Why Isn't Taiwain part of the PRC?

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,511
China
sadly, instead of finding materials on taiwan you keep your red herrings of chinese mistreat themselves.

I know quite enough about China to know that it is a one-party state
china is a multi-party state, with single party keeps the leadership

in which neither the govenrment nor the President can be voted out of power.
both of the government and the president are voted

party rotation is not intrinsically an element of democracy, ask Washington. single party with leadership is in no contradiction with democracy, though it might be brainwashed so in west.

the remaining becomes rubbish .
So if that is the case, and you support that system, there is no reason why you should think that the people of Taiwan should be able to express their own will about whether they should be subject to that same government. As a citizen of the UK, I would not wish the country to be broken up, but I supported the right of the Scots to vote on withdrawal because I believe that self-determination is a democratic right. You don't believe in democracy (the right of people to have a free choice, expressed in a vote after free discussion, about who should govern them), so it follows that you would not be unhappy to see the people forced into the Chinese state even gainst their will. So I was saying that you were being consistent in your views.
copy & paste section:

to remind those who do not know enough about taiwan

let us review a single post of me
if name like Wang Jinping, Han Guoyu, Wu Yinning, Wan Shijian.... could be talked by those lecturing and taiwan independence loving guys, i'd have thought someone know the situation and his/her assertion taiwan is independent worthy a tripe re-think.

the situation is not.
let me just say, you guys deserve no serious debate.
because you have no knowledge.

oh, i believe i am granted to speak "you do not deserve", granted by those of you who are showing off "disagreements" without "backing mater"

to you people, free thinking means random thinking. to me, free thinking means reasoning and means backing my reasoning.

"As president of the Commission, I support the position of the Spanish government. And do you know why? Because I am in favor of who respects the law," Juncker told the Spanish daily El País in an interview. "The EU is based on the rule of law, and what my Catalan friends have done is the opposite: violating the law."
if the europe cannot have a consensus of their own, what gives them confidence to lecturing others?

I believe that self-determination is a democratic right.
none of my business, *and* none of the business of FACTS.


oh, wait a second, UK is no longer part of EU, and UK is claimed to project their military force again in aisa....playing their old gunboat diplomacy when they do not actually have proper gunboats....
:vomit:
 
Last edited:

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,760
Rule of law, free elections, prior to that freedom of opinion, press etc., and freedom of organisation, and the free formation of public opinion.

The PRC allows none of that. All of it would directly infringe on the role of the CCP to direct, which is clearly specified in the basic structure of the PRC as is. (And it has in recent years been increasingly emphasized and sharpened under Xi Jinping.)

Considering the sheer size of China, and the relative liberty wealth brings, control of public opinion is a herculean task. Yes, the western democracies on some level have for the last decades assumed that it would simple prove impossible for the CCP to maintain control under those circumstances.

However, we are very impressed by the efforts AND relative success of the PRC to despite the challenges maintain its control, which means denying rule of law, no freedom of opinion, no freedom of the press, not freedom of organisation, and Chinese public opinion is certainly not allowed to find its own expressions not directed by the CCP.

Add to that how these days the CCP is no longer content to maintain its grip on the Chinese, but has also started exporting it, directly pressuring sovereign states to adopt the CCP's views, priorities and interests — and NOT their own. One of these key interests is the continued maintenance of free and open societies – beginning with the CCP targeting the formation of free public opinion in OTHER countries. Which is why the conflict takes on an ideological aspect.

It would be bad enough if China maintained its police-state thought-crime approaches for domestic uses. But now it is actively exporting so just leaving the Chinese to their own devices is not really an option anymore.

If you want to think what the CCP proscribes then it's all fine of course. If you want to the freedom to have a mind of your own publicly, it's not. The CCP was ALWAYS very certain that it has a right to tell people what to think.

And then again, none of this is settled. The CCP is still in trouble here, since while it might have power as its main interest and main asset — which is what makes it difficult to deal with, it can and will make smaller nations pay for having opinions — the propaganda campaign it is rolling out is actually not that hard to counter, because aside from the determination to exercise power, the CCP is actually intellectually and conceptually destitute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dukeofjive

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,511
China
just don't hell understand why some of the west would consider they know china better than chinese, and why they consider they know what is better for chinese than chinese.

as noted, again, you have nothing but red herrings.

i have copy & paste
but
if name like Wang Jinping, Han Guoyu, Wu Yinning, Wan Shijian.... could be talked by those lecturing and taiwan independence loving guys, i'd have thought someone know the situation and his/her assertion taiwan is independent worthy a tripe re-think.

the situation is not.
 

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
5,481
Londinium
Separatism isn't a human right.
Not according to the UN, and the charter signatories, such as PRC.

The right to self-determination was an integral element of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) heard today as it concluded its general discussion on that subject, and on the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
Self-Determination Integral to Basic Human Rights, Fundamental Freedoms, Third Committee Told as It Concludes General Discussion | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases

UNPO: Self-determination

All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. UNPO's Members are indigenous peoples, minorities, unrecognised States and occupied territories that have joined together to promote their right to self-determination, while also defending their political, social and cultural rights and preserving their environments.


The right to self-determination of peoples is recognized in many other international and regional instruments, including the Declaration of Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States adopted b the UN General Assembly in 1970, 2, the Helsinki Final Act adopted by the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) in 1975, 3, the African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights of 1981, 4, the CSCE Charter of Paris for a New Europe adopted in 1990, 5, and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of 1993. 6, It has been affirmed by the International Court of Justice in the Namibia case 7, the Western Sahara case 8, and the East Timor case 9, in which its erga omnes character was confirmed. Furthermore, the scope and content of the right to self-determination has been elaborated upon by the UN Human Rights Committee 10, and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination 11, and numerous leading international jurists.

China is a signatory to the Charter of the United Nations - Wikipedia, which covers the right to self-determination (“Separatism” as you have attempted to re-define it) as a human right.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,511
China
Not according to the UN, and the charter signatories, such as PRC.
Self-Determination Integral to Basic Human Rights, Fundamental Freedoms, Third Committee Told as It Concludes General Discussion | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases

UNPO: Self-determination

China is a signatory to the Charter of the United Nations - Wikipedia, which covers the right to self-determination (“Separatism” as you have attempted to re-define it) as a human right.
Understanding Self-Determination: The Basics
DEFINITION OF SELF-DETERMINATION

The right to self-determination, a fundamental principle of human rights law,(1) is an individual and collective right to "freely determine . . . political status and [to] freely pursue . . . economic, social and cultural development." (2) The principle of self-determination is generally linked to the de-colonization process that took place after the promulgation of the United Nations Charter of 1945. (3) Of course, the obligation to respect the principle of self-determination is a prominent feature of the Charter, appearing, inter alia, in both Preamble to the Charter and in Article 1.

next time, learn well then talk.

as the source from UN (cited by yourself) speaks
Among many others, the representative of the United Arab Emirates noted that the Palestinian people were deprived of the right to self-determination, which was universal.
how many of west has attempted to fulfill their duty to protect the rights of Palestinian??

dare you rubbish it here?

as for UNPO, it has nothing to do with UN, you try to confuse us with your distortion?

if the west did not make colonizations, there is no self-determination.

on the other hand, only colonization issues is related with self-determination, literally.

as taiwan being chinese culture, chinese nation, it has nothing to do with self-determination.

do not try to transfer the sins of your ancient to those victims of colonization.

let me just say, the sins of west during its colonization times will be remembered by history, nobody would blame current europe or america for the old stuff, but the past sins will not be washed white. history remembers.
 
Last edited:

Baldtastic

Ad Honorem
Aug 2009
5,481
Londinium
Understanding Self-Determination: The Basics



next time, learn well then talk.

as the source from UN speaks

how many of west has attempted to fulfill their duty to protect the rights of Palestinian??

dare you rubbish it here?

as for UNPO, it has nothing to do with UN, you try to confuse us with your distortion?

if the west did not make colonizations, there is no self-determination.

on the other hand, only colonization issues is related with self-determination, literally.

as taiwan being chinese culture, chinese nation, it has nothing to do with self-determination.

do not try to transfer the sins of your ancient to those victims of colonization.
Not sure exactly what your argument is here, as usual it starts with an insult...your hallmark.

Self determination doesn't just apply to former colonies.
 

heylouis

Ad Honorem
Apr 2013
6,511
China
Not sure exactly what your argument is here, as usual it starts with an insult...your hallmark.

Self determination doesn't just apply to former colonies.
1. you apparently tries to ignore the source as given by me Understanding Self-Determination: The Basics
2. you apparently has no excuse for the failure of west on the protection of rights of Palestinian, as demanded in the precise source as cited by yourself.
3. you apparently attempted to distort history, sins of west for the colonization exist, and will not be forgotten. one would insult history if one forgets the historical facts.
4. UNPO is not a part of UN, your linking of UN chapter with UNPO is nothing but distortion, if you are able to establish the actual link between UN and UNPO here, show the source. if you cannot show sources, accept the criticism and learn from who know better.
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,533
Europix
Separatism isn't a human right.
?!?

Did I said it's a "human right"? Did You said it's a "human right"?

You answered on Democracy that:

It stands for doing what the people wish.
then You continued with how it works in PRC, etc, etc., I replied You yhat if that statement is applied, it is to be applied to everyone. Be them Taiwanese, or Hotentots, or Canadians.


So let's go back to where it started:

It stands for doing what the people wish.
Is it applicable to people "a", "b" ... "n+1" or it is applicable only to people "a", "c", "e" but not to people "b", "d", "f"?
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,533
Europix
somethings you failed to back in recent posts:

1. Russian Federation's consulate in taipei

2. allowance of passports entrance = acknowledgement of independent taiwan country
Fail?

How on Earth can one fail to back when he asks questions?!?

BTW, You did answer to one of the questions (the Russian consulate one), but You didn't answered to the other ones.