• randint@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Taiwan does not view itself as a soverign nation, but for most practical purposes it is one. Also, I don’t think “definitionally” is a word.

    Edit: Apparently “definitionally” is a word. I stand corrected.

    • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Taiwan does not view itself as a soverign nation, but for most practical purposes it is one.

      Being a sovereign nation is when you don’t have a seat in the UN and most sovereign nations refuse to recognize you as an independent nation.

      • GivingEuropeASpook [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Being a sovereign nation is when you don’t have a seat in the UN and most sovereign nations refuse to recognize you as an independent nation.

        I really don’t think this is the view people on the left should hold. Someone could say the same thing about many nations or groups that don’t have a seat in the UN and aren’t recognised but are still supported by communists and anarchists.

          • Abraxiel [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            De facto, a polity that has a distinct administration which dictates policy within and maintains its own borders.

            • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              pretty sure the red light district in my town fits that definition.

              Unless you get like seriously scientific about it a sovereign nation is basically vibes based

        • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Whether a nation or people is sovereign or not is a statement of reality, and part of sovereignty is whether other sovereign countries are able to vouch for your sovereignty. Just formally acknowledging your sovereignty like having an embassy is the bare minimum, but there’s more like defense treaties, economic deals, and joining organizations. At the end of the day, there will be other countries and entities that will seek to challenge and destroy a country’s sovereignty and unless you have a fleet of Gundams, you’ll need other countries to rush to your defense when it’s challenged. Nobody can do it alone.

          If you’re talking about cases like the ROC being in the UN instead of the PRC even though the PRC is de facto far larger than the ROC, remember that the UN isn’t an immutable organization. There’s nothing stopping the ROC from denouncing the UN as a sham organization after getting kicked out and starting their own rival organization called the League of United Nations or something and getting other countries to cosign to this new organization. There’s nothing stopping the ROC from campaigning their allies (ie the West and various Western vassals) to leave the UN and join the LUN. But for obvious reasons, a LUN would never happen because the ROC doesn’t have many allies. Most countries, including its so-called allies, see Taiwan as a US unsinkable aircraft carrier that’ll inevitably be reunited with the Mainland, whether peacefully or by force, or be completely destroyed in the process of a US-China war.

      • randint@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do you know what a sovereign nation is? Whether a state has a seat in the UN is not an indicator of sovereignty. By the way, do you know why the ROC does not have a seat in the UN? The old China, ROC, quitted preemptively so as to not get kicked out by the new China, PRC. By your logic, evidently, a nation can decide whether another nation is sovereign.

            • TBH I don’t think “legitimacy” matters. They function as an independent country. They issue passports, and flights between them and the mainland function as international flights despite both countries making up legal mumbo jumbo that calls it “cross-strait travel”. There are countries with more widespread “legitimate” recognition that are functionally less of a nationstate than Taiwan.

        • TheGamingLuddite [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Taiwan is currently a Chinese settler colonial regime that functions as an American military base and microchip factory. If they want sovereignty, they should give the land back to the natives they stole it from and return the billions of dollars worth of gold and artifacts they looted from the Qing coffers after they (catastrophically) lost the easiest civil war in history.

          • The ideological makeup of Taiwan has nothing to do with whether or not they are entitled to sovereignty from a diplomatic perspective. International relations isn’t about right and wrong. In fact, the KMT and CPC are in agreement in maintaining the status quo - the KMT and the CPC work together to oppose any attempts at renouncing claims to mainland China by Taiwan and formally becoming the Republic of Taiwan.

          • randint@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Give the land back to the natives? And how exactly would that be done? Handing the government over to them? I would say that 99% of the natives would not want that. The government of Taiwan is already doing enough to make up for the horrible deeds done: the natives enjoy a ×1.35 boost on exams, their statuses and cultures are protected legally, and the government is also pushing natives to learn their native languages.

            Is it really that wrong for a government to loot things from its land? In any case, they are also taking good care of the artifacts and opening them up to visitors who wish to see them. The civil war was not that easy either.

            • TheGamingLuddite [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              There’s no valid argument for Taiwan’s independence as a Chinese settler colony. As proof, the entire DPP argument depends on Chinese settlers pulling a Liz Warren and pretending to be native. It’s also totally incoherent to claim they’re a separate country but were also justified in looting billions of dollars worth of gold from “its” land, as if Beijing isn’t a thousand miles away from Taipei.

              As for the civil war being easy, the KMT had the support of every US president, Stalin, and Hitler, which is just to say they had everyone’s support. The KMT flag would be over China right now if they had simply not tried to murder the communists in cold blood. I guess they did make things hard on themselves.

              • randint@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The KMT flag would be over China right now if they had simply not tried to murder the communists in cold blood.

                I disagree. Had Chang Hsueh-liang not kidnapped Chiang Kai-shek back in 1936 demanding that he stop fighting communists and form a united front against Japanese, things probably would have been very different. I do not understand why you think that KMT would still rule the entire China if they had not fought the communists.

                excerpt from Wikipedia about the Xi'an incident in 1936

                On April 6, 1936, Chang met with CPC delegate Zhou Enlai to plan the end of the Chinese Civil War. KMT leader Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek at the time took a passive position against Japan and considered the communists to be a greater danger to the Republic of China than the Japanese, and his overall strategy was to annihilate the communists before focusing his efforts on the Japanese. He believed that “communism was a cancer while the Japanese represented a superficial wound.” Growing nationalist anger against Japan made this position very unpopular, and led to Chang’s action against Chiang, known as the Xi’an Incident.

                In December 1936, Chang and General Yang Hucheng kidnapped Chiang, imprisoning him until he agreed to form a united front with the communists against the Japanese invasion. After two weeks of negotiations, Chiang agreed to unite with the communists and drive the Japanese out of China. When Chiang was released on December 26, Chang chose to return to the capital city of Nanjing with him; once they were away from Chang’s loyal troops, Chiang had him placed under house arrest. From then on, he was under constant watch and lived near the Nationalist capital city, wherever it moved to.

      • randint@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        someone else just linked to “definitionally” on Wiktionary. I stand corrected.