Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Do you people not know your history, taiwan is what remains of 'old china'.
-
Finished your HSC? Check out our University Discussion, Non-School forums or help out next year's HSC students! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
China vs Taiwan (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Collin
- Start date
How does your post prove that they are Chinese by nationality? I'am aware of the history of Taiwan, but those words don't seem to prove much relevance here. For starters, how does the formal names of Taiwan and China prove that they are same in nationality? The People's Republic of China does not equal Republic of China. It's named such, since both countries (atleast at one stage) claimed sovereignty over both 'nations' as their own. That obviously doesn't necessarily prove that they are both the same country. A can claim ownership of A + B and B can also claim ownership of A + B. The fact that they both claim ownership of A + B doesn't warrant the conclusion that A must = B.Phanatical said:
If Taiwan was officially part of Chinese sovereignty, the country would not have it's own president. Taipai wouldn't be the capital. There would only be one capital, not two. There wouldn't be two independent governments. Why do people refer to Taiwan like it's separate from the mainland? Because, controversially many don't believe in the legitimacy of Beijing's claims, obviously.
Chen Shui-bian: "Taiwan has already been an independent sovereign country. Currently, Taiwan is already a country, an independent sovereign country. There is of course no question of declaring independence, because it is already a country."
Another thing, it all comes down to constitutional semantics, of both PRC and ROC. Stuff like ROC claiming that PRC can only claim Taiwan as part of it's borders if and only if PRC is willing to claim that Mongolia is also part of it's sovereignty, which is obviously not true.
Now I don't want to be slammed down here for my seemingly pro-Taiwan words, because I've always been pro-Beijing. Track down any of my past political arguments on this topic on any forum, and you would find that I've always supported The People's Republic's, may I add - subjective notion that Taiwan is a part of it's borders and that it has the right to retake the island, by force if necessary. But the point is, there has been no official reunification. Hence authentically one cannot proclaim that Taiwan and China are not separate, until that reunification is achieved and hence, one can denote the citizens of those two respective countries Taiwanese, or Chinese. Whether or not the majority of the world believes in the One China policy is irrelevant. The simple point is, some do not, and there has been no official reunification.
Also, another simple reason why one can refer to the people of Taiwan as 'Taiwanese' and the people of China as 'Chinese': The word 'Taiwan' is commonly used synonymously with the Republic of China, while the word 'China' is used to refer to areas under the control of the People's Republic of China. Hence when someone refers to a 'Chinese', they may simply have meant that they are referring to a person whose origin is of the mainland, disregarding any contextual links with race or nationality.
You know what that means right? Your mum will be having roast duck for dinner on Christmas.. aaaaaaaaaaAAAHAHAHAHAHA.. lol, just kidding.xiao1985 said:
How can you fail man, you're smart. I'm dissappointed in you, Xiao. So dissappointed, now go to your room and hang your head in shame. If your computer is already in your room, then erm.. disregard the 'going to your room' bit and just hang your head in shame, right now.
meLoncoLLie
adores corgis
lol "duckie boy"
chiqui said xiao is tops :uhhuh: aren't you xiao?
chiqui said xiao is tops :uhhuh: aren't you xiao?
meLoncoLLie
adores corgis
FRIGID!!!!!
lol Selina will be fine
lol Selina will be fine
Phanatical
Happy Lala
In this context, the Peoples Republic of China DOES equal the Republic of China, in that the latter is the previous government of China, and that the former is the Current government of China. Taiwan forms part of both the Republic of China, and its successor, the Peoples Republic of China, and to suggest that it is an independent country would be like suggesting that Canberra is an independent country from the rest of Australia.
Taiwan does not have a legitmate government. What it has is an occupying force, and its so-called "President" is nothing but the leader of this occupying force. As such, its legitimacy as a nation state is no greater than say, the Hong Kong government. That means that it may control the day to day running of the province, but it does not have sovereignty over the territory. As such, to call it a country is incorrect.
Taiwan does not have a legitmate government. What it has is an occupying force, and its so-called "President" is nothing but the leader of this occupying force. As such, its legitimacy as a nation state is no greater than say, the Hong Kong government. That means that it may control the day to day running of the province, but it does not have sovereignty over the territory. As such, to call it a country is incorrect.
jm1234567890
Premium Member
i thought it was like canada and united statesPhanatical said:
No, it doesn't.Phanatical said:
The business of previous governments is completely irrelevant. Pakistan was 'broken off from India', and became a separate country. The Indian government was hence the previous government of the-now Pakistan. The only reason why we're not arguing about this is because there is no business of one (or both) of those countries squabbling over the other still being theirs. For us, the civil war branched off the 'two factions' into two new 'nations'. Previous governments or whatever is irrelevant.
Whether or not Taiwan is part of China is an ambiguous argument, and it's subjective. Your opinion simply holds for the Beijing's, yet who is to say that their claims are legitimate over Taiwan's? By Taiwans own constitution, it is not part of PRC. You must realise this. Your argument is based on your opinion. Nothing is objectively correct here, or _staple_. Taiwan may not be a true independent nation, but you cannot 'prove' that Taiwan is truly part of PRC. Your notion of this 'occupying force' is preposterous. The only way to settle this is when Taiwan formally declares independence, or an official, formal reunification occurs. Until then, you have no God-almighty argument to staple down to everyone that Taiwan is genuinely part of China's sovereignty. You only speak for the opinions of PRC and pro-PRC nations.
Also, let me remind you that the original argument was about your confusion over how I could refer to the people of Taiwan as Taiwanese and the people of 'China', 'Chinese', when according to you, they are the same race and nationality. Like I elaborated upon in the previous post: The word 'Taiwan' is commonly used synonymously with the Republic of China, while the word 'China' is used to refer to areas under the control of the People's Republic of China. Hence when someone refers to a 'Chinese', they may simply have meant that they are referring to a person whose origin is of the mainland, disregarding any contextual links with race or nationality.
Now this was my original intention in terms of contextual usage. How? Because the situation with Taiwan and the mainland, disregarding the sovereignty business, is practically equivalent to two factions at loggerheads with each other. I asked 'Who here is Taiwanese and who here is Chinese?' as to set up the pretext for the next question, which was regarding which 'faction' you'd 'ally' yourself with should a conflict begin. In that sense, it makes complete sense to regard the people of Taiwan simply as 'Taiwanese' and the people of the mainland simply as 'Chinese', as to represent those respective factions with names, where the priorities of race and the arguments of the legitimacy of sovereignty didn't play a part.
Phanatical
Happy Lala
And to that question I stated that they could not be distinguished as they are not two separate countries, but the one and the same country, and it would be like saying tasmanians and australians. Or Victorians and Australians. Sure, Tasmania might be inbred, and they might want to separate and call themselves Taswegians, but it's still an inalienable part of Australia.
It's not like any state of Australia and Australia. I've said that before. Tasmania is an official state of Australia, it is part of Australia's sovereignty and there is no refuting that fact from any source. The situation is NOT the same for Taiwan and China. The status quo of Taiwan is ambiguous and subjective, depending on which side you look at, and perhaps which side you take a bias to.Phanatical said:
Phanatical
Happy Lala
There is a group of people in Queensland who claim sovereignty from the rest of Australia. Are they any less Australian than the rest of us? No, because they're full of shit. Exactly the same with the Taiwan situation.
Dude, stop making these absurd comparisons. Civil war ripped China into two factions, while now atleast one still formally claims sovereignty over the other. The situation is ambiguous and Taiwan's words are only bullshit to you because you are agreeing with Beijing's _opinion_, under PRC's constitution of who has sovereignty over Taiwan. If this was as black as white as those comparisons you make, there would be not so much international controversy. Stop making these silly comparisons where a part of a nation without any prior significant incidents such as war just suddenly claims sovereignty. We know that's full of shit, but the comparison is wrong.Phanatical said:
Now we've been on this same bloody argument for a few posts now, nothing is getting progressed. I've realised now that I won't ever be able to change your opinion and I'm not going to be bothered anymore, since no fresh argumentative topics are getting introduced anyway. So just drop it buddy, unless you want to continue to squabble on things we've already talked about a thousand times.
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
I agree, the only person here who seems to know anything much about the situation is JKDDragon the rest of you actually have no clue what so ever lol
Phanatical
Happy Lala
I have quite an excellent understanding of the situation, thank you very much. The simple fact of the matter is that no matter how legitimate it may think itself, the Taiwanese "Government" is not a legal entity, not by Chinese standards, and not by world standards. Fuck, it isn't even a legal entity by Republic of China standards. It is part of China, no more independent than Hong Kong or Macao. To argue otherwise is to push a separatist agenda. To recognise "Taiwan" as anything but a province of China is to suggest that it is an independent nation, and hence my comparisons are correct.
Again, I refer to Tasmania and mainland Australia. Most Tasmanians don't like the mainland. If they were to attempt to secede from the Commonwealth and establish themselves as a sovereign state, and if they elected a Prime Minister, it would not make them an independent country, but they would still remain a state of Australia until such time that Australia's other 5 states and territories allow otherwise. The point of this comparison is that for Tasmania to secede, it must be ratified by the other states of Australia.
For Taiwan to become an independent country (become - because it isn't), it must be recognised by the Peoples Republic of China, as Taiwan is a province of the Peoples Republic of China. Until such time, it can not be considered a country, and the "Taiwan President" and the "Taiwan Government" remain illegitimate. It's not a matter of terminology, nor a matter of semantics, but a simple legal reality.
Again, I refer to Tasmania and mainland Australia. Most Tasmanians don't like the mainland. If they were to attempt to secede from the Commonwealth and establish themselves as a sovereign state, and if they elected a Prime Minister, it would not make them an independent country, but they would still remain a state of Australia until such time that Australia's other 5 states and territories allow otherwise. The point of this comparison is that for Tasmania to secede, it must be ratified by the other states of Australia.
For Taiwan to become an independent country (become - because it isn't), it must be recognised by the Peoples Republic of China, as Taiwan is a province of the Peoples Republic of China. Until such time, it can not be considered a country, and the "Taiwan President" and the "Taiwan Government" remain illegitimate. It's not a matter of terminology, nor a matter of semantics, but a simple legal reality.
Not-That-Bright
Andrew Quah
Taiwan has a different culture and history,
Taiwan is a democratic nation,
Taiwan is a much different nation economically....
Taiwan will do best by being a separate entity to best represent its own matters on the world stage, the vast majority of taiwanese want taiwan to be a separate nation.
It isn't fair for china to impose its will upon an island full of people that are running with their own government and wish to be their own country. All that this is about is the new communist government having unfinished business with the roc government.
Taiwan is a democratic nation,
Taiwan is a much different nation economically....
Taiwan will do best by being a separate entity to best represent its own matters on the world stage, the vast majority of taiwanese want taiwan to be a separate nation.
It isn't fair for china to impose its will upon an island full of people that are running with their own government and wish to be their own country. All that this is about is the new communist government having unfinished business with the roc government.
Last edited:
I wouldn't bother wasting your breath mate, he's not going to relent on his arguments, and you'll just end up practically recycling your points over and over, just like I have.Not-That-Bright said:
SO, back to the original questions before I was so rudely interrupted:
If Taiwan and China were to engage in a conflict, which side would you take? And..
Who's goin' back to Beijing for the 08' Olympics?