Chinese territories.