Xi Jinping says no one can stop China’s ‘reunification’ with Taiwan (www.independent.co.uk)
from MicroWave@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 17:06
https://lemmy.world/post/23776604

Summary

Chinese President Xi Jinping reiterated in his New Year’s speech that Taiwan’s “reunification” with China is inevitable.

China has escalated military activity around Taiwan, including frequent incursions near the island and sanctions on U.S.-linked companies over arms sales to Taipei.

Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te rejected Beijing’s claims, stating Taiwan’s future can only be decided by its people.

Lai also criticized China’s restrictions on travel and education exchanges with Taiwan, calling for dignified, reciprocal relations based on goodwill and equality.

#world

threaded - newest

cygnus@lemmy.ca on 01 Jan 2025 17:42 next collapse

Sounds rather rapey when you put it that way, doesn’t it?

Eldritch@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 20:14 collapse

Very. But I still expect to see plenty of hypocritical leninists ignoring or defending this. Telling us that Daddy Xi is only killing them for their own good. And that if they just lay back and took it that they would learn to enjoy it.

Not that it’s ever made sense that they defend certain capitalists. While denouncing capitalism and other capitalist governments.

TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee on 01 Jan 2025 17:44 next collapse

If Taiwan isn’t building attack marine and air drones like fucking crazy right now they are incredible idiots. I would be mass producing that shit like a motherfucker and preparing to blow up the chip factories incase shit goes south.

shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 01 Jan 2025 18:19 next collapse

The chip factories are wired to pop. Taiwan is an awesome country by the way

shalafi@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 01:54 collapse

Yep. China will get nothing of Taiwan’s true wealth. OTHO, see why America is pumping chips? CHIP Act.

xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 13:06 collapse

They don’t build the weapons for themselves (mostly), but the US has enormous volumes of weapons (presumably including a lot of drones) already stored in Taiwan so that they can be bought and delivered instantly if they’re needed

MonkeMischief@lemmy.today on 02 Jan 2025 20:30 collapse

“Expedited next day (war)shipping!”

aeronmelon@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 17:48 next collapse

So the coup is finally over?

RalphWolf@lemmy.ca on 01 Jan 2025 17:52 next collapse

How did this work out for Hong Kong?

ghostface@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 18:05 collapse

The difference being several, one hong Kong is inside of China with its territorial boundaries being only legal and social. Two hong kong actually believed the laws and structure they put in place would hold while Taiwan is under no such illusion

FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 19:38 collapse

The actual difference is most of Hong Kong was only leased by Britain for 99 years in 1898 and was returned on schedule in 1997.

adarza@lemmy.ca on 01 Jan 2025 19:58 collapse

except they gave it back to the wrong china.

prc didn’t exist back then.

roc is the successor state to the one that made that deal with britain.

FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 20:45 collapse

Unfortunately totally legal under international law with the United Nations blessing…

In 1972, China successfully petitioned the United Nations to remove Hong Kong from its list of non-self-governing territories, and declared that the colony was a “Chinese territory under British administration”. The United Kingdom did not raise any objections to this and the local population did not think the move was significant, but the implication of this change was that Communist China alone would determine the territory’s future, excluding the people of Hong Kong.

…wikipedia.org/…/Sino-British_Joint_Declaration

DicJacobus@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 13:15 collapse

The UN is a corrupt authority. Especially when it comes to the UNSC. 2 of its 5 permanent members legal entities ceased to exist and fundamentally different successor states assumed their place.

The case is far more aggregious with the USSR and Russia. Ukraine tried to sue in 2022 arguing russia wasn’t legally entitled to just assume the USSRs position as far as the security council was concerned. “Technically Kazakhstan was the last state of the Soviet union. Etc”. But ultimately. As expected. “Realists” didn’t want to hear the argument. And it went nowhere

Nougat@fedia.io on 01 Jan 2025 17:56 next collapse

Okay, West Taiwan.

HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 01:15 next collapse

Sounds like something south Canada would say.

rarbg@lemmy.zip on 02 Jan 2025 06:04 next collapse

Not North America?

Oh wait…

wabafee@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 12:09 next collapse

You mean North Mexico?

dil@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 16:44 collapse

Don’t do that.

Don’t give me hope.

j4p@lemm.ee on 02 Jan 2025 13:14 collapse

Get the sentiment, but just a friendly reminder that most Taiwanese people don’t love the “West Taiwan” meme as it props up the outdated idea that Taiwan wants to make a claim to China, when the vast majority are in favor of just being left alone. This isn’t two aggressors laying claim to each other, it’s one threatening the other.

socsa@piefed.social on 01 Jan 2025 18:10 next collapse

Definitely not something an imperialist would say.

catloaf@lemm.ee on 01 Jan 2025 18:26 next collapse

Oh is the PRC going to surrender to the ROC? Because Taiwan was never part of the PRC. For there to be reunification, the PRC would have to give mainland China back to the ROC.

RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com on 02 Jan 2025 18:05 collapse

It all hinges upon which government you consider “legitimate.”

We can’t pretend violent rebellions aren’t eventually considered legitimate, good or bad. Look at the US.

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 18:29 next collapse

<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d368bbf7-fdf0-46cb-a2fa-c677a74d1ffe.png">

YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub on 01 Jan 2025 18:50 next collapse

I wouldn’t want to be getting into a shooting war after seeing what Russia has got itself into. Fuck, Russia lost its fleet to a country without a navy.

Does Xi think he can keep a land army supplied in the era of drones taking out surface combatants?

FelixCress@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 19:51 collapse

It is not the same though.

Firstly, Russians are inefficient and inept as fuck, Chinese are not.

Secondly, Ukraine had a strong support of both EU and the US. Now Trump is going to be in power and this cunt will happily let China take over Taiwan.

Thirdly, Ukraine is 600k km2. Taiwan is 36k.

YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub on 01 Jan 2025 20:07 next collapse

Everyone in the lead up to the Russian invasion thought Russia had a world class army (besides some analysts like Philips O’Brien). Three day invasion is how many western analysts were spinning it (Michael Koffman is the one I remember talking about this). I think it is a stretch to believe that the Chinese military is any better, especially since their last fight was, what, in the 70s against Vietnam?

Ukraine doesn’t have a giant moat around it. Taiwan does. Amphibious warfare is much much much harder than land based war. Probably by like 2 orders of magnitude at least. Keeping an army supplied in that environment is very very hard and that was before drones made defense warfare extremely effective. The US stopped supplying weapons to Ukraine for a few months last year and they held the line quite well just with their drones.

FelixCress@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 20:23 next collapse

I am not going to claim I am a military expert because certainly I am not. I think your arguments don’t hold water though:

  1. It is irrelevant what everyone thought, unless you are asserting Chinese army is as bad as Russian. If so, I would say unlikely on the basis of the entire technological development of both countries. There is also cultural aspect: I worked with number of Russians and Chinese. Russians were sloppy as fuck, nearly all of them. Chinese on the other hand were the most hard working people I have ever seen in my life, again almost all of them. Population size also matters.

  2. Amphibious warfare is only harder until you land and secure even temporary harbour.

  3. You are underestimating importance of western support. “just a few months” is not important - ask yourself where Ukraine would have been now if the US were to not supply anything to them from the very start - and this is the situation Trump is likely to put Taiwan in.

YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub on 01 Jan 2025 20:37 collapse

On point two you are correct only if the attacking force has air/sea supremacy like the us did in WWII. With drones I have a very hard time believing that will be the case. That is what makes it hard. Sure landings are brutal, but logistics is a nightmare when you have to supply your troops with vulnerable ships. That is why the Russian navy getting smacked about by Ukraine is so relevant.

DicJacobus@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 12:52 collapse

China hasn’t fought an interstate war in decades. The last well known example was korea. All the other fights they had were with the soviets from 1950 to present. And they lost every one of those border wars

China is very very inexperienced when push comes to shove.

NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io on 01 Jan 2025 22:41 next collapse

Now Trump is going to be in power and this cunt will happily let China take over Taiwan.

Will he? Trump is soft on Russia but wasn't he pretty hard on China?

FelixCress@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 22:43 next collapse

I would be stunned if he was to do anything.

hitmyspot@aussie.zone on 01 Jan 2025 22:59 next collapse

Until he benefits personally, then he’s soft. All China would need to do is promise to sell Trump goods or let him build a gaudy hotel.

nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca on 01 Jan 2025 23:17 next collapse

Trump is soft on Russia but wasn’t he pretty hard on China?

Has he ever been tough on China when the cost him anything? Being hard on China has economic consequences.

DicJacobus@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 13:08 collapse

Trump represents overt corporate oligarchy taking over America. Those people don’t care as long as they live comfortably. The US is building chip factories in the southwest to replace TSMC for domestic use. Once thats completed. Corpos don’t care about Russians and Chinese carving out spheres of influence across the world and killing millions. They only care about their own hides and the last reason to care about overseas affairs would have become redundant.

And this is the same scenario where millions of Americans are thrown into abject poverty by the deliberate crashing of the economy as technofascist corpos like Elon musk are allowed to shape the economy to their designs.

Once again. Those corporate only care about their own kind. Everyone else is expendable assets. Whether it be lower and middle class american citizens. Or entire countries. Panama. Canada. Mexico. Ukraine. Taiwan. You can’t appeal to the morals and nature of corporate oligarchs because they’d rather kill you for wasting their time.

GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca on 02 Jan 2025 14:33 collapse

Trump was hard on China until Ivanka got her patents approved. After that, he was remarkably friendly with them. And now Russia is friendly with China. I’m sure those tariffs will disappear once he’s been paid.

NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 00:46 next collapse

It’s worth noting that there are limited spots you can land on the Taiwan coast for an assault, and they are heavily guarded.

It’s a very different war up until they can get and maintain a foothold.

dellish@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 04:48 collapse

Firstly, Russians are inefficient and inept as fuck, Chinese are not.

Citation needed. The Chinese largely based their armed forces on the Russian model in a somewhat combined effort, so I suspect they’d be just as shit. It will be interesting to see how much of a fight Taiwan gives them.

On the second point I have no doubt Trump won’t intervene, however I do find it odd that Musk just finished fucking over the budget bill (whatever its name is) that would have helped fund chip manufacturing in the US just for them to simultaneously hand all Taiwanese chip manufacturing to China. It’s almost like they have no game plan…

FelixCress@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 07:31 collapse

It’s almost like they have no game plan…

They don’t.

skvlp@lemm.ee on 01 Jan 2025 18:54 next collapse

Taiwan has never been your territory, Xi Smallping-energy.

Doom@ttrpg.network on 01 Jan 2025 19:26 next collapse

Lol thought it was already a part of China poohpants

[deleted] on 01 Jan 2025 19:34 next collapse
.
Railcar8095@lemm.ee on 01 Jan 2025 19:43 next collapse

*Excited Putin noises

recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee on 01 Jan 2025 20:01 next collapse

Multiply china!

RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 20:05 next collapse

Common sense be damned, they’ve got a grudge to settle!

FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 01 Jan 2025 21:22 next collapse

Yes. “reuninifcation”.

Just like Austria was “reunified” with Nazi germany. 🤮

NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io on 01 Jan 2025 22:40 next collapse

I mean that was also reunification. Doesn't make it a good thing, but it fits the definition of reunification.

john89@lemmy.ca on 02 Jan 2025 11:51 collapse

Reading up a bit on the history of China, it looks like the Communists won the war for power in the nation and those who were supported by the West fled to Taiwan.

A better comparison would be if the Confederates fled to an island and retained their independence after losing the American civil war.

You need to keep in mind, the capitalists lost. You can live in la-la land thinking they “should have” won, but that’s simply not what happened.

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 02 Jan 2025 12:23 next collapse

Capitalist lost? You seen modern day China? Hardly anti-capitalist. Taiwan should get to decide if it’s part of China or not. Doesn’t seam they want undemocratic dystopia.

Going to your America example, the Brits withdrew to Canada. You with Trump with invading Canada then? A 1812 rematch?

Saleh@feddit.org on 02 Jan 2025 12:59 next collapse

The official position in both countries is that there is “one China” and that they are the legitimate one.

Unlike in mainland China in Taiwan people including most of the political elite seem to be fine with the status quo though.

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 02 Jan 2025 20:54 collapse

I think they are both best just signing mutual recognition and moving on. Neither is the same as they where when they seperated.

grozzle@lemm.ee on 03 Jan 2025 04:51 collapse

everyone in Taiwan would love to do that, but Beijing can’t get over being dumped.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 13:20 next collapse

Having markets and Private Property doesn’t mean a country isn’t dedicated to Socialism and eventual full public ownership. Rather, Marx and Engels maintained that even heavily developed countries could not immediately publicly own and plan all production, but that after the revolution this would be a gradual process. Focusing too much on Class Struggle and not on industrial development (which allows the Class Struggle to be accelerated as the more an industry develops the easier it is to plan it, a central observation about Capitalism that led Marx to predict the next mode of production to be Socialism), is a dogmatic mistake that led to the excesses in the Cultural Revolution.

Either way, back to the US, a more apt comparison would be decolonization and land-back for Indigenous Peoples, same with Canada.

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 02 Jan 2025 20:51 collapse

Your saying it’s not capitalist and it clearly is now.

For the US example, it’s not comparable if you go back to Indigenous Peoples. That’s a whole other thing.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 21:17 collapse

What do you mean by China is “clearly Capitalist?” What do you think Capitalism and Socialism are?

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 02 Jan 2025 21:27 collapse

“Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.”

This applies to modern China.

Communism’s brief doesn’t fit modern China “a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange that allocates products to everyone in society based on need.”

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 21:51 collapse

Private Ownership isn’t the basis of the PRC’s economy, though. The PRC isn’t at Communism yet, either, rather they are Socialist. The base of their economy is in the Public Sector with strong state control over the Private Sector.

To ask this in another way, are you of the belief that a “single drop” of Capitalism makes the system Capitalist? The natural conclusion to that is that neither “Capitalism” nor “Socialism” has ever existed. This is obviously wrong, of course, the answer is that the system is determined by the sector with power over the economy.

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 02 Jan 2025 23:18 collapse

So we agree modern China is not communist. From what I skim (not really read to be honest) capitalism came to China via Deng Xiaoping. Its not been becoming less capitalism since. Now it’s not different than other capitalist countries, only the state at the centre isn’t democratic and not accountable to its people or laws.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 23:30 collapse

The CPC is a Communist Party, they are trying to build Communism. Communism is a global system, so no, we aren’t on the same page here.

Capitalism did not “come to China” via Deng. Markets existed even under Mao, what Deng did was invite foreign investment and allow profits to be made off of Chines labor in exchange for industrialization, training, and development. This was a bit of a gamble, but has been critical for the modern success of the PRC. This isn’t a total subversion of Socialism and a return to Capitalism, key industries were maintained in the Public Sector like banking, energy, steel, and so forth.

Next, this Private Sector has been more and more under direct control of the CPC as it develops, especially in the last decade. The CPC exerts firm control and executes strong central planning. This is an increase in socialization of the economy, gradually. This is fundamentally and entirely different from Capitalist countries, where the Private Sector is dominant and Capitalists control the state.

Finally, the PRC is democratic and accountable to the people, just not to wealthy Capitalists. I’m not sure where you are pulling this myth from, to be honest, there are elections, councils, mass participation, and multiple political parties. It isn’t the same as western systems, but it is democratic.

Overall, I think you need to do a fair bit more research into Marxism and the PRC if you want to be making qualitative judgments of it along Marxian lines, no shame in learning something new!

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 03 Jan 2025 16:20 next collapse

The trueth is all the countries you are calling capitalist because are probably all mixed economies. With a lot owned by the state. Here in the UK that includes our health service, education system, roads, the electricity grid, and more. Rail is being renationalised and water probably will have to be too as its privatisation (by the Conservatives in the 80s) has been an epic fail. The key difference is these countries can peacefully kick out the government and the government is answerable to laws. Laws it sets. We recently had a PM brought down for breaking his own Covid laws. We have free press holding governments to account. All kind of freedom of information and transparency.

China started out more communist than if is now. More like the USSR.

Taiwan is mixed economy like western democracies, and doesn’t want to be like China. Which is why China is having to talk about inflicting it by force.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 17:42 collapse

The truth is that close to every economy beyond the very earliest tribal formations were all mixed economies. When people say a country is Socialist or Capitalist, they are making a judgement of which aspect of the economy holds power, and is thus primary. The idea that an economy can be 32% Capitalist and 68% Socialist is nonsense, everything in an economy exists in the context of the rest of it and thus cannot be seen as static quantities.

Your next bit, on saying the people “have the power to kick out government peacefully,” is frankly misguided. The laws in Capitalist society, such as the UK, are ultimately determined by the Bourgeoisie and to a lesser extent the remnants of the Monarchy. What is cast as voteable is what has already been predetermined as acceptable to the ruling class. A “free press” is really “free to be manipulated by wealth,” and it is in this manner that narratives are massaged. The truth is that there is no such thing as free press. No matter how independent or dependent, all press has an agenda, and all press has a bias.

As for the PRC, it had higher rates of Public Ownership in the past, yes. This did not make it “more Communist.” When understanding Marxism, one must understand that modes of production and forms of property ownership have different levels of development they excel at. Because the PRC collectivized too early, growth was unstable (though positive) and there was a lot of chaos. The expansion (not introduction!) of Markets and the invitation of foreign investment served to better suit the material conditions of the PRC in the 90s, and now that said industrialization has played enough of its part, the CPC is gradually extending more control and ownership. Marxism was applied under Mao, then it served its purpose and Marxism was applied again under Deng, then it served its purpose and now Marxism is being applied again under Xi and is continuing to serve its purpose based on new material conditions.

The Taiwan bit is complicated. The majority of Taiwanese people like the current status, but don’t want to be independent nor folded in. Many want to be folded into the PRC, and some are outright hostile. The Nationalist Kuomintang fled there during the end of the Communist Revolution, so in its present state it remains at odds with the Communist mainland.

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 03 Jan 2025 21:14 collapse

So we agree countries are really a shades of grey. Personally, I would move more infrastructure to state ownership in the UK. Other countries it is up to them, though the US private health is clearly an epic murderous fail. As long as the setup doesn’t make trade unfair and start tariff problems.

In the UK monarchy is symbolic. They can’t take sides on anything officially. If they did, it would be a scandal. Most democracies with a monarchy are similar or have them not even symbolically part of the system. Their power is purely adversely and in networking.

Based on rumour and the queens dresses at the time, and family history, it is widely thought the queen did not want Brexit. But it happened anyway. It brought down the PM of the time as well. In fact it was the start of a series of short lived PMs. Mainly because Brexit is a batshit idea and the promises made are incompatible with each other and reality! Arguably the press was a bit too free. Free from fact. All suboptimal, but doesn’t back you ruling Bourgeoisie angle. I’m pretty sure we be back in the EU one day anyway due to demographics and economic realities.

I say again, it can only up to the people of Taiwan if they are assimilated into China. If they vote for it, (I recommended a 66+% super majority to avoid Brexit 52% nonsense) I’d have no issue. If they don’t and are just invaded, I have a big issue with it. Like I do with Russia invading Ukraine and Israel’s genocide.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 04 Jan 2025 01:24 collapse

Marxism is Dialectical, it recognizes that “pure” systems are close to fantasy, sure.

As for the UK, again, the Monarchy shouldn’t exist, period, and the fact that you think the press was too free only cements bourgeois rule as the dominant factor in UK society. Money is the driver of your society just like it is for all Capitalist countries.

Taiwan is a complicated issue and will likely be resolved in a way that nobody is initially happy with due to external pressures like US involvement.

jabjoe@feddit.uk on 04 Jan 2025 20:38 collapse

Pure is a nonsense absolutely.

I’d remove the monarchy, but right now it isn’t doing any harm. When it does, it will be removed from the system. That tension, that “sword of damocles”, the monarchy is very aware of and it keeps them in check. No one should be born into positions and I have no time for royals complaining of their gilded cage. At some point the UK will restructure I"m sure (federate and decentralise) and each time wil reduce the monarchy position.

I said “arguably the press was a bit too free”. That is not saying I think it is. Only that I see a case for the argument it is. Out of that and a totally state controlled press, free is better. Things fester in darkness. Unaccountable power corrupts. Fact free needs more consequences, but that isn’t the same as choking freedom.

Money drives China just as much. That’s OK. Money is just an expression of value we are prepared to exchange. It’s an intermediate used between goods. An abstraction. Even if we ever get to post scarcity, it will be with us.

Taiwan does want China. It can see what happened to Hong Kong. We all can. If China wants it, it will have to take it by force. Just like Russia is trying to with Ukraine.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 17:01 collapse

I appreciate what you do, and always learn from your comments.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 17:30 collapse

Thanks, I appreciate the kind words! I know most people likely aren’t going to get much out of what I say, but I also know many others will learn a thing or two, and when they point that out it helps!

Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 02 Jan 2025 14:42 next collapse

I dont get the downvotes. China is state controlled capitalism with all the negatives of capitalism like extreme wealth disparity. China couldnt be further from a stateless, classless moneyless society that communism aspires.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 14:55 collapse

There are a lot of similarities between the PRC’s economic model and the NEP, but this doesn’t mean it’s Capitalist, nor is it accurate to say it has all of the negatives of Capitalism. The PRC is in the early stages of Socialism, and this is shown through strong government control of the Private Sector, a robust and expansive Public Sector, and large-scale Central Planning. You’re correct that it is far from being Stateless, Classless, or Moneyless, but at the same time you have to acknowledge that they simply can’t push the “Communism button” and establish a global Republic of full Public Ownership and Central Planning and an established system of labor vouchers or other such non-money form of accounting.

The process of building Communism is long and drawn out after the revolution, and must be a global process as well.

cqst@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 18:59 collapse

<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/pictrs/image/c3846065-3d7c-42ca-b8a1-4c0fc4a55ed3.webp">

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 19:06 collapse

Yes, all Socialist societies should work towards the eventual end of commodity production, however neither Marx nor Engels figured that it could be done away with immediately. From Principles of Communism:

Question 17 : Will it be possible to abolish private property at one stroke?

Answer : No, no more than the existing productive forces can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. Hence, the proletarian revolution, which in all probability is approaching, will be able gradually to transform existing society and abolish private property only when the necessary means of production have been created in sufficient quantity.

From Socialism: Utopian and Scientific:

The first act in which the state really comes forward as the representative of the whole of society – the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society – is at the same time its last independent act as a state. The interference of the state power in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then dies away of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production. The state is not “abolished”, it withers away. It is by this that one must evaluate the phrase “a free people’s state” with respect both to its temporary agitational justification and to its ultimate scientific inadequacy, and it is by this that we must also evaluate the demand of the so-called anarchists that the state should be abolished overnight.

Ultimately, it remains a contradiction that eventually the PRC will have to do away with. However, this is a gradual process that can only be accomplished through trial and error. There is a Chinese proverb often referenced in the CPC, that “one must cross the river by feeling for the stones,” and this reflects their cautious strategy. Moreover, we must understand that the USSR fell, and the CPC saw that in real time. Not wanting to repeat the Cultural Revolution nor the fall of the USSR, the CPC adjusted their practice. It remains to be seen what will happen in 10, 20, 50, 100 years, of course, but currently the CPC is behaving in a manner we can understand as Marxist.

cqst@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 19:14 collapse

The USSR was just as capitalist as the PRC. Because it had generalized commodity production and wage-labor. You can’t have a socialist mode of production in just one country, as the interaction with capitalist countries will infect your system.

The PRC is a highly technocratic advanced capitalist democracy, and yes, it will likely outpace the west in a number of key statistics over time, that doesn’t make it socialist, because the productive mode is capitalism.

Cowbee@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 19:25 collapse

You can’t have Communism in one country, as Communism must be international, global, and have fully eradicated Private Property and Commodity Production. You absolutely can have Socialism in one country, however. Socialism is a transitional status towards Communism from Capitalism, and is dependent upon human supremacy over Capital and a trajectory towards further collectivization and the dominance of the Public Sector over the Private not in percentage, but power.

To take the opposite claim, that you can’t have Socialism in one country, is to determine that you must call a fully publicly owned economy “Capitalist” despite eradication of Markets and commodity production in general. Further, to claim that Socialism can only exist internationally is to make the asserted claim that a 99% publicly owned and planned economy is actually dominated by the 1% in the market sector and is thus Capitalist, these are anti-dialectical judgements.

Further, revisiting Marx, he considered countries where feudalism was still the majority of the economy yet Capitalism well on its way to dominate the entire economy to already be Capitalist. The dialectical method acknowledges that there is nearly no such thing as a “pure” system, to require “purity” for Socialism alone and not any of the previous Modes of Production erases the foundation of Scientific Socialism.

All in all, I am getting a definite Trotskyist vibe from your analysis and that would explain your stances a bit more, but I really do wonder in particular how you personally reconcile Dialectics with an anti-dialectical approach to Socialism specifically. The productive mode does not depend on a “one drop” rule of commodity production, but the dominant mode and the trajectory of the system as a whole.

I suggest reading What is Socialism? Here’s a relevant snippet from it talking about your exact argument:

Let’s imagine trying to apply this line of thinking to any other mode of production. If any hint of private ownership, commodity production, and the anarchy of production in a socialist society would serve to prove it is not socialist, then, by logical necessity, any hint of public ownership, social production, and economic planning in a capitalist society would serve to prove it is not capitalist. Real capitalism, therefore, just like socialism, can be proven to have never been tried.

This also leads to another absurdity. There is an enormous gulf between these two systems. How, then, does one transition between capitalism and socialism? If a mode of production can only exist in its most pure form, then how does one mode of production transition into the next? Necessarily, it must be an instantaneous jump, from one pure form to another. It fundamentally cannot be any other way.

MonkeMischief@lemmy.today on 02 Jan 2025 19:53 collapse

You with Trump with invading Canada then? A 1812 rematch?

Oh no, please don’t give that bloated orange Slurm mascot any more ideas.

RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com on 02 Jan 2025 18:04 next collapse

That’s weird, I thought China has currency and all sorts of other capitalist systems.

catloaf@lemm.ee on 02 Jan 2025 18:31 next collapse

Keep reading, because you haven’t gotten it yet. The communists rebelled against the KMT government and pushed them out to Taiwan. The American analogy would be if the south had won the civil war and pushed the north back to, let’s say, Long Island.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 22:18 next collapse

K, I don’t use all caps a lot, but I DON’T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE CHINESE CIVIL WAR.

I will not be a slave to history. My defense of Taiwan is entirely based on the here and now.

K I need to qualify that statement somewhat. History is useful for explaining why the world is the way it is today, and serves as a guide into the future, but it is useless as some kind of long term score sheet.

john89@lemmy.ca on 03 Jan 2025 05:59 collapse

Well, if that’s how you want to see it then the idea of “rightful owner” doesn’t matter much.

It’s really just who you like more at that point.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 03 Jan 2025 08:27 collapse

It’s not that the rightful owner doesn’t matter. It’s that it is hard to quantify on this scale, and it is especially hard to quantify using history.

And yeah, it is in fact more about who I like more. I like the Taiwanese government because the Taiwanese people are in control of it, and I believe in every human’s right to choose their own government. I hate the Chinese government for exactly the same reason, along with the fact that they’re a bunch of land grabbing imperialist bastards.

john89@lemmy.ca on 03 Jan 2025 15:08 collapse

I’m glad you can admit your bias and that your idea of who China belongs to is based on personal preference.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 04 Jan 2025 18:45 collapse

I’m glad you can admit that you consider human rights as a form of personal preference.

But my, uh, “preference” for human rights isn’t actually the highest principle at play here. The highest principle here is that of internationally-agreed-upon borders. A country may not violate these borders. Period. For example, even though I like Taiwan’s government more, I do not believe they deserve one square metre of mainland China.

bountygiver@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 00:51 next collapse

personally, if the confederates f off to their own island, I would let them stay on that island, as long as they don’t spill their influence back.

Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 06:27 collapse

That’s a lazy and inaccurate take. The Chinese Civil War wasn’t some simplistic ‘capitalists vs. communists’ fight. The KMT was corrupt but not purely capitalist, and the CCP’s victory came from exploiting peasant dissatisfaction and the KMT’s failures, not some inherent ideological supremacy. Comparing the KMT to the Confederacy is absurd—they weren’t separatists but nationalists fighting for control of all China. If you’re going to push historical narratives, at least try for accuracy instead of ideological grandstanding.

Cyberjin@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 23:01 next collapse

He been saying stuff like this for many years… especially China’s red lines “don’t visit Taiwan or else…” and nothing happens.

Gotta keep up moral and focus away from things like their economy that’s going down 👎

cabron_offsets@lemmy.world on 01 Jan 2025 23:51 next collapse

Pooh wants his hunny

irreticent@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 01:18 collapse

Seems more like he wants someone elses hunny.

lustyargonian@lemm.ee on 02 Jan 2025 02:39 next collapse

Who’s stopping them anyway? Just do it if you are so obsessed with it.

Dasus@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 04:16 collapse

Uh… Taiwan is stopping them. Taiwan is a country, despite China’s constant fucking attempts to pretend it isn’t.

John Oliver - Taiwan

lustyargonian@lemm.ee on 02 Jan 2025 12:23 collapse

I know that. My point is China keeps saying things as if they are really held back, but the reality is they’re themselves afraid of stirring the shit and getting effed up by world at large.

If you check my comment history, you’ll see that I support Taiwan.

Dasus@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 12:39 collapse

Alright.

Good man.

NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone on 02 Jan 2025 03:40 next collapse

Bit rapey.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 22:04 collapse
kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 05:31 next collapse

If Fascist China thinks the EU and US will give up their largest producer of semiconductors then they’re severely mistaken

ripcord@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 12:59 next collapse

What do you think they would do to stop it?

xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 13:03 next collapse

Send the US navy to blockade the strait and finalise the sale of the billions of dollars worth of weapons already waiting on the island for exactly that purpose

ansiz@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 13:15 next collapse

That’s a joke, right? Taiwan is literally about 90 miles away from mainland China. The USA could park every ship we have and that still wouldn’t work. If China wants Taiwan, then they will get it even if Taiwan is largely destroyed doing it.

The USA already prevents the Chinese from getting the top processors from Taiwan, so blowing up the factory will hurt the USA much more than China. Not to mention kneecap Musk and the tech bros that have been supporting Trump.

GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca on 02 Jan 2025 14:06 next collapse

There has been work to replicate the capabilities in Taiwan on US soil. While it hasn’t been going great, it has been progressing. At some point it is quite possible that Taiwan will no longer be as strategic a partner with America as they are now, which doesn’t bode well for their continued assistance from America. But if there comes a time that China will take Taiwan you can be guaranteed that everything possible will be done to reduce the risk of technology transfer.

ansiz@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 20:54 collapse

But you have to factor in deliberate effort already to eliminate the CHIPS act by Congress. I’m sure it will get the axe in the new administration.

The rush had been increased because of the efforts Western governments like the USA have made to prevent China from getting the chips from Taiwan, that encourages the Chinese to develop their own capacity but also eliminated the hit they would take if processor production in Taiwan was crippled by conflict.

The actual ace in the hole protecting Taiwan is the fact that the Chinese want the Taiwanese to join willingly, but if the Chinese economy has continued trouble than Xi will be under pressure to demonstrate strength and that is where they could make a move on Taiwan.

xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 14:44 next collapse

No, it’s not a joke. And putting a small amount of thought into it makes clear that the US believes it can effectively defend Taiwan - it wouldn’t keep such volumes of weaponry there if it believed it would trivially fall into China’s hands.

The US’ Center for Strategic and International Studies has wargamed this 24 times for conventional warfare only and 15 times for consideration of the use of nuclear weapons. In both scenarios, they found they would likely be able to successfully preserve Taiwan’s autonomy.

I think you deeply underestimate just how difficult and expensive in manpower and materiel it is to perform a naval invasion, especially against a nation whose military is specialised for pretty much exclusively that purpose.

Naval superiority is naval superiority; if you can’t get your military to the other side of the strait, you can’t invade the island, regardless of distance. The actual question is whether Taiwan would be able to hold off an invasion for long enough for the US navy to reach and control the strait, which is reasonably likely given the US rents a large number of naval bases in the region for just this purpose.

I’m going to just go ahead and ignore your second paragraph, since it’s entirely unrelated to the US’s military capability wrt to Taiwan.

CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 18:07 next collapse

Haven’t both Taiwan and China both been stockpiling an essentially unlimited supply of long range anti-ship missiles for about a decade now? I can’t imagine China having a fun time even landing troops but it’d be equally hellish for any US ships attempting to exist in the general area.

Maggoty@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 20:07 collapse

The US surface ships can sit outside the Chinese medium range envelope and attack only the landing forces. They don’t need to hit Chinese mainland, that’s what the 71 submarines are for. The long range missiles are then easy to defeat because there aren’t enough to saturate the air defense.

ansiz@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 20:57 collapse

I think you nearly overestimate the appetite of the USA government or people to engage in such a massive conflict over Taiwan. The new administration has made it clear support for Ukraine is on thin ice and a deal can be made with Russia to end the fighting. Why not with China as well?

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 21:55 next collapse

a deal can be made with Russia to end the fighting [in Ukraine].

How do you know? My impression is that any deal without security guarantees from the West will just be violated in about two years or so by Russia, and Russia would refuse to make a deal with such security guarantees for exactly that reason.

If Russia changes its mind and says it would be willing to accept such a deal, I would change my mind. Actually I still wouldn’t because Russia are the lyingest bastards I know, but whatever. It hasn’t happened. It would never happen.

Imperialists cannot be reasoned with without credible threats of violence. If it were otherwise, they wouldn’t be imperialist.

xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 08:31 collapse

One of the primary reasons trump wants to reduce the US’ focus on Russia and Ukraine is to prioritise their position towards China. That’s not to say Trump might not decide against direct involvement; he’s famously erratic, but the semiconductor production of Taiwan is an critical economic dependency that can’t be replaced in the short term.

Maggoty@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 20:05 collapse

That’s 5 hours in the open, with every weapon system in the Pacific Ocean firing at you. Good luck?

myrrh@ttrpg.network on 03 Jan 2025 05:27 collapse

…trump’s trivially manipulated: the next four years are china’s best shot and they know it…

Zetta@mander.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 13:51 next collapse

The us would probably enter war to stop it, Taiwan is pretty valuable to us

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 18:10 next collapse

“Us” being? Taiwan didn’t send me a Christmas card.

candybrie@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 18:20 collapse

Bet they made the processor you used to write that comment.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 18:34 next collapse

War is necessary… so I can text grandma? Do ya’ll not hear yourselves?

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 21:46 next collapse

How would you keep the imperialists from stealing land?

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 03:30 collapse

Are you talking about the White Terror?

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 03 Jan 2025 08:34 collapse

No, not even a little bit.

I’m talking about imperialists stealing land. What land was stolen by the Taiwanese during the White Terror?

For example, the Soviet Union would have stolen Finland if they could, but Finland was (still is) heavily armed and it would not have been worth the Soviets’ trouble. This is a clear example that when it comes to imperialists like the Soviet Union, the threat of war is necessary to prevent it. This isn’t about starting war. It’s about preventing it.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 16:41 collapse

Is America not imperialist? Why is it not okay when they do it, but okay when we do?

Maybe imperialism is bad when anyone does it.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 04 Jan 2025 18:36 collapse

I never defended American Imperialism.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 04 Jan 2025 20:18 collapse

America is defending Taiwan, ipso facto, you did.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 04 Jan 2025 22:23 collapse

I’m sorry, but I have to give up on you.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 05 Jan 2025 03:37 collapse

It’s fine. None of this matters.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 05 Jan 2025 10:06 collapse

That attitude explains everything.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 05 Jan 2025 15:21 collapse

It was a concession. Your response reveals a paper tiger. 🐯

mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 22:38 collapse

More like: War is necessary… so a dictator can stroke his own ego

Remember who is the aggressor here.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 03:34 collapse

The Kuomintang fought a civil war and lost, would we be okay if the Confederacy kept Florida and wouldn’t give it back?

mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 04:30 collapse

The Confederacy retreated to Florida. Then internally the people of Florida turned it around, repealed slavery, defeated the original Confederacy government, started a new democracy and is now thriving. Nope, leave them alone.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 16:36 collapse

not even comparable. Martial law for 40 years doesn’t sound like turning it around.

mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 20:16 collapse

Did you read the article? Martial law was lifted in 1987. That’s 38 years ago.

The PRC is still under this condition today. Say the wrong things about Xinnie the Pooh and you will be disappeared, martial law or not.

How much undocumented atrocities occurred in China that you can’t even link a Wikipedia article to? And are you willing to accept what’s written about the Tiananmen Massacre on the same site that you linked to? If not, then stop linking to a site that you don’t believe in.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 23:20 collapse

Lifting of martial law means opposition political parties can be formed legally for the first time, giving Taiwan’s fragmented but increasingly vocal opposition a new chance to organize. Communist parties remain banned. Dissidents welcomed the development, but noted that a new security law immediately replaced martial law and still restricts political activity.

That’s quite a democracy.

It banned formation of any new political parties, gave the military wide censorship powers and was used by military courts to convict thousands of civilians of sedition and other crimes.

piradianssquared@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 22:07 collapse

en.wikipedia.org/…/List_of_Intel_manufacturing_si…

needanke@feddit.org on 02 Jan 2025 22:55 collapse

That’s not where they produce their cutting edge chips though… tomshardware.com/…/intel-will-spend-14-billion-on…

ripcord@lemmy.world on 05 Jan 2025 12:16 collapse

Zero chance.

kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 14:29 next collapse

Theres a single dam in China which is extremely vulnerable, if hit by a rocket the majority of Chinas food supply would be destroyed.

Tinidril@midwest.social on 02 Jan 2025 17:38 collapse

That’s about as likely as America performing a preemptive nuclear strike on China. The international “fallout” would be pretty much the same.

Maggoty@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 20:09 next collapse

The Taiwanese know of it’s existence too, and have the capability to hit it. Furthermore we currently have a president who views war crimes as going above and beyond instead of criminal behavior. I would not bet against someone blowing it up.

Tinidril@midwest.social on 02 Jan 2025 21:37 next collapse

I have no doubt that Trump is capable of giving the order. As it stands, there is no way the order is obeyed. Trump will of course start trying to install loyalists in military leadership, but I doubt even the generals could successfully get such an order obeyed today. The entire military culture would need to be replaced, and I think the protections against that will require more time than Trump has to do it.

Thankfully, incompetence is a core trait of fascism, and I don’t think Trump or his people have the juice.

Maggoty@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 23:24 collapse

Hitting that dam is a lot harder to disobey as an illegal order than violating Posse Comitatus. Especially if we’re on the brink of nuclear war that would create massive civilian casualties anyways. We expect a big pushback if Trump tries to deploy the military domestically. Going to war is another matter entirely.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 22:00 collapse

Oh damn. Taiwan wouldn’t do it now, but if China invaded, they absolutely would.

Mubelotix@jlai.lu on 03 Jan 2025 02:40 collapse

It’s not the same at all. Ok the US would get blamed, but they wouldn’t be fired at back with nuclear weapons

AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 16:10 next collapse

Unleash the 22

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 21:59 collapse

I’m almost afraid to ask, but what is the 22?

AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 15:13 collapse

The F-22 Raptor. It’s never been deployed.

MonkeMischief@lemmy.today on 02 Jan 2025 19:34 next collapse

What do you think they would do to stop it?

How does

“Naval assets filling the sky with a stupidly impossible number of militarized drone swarms using highly classified AI-augmented coordination and cyber warfare which will dump a ton of really nasty crap into an already struggling ocean”

sound?

Because that’s the plan, apparently. =\

wired.com/…/china-taiwan-pentagon-drone-hellscape

Maggoty@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 20:00 collapse

So much Death. Just so much. For reference look at the aircraft carrier HMS United Kingdom in World War 2. The world’s only unsinkable ship, capable of producing it’s own weapons even. Now update that to 2024 with modern, missiles, torpedoes, and submarines. China would likely win a protracted, non nuclear, limited engagement. But not before significant areas in China and the entirety of Taiwan were nothing but a rubble hellscape.

So at the end of the day, the obvious price of death and destruction, even without nukes. But in the past Presidents have made clear that Taiwan is under the MAD umbrella. So non-nuclear is not a given, and of course we all lose in a nuclear scenario.

WhatSay@slrpnk.net on 03 Jan 2025 08:42 next collapse

That’s why TSCM now has a chip plant in Arizona, to ensure production.

Gluca23@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 10:44 collapse

They know US can be bought for cheap and EU are too coward.

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 02 Jan 2025 06:23 next collapse

Didn’t have Occupied China stepping down and recognizing the legitimate government in Taiwan on my 2025 bingo card

schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de on 02 Jan 2025 13:24 next collapse

great so that means the CCP is stepping down and letting the ROC government back into Beijing to govern a reunified China? Excellent news if true.

vga@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 14:13 next collapse

Are we sure this “China” is a real country?

[deleted] on 02 Jan 2025 17:55 next collapse
.
T00l_shed@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 21:10 collapse

Call it by it’s name, mainland Taiwan.

Psythik@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 06:50 collapse

West Taiwan

T00l_shed@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 12:24 collapse

That works too

cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 15:11 next collapse

china is awful but considering you have the president of the us talking about illegally siezing and occupying at least three sovereign territories, the west has no place to criticize.

Sconrad122@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 15:34 next collapse

Ah yes, the west. The monolithic political entity that definitely involves nobody who is critical of Donald Trump’s ravings. Trump and his sycophants have no place to criticize thanks to his words and actions. Anybody who gets behind his proposed annexations has no place to criticize. But there’s a lot of daylight between those groups and the entirety of “the west”, both within and without the US. If Brazil or South Africa want to criticize Trump’s annexation threats, their involvement in BRICS wouldn’t invalidate that criticism so long as they are also willing to criticize the threatening words and actions of Jinping and Putin. The world is not (yet) composed of 1984-esque political monoliths, and there is no need to voluntarily give up that heterogeneity in order to silence criticism of aggressive and threatening geopolitics

Tinidril@midwest.social on 02 Jan 2025 17:30 collapse

“The West” wasn’t fair, but “America” would be. It’s not like China is a monolith either. It might be more monolithic than the US, but I guess we really have the wait and see if that holds. Fuck.

pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 16:09 next collapse

We hate imperialism, whoever does it, and justify none of it

cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 16:24 collapse

i wasn’t justifying any of it…

pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 15:14 collapse

Sorry, your comment really came off as “because you live in a country where terrible people have elected a terrible person, you’re not allowed to criticize imperialism”. Which really seems like “because a horrible American wants to do it, it’s ok when any other country does it” in disguise.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 22:06 collapse

You may not be aware, but this is a very tired talking point from the propaganda departments of empires everywhere and I’m so far beyond tired of hearing it. So is everybody. It even has a name: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

The empires use it to shut down all criticism of anything they do. That is why everybody here is reacting to you the way they are.

Crikeste@lemm.ee on 02 Jan 2025 22:12 collapse

Comparing actions, especially when people are so fervently against one side, is not tired. If you’re going to “call something bad”, you’d better look inward and make sure your heart isn’t wrapped in hypocrisy.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 22:34 next collapse

Did you read the link I sent the other guy?

petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 23:40 collapse

I haven’t annexed any territories, so I think it’s fine.

itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com on 02 Jan 2025 16:21 next collapse

We have always been at war with Oceania.

Kraven_the_Hunter@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 02 Jan 2025 18:21 next collapse

“Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.”

Rhoeri@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 06:12 collapse

You mean… “Reunified.” Think of it like Russia’s “special military operation” only with less genocide.

TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 18:34 next collapse

I mean, he is not wrong

T00l_shed@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 21:10 next collapse

Mainland Taiwan will join Taiwan eventually you’re right

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 21:43 collapse

How do you know?

TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 05:10 collapse

No one did shit to Russia other than some easily avoidable sanctions. China attacks the US daily in the form of cyberattacks and nothing happens.

If they went and took Taiwan tomorrow the world would condemn it very hard on social media and that’s about it, hell, they even did it before with Hong Kong and no one cared.

Rhoeri@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 06:21 next collapse

So… you seriously perceive the lack of response to one event to mean it’s a green light for everything?

Man, I hope you people don’t ever become in charge of anything important.

TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 09:11 collapse

I hope too, I would never want to be in charge of anything, even in my house I prefer for my wife to be in charge.

I also hope I’m very wrong, I don’t think I am but I hope.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 03 Jan 2025 08:36 collapse

I really don’t think the Crimea or the Hong Kong method is going to work this time.

But if it actually did work, then yeah you might be right.

If it comes to an all out military invasion, though, you can bet that shit is not going to go uncontested.

cqst@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 19:01 next collapse

Taiwan will voluntarily reunify with China in the next two decades.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 21:40 next collapse

How do you know?

Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 02 Jan 2025 22:06 next collapse

Cool story. Could use some more unicorns though, IMO

TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works on 02 Jan 2025 22:12 next collapse

how do you think that would happen?

Mubelotix@jlai.lu on 03 Jan 2025 02:37 collapse

One could just change the definition of voluntarily

hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 10:00 collapse

’ ’ ← thought that “voluntarily” might need some quotes

ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 21:34 next collapse

It’s gross how they always refer to these things as “reunifying”.

comfy@lemmy.ml on 02 Jan 2025 22:34 next collapse

Why isn’t that an appropriate term? It was part of China’s (Qing) territory from 1684 until the Japanese occupations, and is only disunified because of an unresolved civil war. Taiwan (officially the “Republic of China”) considers themself to be China. So why wouldn’t their combination be the reunification of China?

kshade@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 22:53 next collapse

Taiwan was never part of current China though and does not want to be absorbed into that state. Reunification doesn’t sound right for what China would have to do to make it happen.

Mikrochip@feddit.org on 03 Jan 2025 09:23 next collapse

Taiwan was never part of current China though

The same was true for East and West Germany and that, err, merger is generally considered to be a reunification.

But I agree with the rest you wrote, so I guess it’s a moot point anway.

Nonbinary_Sahrah@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 10:10 collapse

But west germany did not invade east germany…

Mikrochip@feddit.org on 03 Jan 2025 19:57 collapse

I mean, true, but that doesn’t contradict what I wrote, does it? I objected to that particular part of kshades argument, not their argument as a whole.

kshade@lemmy.world on 04 Jan 2025 01:15 collapse

It’s a fair argument, I wouldn’t call South or North Korea forcefully annexing the other reunification either though. One state would be annihilated, both in terms of its institutions and its culture. There’s no unity in that, it’s conquest.

But maybe my view of the word is colored by German history. I don’t know, it’s just that calling what would be a horrible, grueling war “reunification” doesn’t seem right, like an attempt at white-washing what would actually happen. Reminds me a bit too much of Putin’s claims about Ukraine.

comfy@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 22:01 collapse

Reunification doesn’t sound right

It’s an objective term for when states join into a single state, like the unification of Italy for example. It’s not about approval or disapproval, I’m not taking a side by calling it reunification.

kshade@lemmy.world on 04 Jan 2025 01:05 collapse

The re- prefix does have implications that go beyond any two states becoming one. Germany’s case is a bit different anyway because it was external forces splitting the country.

GrammarPolice@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 23:04 next collapse

Get your authoritarian ass outta here😂

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 16:52 next collapse

Uh,

From 1949 to 1987, the KMT ruled Taiwan as an authoritarian one-party state after the February 28 incident.

mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 20:24 collapse

So its no longer an authoritarian government for 38 years now. Thanks for pointing that out!

In the mean time Xi is serving his 3rd term in PRC right now, or 4th? Ignoring the rules set up by his predecessors. And you think that’s better?

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 22:55 collapse

Even the UN 🇺🇳 doesn’t recognize Taiwan 🇹🇼.

NuclearDolphin@lemmy.ml on 04 Jan 2025 20:39 next collapse

Nor does the US or Taiwan

mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world on 05 Jan 2025 05:10 collapse

Because China holds a veto power. What’s your point? China won’t allow Taiwan to join a club that China’s partially in control of. In other news, water is wet.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 05 Jan 2025 15:17 collapse

Interesting, the ROC doesn’t hold veto power? How can China join the club, if Taiwan is the rightful government representing all the Chinese people?

comfy@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 21:55 collapse

Not an authoritarian, not even taking a side. I’m pointing out that unification is the term for resolving partitions to form a single state.

Rhoeri@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 06:08 next collapse

If you want something that doesn’t want you- what do YOU call it?

mojofrododojo@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 08:49 next collapse

rape

NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 09:21 next collapse

envy.

comfy@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 22:05 collapse

What’s that got to do with anything? It’s still called a reunification even if both sides didn’t want it. There was a whole entity, it split, and if it joins back together then that’s called reunifying it.

amon@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 09:05 next collapse

Bro please move to .ml there are dozens of you there

AlexisFR@jlai.lu on 03 Jan 2025 09:17 next collapse

Got it, let’s help continental China adopt modern and true democracy then!

NuclearDolphin@lemmy.ml on 04 Jan 2025 20:40 collapse

Work on your own imperialist fucking country first. Jesus fucking Christ you libs are insufferable.

hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 09:56 next collapse

I think “invasion” would be the correct term here.

comfy@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 21:51 collapse

You can use both terms, there’s no contradiction.

Consider the US civil war. The Confederates were (rightfully) invaded and plenty of them still aren’t happy about it, the result was still the unification of the ‘northern’ and the ‘southern’ states.

Nonbinary_Sahrah@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 10:08 collapse

Instance checks out

NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 09:20 collapse

I got news for you. The Republic of China also uses that same language.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 21:50 next collapse

Wow, China’s propaganda in plain view in this comments section, damn!

Texas_Hangover@sh.itjust.works on 02 Jan 2025 23:01 next collapse

Tankies gon’ tank.

etuomaala@sopuli.xyz on 02 Jan 2025 23:10 next collapse

Yeah, some of 'em. Most of them are just regular Chinese people repeating what they’ve been told, though. I’ve talked with all kinds of Chinese people like that, and truly, when I’m not being a dick about it, it is amazing how quickly I can change their minds. “Quickly” here means “in a month”. Not during the first conversation. Be gentle.

Mubelotix@jlai.lu on 03 Jan 2025 02:36 collapse

Tankies gonna downvote too. They think they are anonymous in the votes haha

amon@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 09:06 collapse

We need public downvotes

Mubelotix@jlai.lu on 03 Jan 2025 12:39 collapse

They already are

hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 09:57 collapse

And these people are willingly kissing his ass. They’re not even Chinese people who actually grew up with propaganda, but instead make the conscious choice to believe it.

mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world on 02 Jan 2025 22:35 next collapse

The quickest way to do this is for the CCP to surrender to the ROC.

hsakaa@lemm.ee on 03 Jan 2025 02:48 next collapse

With the declining population and the slowing down of the chinese economy, he should be more concerned about improving their economy otherwise the Chinese population will give him mussolini treatment.

Rhoeri@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 06:24 next collapse

Imagine being the type of loser that would downvote comments in support of a country refusing to be overthrown.

You’d think we’d have learned by now, but here we are.

Here’s for hoping these kids manage to become aware of their ignorance by the time they hit high school.

TokenBoomer@lemmy.world on 04 Jan 2025 02:50 collapse
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 08:21 next collapse

I worry for the future generations of Taiwan and Ukraine. Trump’s going to just shrug and let them die.

Treczoks@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 08:37 next collapse

Reunification? Taiwan was never a part of communist China.

Just because Taiwan was part of an empire that has common roots with communist China is no reason at all.

boredtortoise@lemm.ee on 03 Jan 2025 10:01 next collapse

Let’s not use their propaganda and call them communist. Communist leadership wouldn’t have fascist allies around the world

Jamablaya@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 10:21 collapse

man that is a ridiculous amount of lies in very few words. nice show.

WhatSay@slrpnk.net on 03 Jan 2025 08:38 next collapse

Some military strategists are expecting China to make their move in the next couple years.

NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml on 03 Jan 2025 09:13 collapse

I’ve seen similar reports. They are said to have the highest proportion of military aged men in their population between now and the early 2030’s before a big downwards population-trend for the next several generations as a result of the ol’ limited children policies. After that it’s suspected their resources will be too constrained caring for a ballooning elderly population.

-I’ll be curious to see how it all plays out.

AlexisFR@jlai.lu on 03 Jan 2025 09:15 next collapse

That’s good, the US military is starting to get bored.

hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 03 Jan 2025 09:54 next collapse

Totally not imperialism trust me bro.

Jamablaya@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 10:19 collapse

I mean…It ain’t? Taiwan, the Kuomintang, were literally the imperialists. Taiwan was always China but China changed and…yeah modern china should probably leave Taiwan alone because it’s literally the old chinese government but 100 years later, but they won’t, their government actually thinks in millenia

el_bhm@lemm.ee on 03 Jan 2025 17:31 collapse

At some point Poland held Moscow for a year. We need to get it back I guess. We like to think in milenia as well.

gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de on 03 Jan 2025 10:28 next collapse

chaser behavior

she already said no, what the heck why are you still trying

FreakinSteve@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 16:51 next collapse

This will somehow be treated differently than Gaza

IndustryStandard@lemmy.world on 03 Jan 2025 16:52 collapse

That feel when people here do not realize their own government likely says Taiwan is part of China.