Taiwan Elections 2012

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Crusify_me

All we can do is to maintain neutral relations, take care of our economy, establish our own international diplomacy (Visa-free to US later this year) and really only time and the Chinese citizens will/can determine our eventual full independence.
Let's make sure we're economically ready for that day

The bad news is that if things were bad enough for the current Chinese government to fall, it would mean a crisis that was big enough to screw over the entire planet has occurred.

I am not looking forward to the day China changes its government. Because even if by some miracle it became democratic, the economic crisis required to trigger it would have caused widespread inter-continental suffering.

[Crusify_me]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The bad news is that if things were bad enough for the current Chinese government to fall, it would mean a crisis that was big enough to screw over the entire planet has occurred.

I am not looking forward to the day China changes its government. Because even if by some miracle it became democratic, the economic crisis required to trigger it would have caused widespread inter-continental suffering.

There is no doubt that that would impact the world, Taiwan included.

Another angle we can look at is the current situation of Tibet, Xin Jiang, and inner Mongolia revolting against the Chinese government for independence. If anything was to come of this, that could create the turmoil needed and opportunity for Taiwan.

But let's get into that another time

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Crusify_me

A dual party system for Taiwan is always going to be a benefit, even if there's corruption, because democracy doesn't work if there is no opposition.

America may possibly disagree with you on that point, especially in the light of the farce that was the attempt to raise the debt ceiling. Opposition for the sake opposition doesn't help democracy very much, in my view.

Neither am I saying that a one-party state is ideal, because I just can't see how that could possibly be fully representative of the spectrum of views that one would expect from a diverse society.

As usual, it's all about getting to the golden mean. If only that were so easy to define in practice.

I think my grouse is that I don't necessarily see how Chinese can't adopt democratic principles. Oh, to be sure, I am very familiar with the usual arguments derived from cultural determinism (Chinese never had exposure to the spirit of the European Enlightenment; communalism in agricultural/rural China discouraged individualism; Neo-Confucianism discouraged social inferiors from questioning superiors, and so on). I once espoused such views myself and, perhaps, still do on occasion.

And, certainly, the degree of callousness in contemporary urban China leaves one with very little reason to hope for a gracious, civil society in the mainland, let alone a democratic one.

Yet, I do wonder if it's really that simple, that obvious. Vallen Chaos Valiant may claim that Taiwan got to where it is today by being as un-Chinese as possible. But speaking as a member of the Chinese diaspora in Singapore, Taiwan sure looks very Chinese to me. At least more so than here in Singapore. For a start, I identify first as Singaporean, then as Chinese. My ethnicity is more an afterthought rather than a primary concern.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Yet, I do wonder if it's really that simple, that obvious. Vallen Chaos Valiant may claim that Taiwan got to where it is today by being as un-Chinese as possible. But speaking as a member of the Chinese diaspora in Singapore, Taiwan sure looks very Chinese to me. At least more so than here in Singapore. For a start, I identify first as Singaporean, then as Chinese. My ethnicity is more an afterthought rather than a primary concern.

You have the luxury to be able to be identified as a Singaporean and recognised as such. My Western university flat out replaced "Taiwan" with "China" in my course enrolment listing even though it is still placed in the "T" section.

That's what's the difference between us; you didn't have to worry about who you are because no one is telling you that you are wrong. While I flat out avoid mentioning that fact that I am Taiwanese online, unless I am prepared for a political debate about how I am not what I say I am.

The Taiwanese people had to fight for our right to call ourselves our own names. Even in Western nations. Even in civilian contexts. Taiwan does not legally exist.

My country is no more legal than Somalia. That's how disturbing it is.

[Paranoid Android]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

You have the luxury to be able to be identified as a Singaporean and recognised as such. My Western university flat out replaced "Taiwan" with "China" in my course enrolment listing even though it is still placed in the "T" section.

That's what's the difference between us; you didn't have to worry about who you are because no one is telling you that you are wrong. While I flat out avoid mentioning that fact that I am Taiwanese online, unless I am prepared for a political debate about how I am not what I say I am.

The Taiwanese people had to fight for our right to call ourselves our own names. Even in Western nations. Even in civilian contexts. Taiwan does not legally exist.

My country is no more legal than Somalia. That's how disturbing it is.

As someone born in Beijing, I get what you mean. I see the name Taiwan and I cringe knowing some crazy patriots are gonna rile up a political firefest. What bothers me the most is that in many forms (like some fill-out form, online drop down list, surveys, etc.), HONG KONG is listed as a separate nation and not Taiwan.

While appearance wise, Taiwanese differ very little from people from southern china (guangdong), a mainland Chinese life style is very different from Taiwanese. It traces through several generations of political influence back to when the China split. The people that made up Taiwan were the wealthy that didn't want the money they earned become property of the government and distributed to others. From political views to economic values, Taiwan really should be separate. This difference causes so much necessary poison between the two societies.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

You have the luxury to be able to be identified as a Singaporean and recognised as such. My Western university flat out replaced "Taiwan" with "China" in my course enrolment listing even though it is still placed in the "T" section.

...The Taiwanese people had to fight for our right to call ourselves our own names. Even in Western nations. Even in civilian contexts. Taiwan does not legally exist.

My country is no more legal than Somalia. That's how disturbing it is.

I'm afraid that's a consequence of history. Singapore didn't miraculously become a country because it desired to be one. It was booted out of Malaya, with every expectation that Singapore's government would fail, forcing its politicians to eat humble pie and go crawling back to big brother and beg forgiveness.

Those were the cards dealt to us and we lived with it. Similarly, as you've pointed out, Taiwan had to deal with its own set of hard truths to get to where it is today. And it remains a hard truth that Taiwan can never be a sovereign entity so long as China remains under communist rule.

My point is, despite all your claims of being un-Chinese, Taiwan remains very distinctively Chinese relative to other places in the region. Taiwan has its own ethnic minorities but, culturally, it is homogeneously Chinese, at least to a foreigner like me, who lives in a decidedly multi-ethnic, multilingual society.

So, if after time, Chinese in Taiwan could overcome a dictatorship to adopt democratic principles, why can't mainland Chinese do the same? I ask because just as Japan had been a political model for Taiwan, I see Taiwan as a political model for China. Even more so, because of the ethnic, linguistic and cultural similarities.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Those were the cards dealt to us and we lived with it. Similarly, as you've pointed out, Taiwan had to deal with its own set of hard truths to get to where it is today. And it remains a hard truth that Taiwan can never be a sovereign entity so long as China remains under communist rule.

i think that would be the same no matter if China is communist or democratic.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i think that would be the same no matter if China is communist or democratic.

My immediate reaction was, how so? Given that the one sticking point is that China and Taiwan are still technically at war because of ideology. Get rid of that difference, no more basis for quarrel.

But, on reflection, I see what you mean. Democratic or not, a Greater China would still desire reunification.

Still, my question: Why can't Chinese be democratic? What are Chinese supposedly lacking?

[Paranoid Android]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

So, if after time, Chinese in Taiwan could overcome a dictatorship to adopt democratic principles, why can't mainland Chinese do the same? I ask because just as Japan had been a political model for Taiwan, I see Taiwan as a political model for China. Even more so, because of the ethnic demography.

Taiwan having Japan as a political model could work but definitely not for mainland. The mainland denies western ideologies and when its' run by a single authoritative party, that is carved in stone. The only way to erase that would be watering it down with the blood of victims of some mass catastrophe.

China already witness downfall of Nazi Germany, USSR and other communist single-party authoritarian nations collapse. They know that there's a combined foreign power in the world that can overthrow the PRC party. But as long as they don't have something insane like open invasion, or genocide, or economic collapse into severe famine, that combined will to overthrow china (through military force) will never happen.

The chinese civilians simply don't care that much because in a country with over a billion people, everyone feels small and insignificant and when freedom of speech is already limited, changing political preferences is very bleak.

To answer your question. The Chinese lack organization and inspiration. I mean the people, not the government. The government would never suggest democracy, they own the country, why would they give themselves competition?
-------
I'm just hope all future Taiwanese leaders are anti-civil war. United State's is practically drooling on the borders of China wishing for some reason to stir up controversy and chaos. Chaos is a great way to hit such a populated nation. And Taiwan will lose way more than gain through a civil war.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Paranoid Android

Taiwan having Japan as a political model could work but definitely not for mainland. The mainland denies western ideologies and when its' run by a single authoritative party, that is carved in stone. The only way to erase that would be watering it down with the blood of victims of some mass catastrophe.

Beijing denies Western ideology, not necessarily mainland Chinese. At least, the chattering on weibo blogs doesn't seem to give that impression. Neither does the open support for "dissidents" like Ai Weiwei suggest that ordinary Chinese are completely cowed.

Essentially, I'm asking if it's true that democracy is not suitable for a cultural and political entity like China, because some would suggest that it's Plato's Republic writ large. Rule by sage kings. Enlightened despotism, if you will.

A system like that of, say, the Twelve Kingdoms. (Hey, we are an anime forum, after all. I don't think raising an anime/manga example trivialises the discussion, especially not when I'm referring to something of that quality.)

Realistically, there are more examples of despotism in the world today than there are of functional democracy. If democracy were so necessarily inevitable, as Francis Fukuyama once claimed, one would think the ratio would have changed by now. It hasn't.

[Paranoid Android]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Beijing denies Western ideology, not necessarily mainland Chinese. At least, the chattering on weibo blogs doesn't seem to give that impression. Neither does the open support for "dissidents" like Ai Weiwei suggest that ordinary Chinese are completely cowed.

Essentially, I'm asking if it's true that democracy is not suitable for a cultural and political entity like China, because some would suggest that it's Plato's Republic writ large. Rule by sage kings. Enlightened despotism, if you will.

A system like that of, say, the Twelve Kingdoms. (Hey, we are an anime forum, after all. I don't think raising an anime/manga example trivialises the discussion, especially not when I'm referring to something of that quality.)

Ah, well I'm from Beijing so that's like all my exposure =(

Well if the rest of Chinese truly aren't opposing western ideologies, then China could become democratic if the current party just magically disappeared. However the population size is going to be a challenge, with voting and all that. I mean it's going to be so hard to make sure that everyone goes to vote (China changes so much, so many age groups or social groups simply choose to stop caring) and vote legally, once.

But it's democracy isn't out of the spectrum of possibilities.

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by Paranoid Android

The chinese civilians simply don't care that much because in a country with over a billion people, everyone feels small and insignificant and when freedom of speech is already limited, changing political preferences is very bleak.

Then explain why there was a popular pro-democracy movement in late 1980's.

The Communist Party suppresses the political challenge to one-party rule in various ways. By maintaining high growth and bringing prosperity for 2 decades, the party justify their rule. The Chinese model is more efficient. Stability in the society trumps the call for freedom and democracy. At the same time they use propaganda and censorship to suppress dissents. The activists are locked up if they poise a threat to their authority.

That's why during bad times (the 80's when inflation was high), there was a stronger movement for change.

But even that is starting to change. The Chinese middle class is growing. They have demands for more openness and social justice. It's not a force to challenge one-party rule yet, but there are calls to improve governance. Depends on the party's response, we may or may not see a more open China. Though Communist Party will keep its rule in foreseeable future.

[SaintessHeart]

For Taiwan to achieve independence from China is going to be a pipedream. From what I can see, they are looking at Taiwan's 4 trade ports, their IC fab industry, and their fish filled waters, as well as a place to lay claims to those purported oilfields in South China Sea.

Taiwan is a strategic economic and military point, if they can't have it diplomatically like Hong Kong and Macau, they will take it by force.

[Ithekro]

Hmmm. I'm going to need a history leason here because what is being said doesn't fit what I know of Chinese history of the 20th century.

After the fall of the last Emperor, there was a civil war. Before the Japanese invaded inthe 1930s there was a Nationalist governement (which I was under the impression was suppose to be a democratic style government, but that was never clear) and there was Mao's Communists. The Japanese drove the Communists deep into the heart of China while the Nationalists and their Western Allies fought the Japanese in the south and the coasts. After the war, the Nationalist Goverenment was the defacto ruling body as far as the Allies were concerned. Then the Communists came back out from the interior and the civil war restarted. It "ended" with the Nationalist forces retreat to the coast and eventually to Formosa, which became Taiwan. Up until 1972, Taiwan, as far as the West was concerned, was China, while the Communist government was to be funtionally ignored on the political field (but seen as a great threat). Now things are different.

By question is: If the Nationalist Government started on the Mainland...why can't something like that happen again if the Communist Goverenment falls?

If the Communist Governement falls, would reunification be possible if it was on Taiwan's terms? Because if the reason for the seperation is gone, there is no need to be apart...politically. Economically things are shifting. Militarily the two parts of the new country will have issues....China using their own stuff and copies of old Soviet tech, and Taiwan using purchased American tech.

[Crusify_me]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

For Taiwan to achieve independence from China is going to be a pipedream. From what I can see, they are looking at Taiwan's 4 trade ports, their IC fab industry, and their fish filled waters, as well as a place to lay claims to those purported oilfields in South China Sea.

Taiwan is a strategic economic and military point, if they can't have it diplomatically like Hong Kong and Macau, they will take it by force.

It's a good point that you bring up the claim of Taiwan's industries.

But I don't see it as a pipedream, I think it's more of a race to see if either the Chinese government is shaken or if the Taiwanese government/people eventually fold towards the idea of unity.

Even though people might see China's current economic boom as a stable, "why would you want to change anything in the government" situation, but really, there is still much unrest.
The economy and development of China's interior is completely different than that of its wealthy coastal cities; there is much discrimination between people of one province to another (discrimination towards outer-province workers); the revolts of Tibet, Xin Jiang and inner Mongolia; and the next generation of educated Chinese youths will likely have their say on democracy.

These are just some factors I think can shake the Communist government and create the opportunity for Taiwan

[Crusify_me]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Hmmm. I'm going to need a history leason here because what is being said doesn't fit what I know of Chinese history of the 20th century.

After the fall of the last Emperor, there was a civil war. Before the Japanese invaded inthe 1930s there was a Nationalist governement (which I was under the impression was suppose to be a democratic style government, but that was never clear) and there was Mao's Communists. The Japanese drove the Communists deep into the heart of China while the Nationalists and their Western Allies fought the Japanese in the south and the coasts. After the war, the Nationalist Goverenment was the defacto ruling body as far as the Allies were concerned. Then the Communists came back out from the interior and the civil war restarted. It "ended" with the Nationalist forces retreat to the coast and eventually to Formosa, which became Taiwan. Up until 1972, Taiwan, as far as the West was concerned, was China, while the Communist government was to be funtionally ignored on the political field (but seen as a great threat). Now things are different.

By question is: If the Nationalist Government started on the Mainland...why can't something like that happen again if the Communist Goverenment falls?

If the Communist Governement falls, would reunification be possible if it was on Taiwan's terms? Because if the reason for the seperation is gone, there is no need to be apart...politically. Economically things are shifting. Militarily the two parts of the new country will have issues....China using their own stuff and copies of old Soviet tech, and Taiwan using purchased American tech.

If it was to reunify under Taiwan's terms, I don't think the corporate leaders of Shang Hai, Beijing or Guangzhou would ever listen to the Nationalist government.

I honestly cannot see the Nationalist government ever returning to China.
If it got to the point that the Communist party completely fell, there would probably be a brief interim governing body until the preparation for the world's biggest election in history is ready

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Hmmm. I'm going to need a history leason here because what is being said doesn't fit what I know of Chinese history of the 20th century.

After the fall of the last Emperor, there was a civil war. Before the Japanese invaded inthe 1930s there was a Nationalist governement (which I was under the impression was suppose to be a democratic style government, but that was never clear)

it was a democratic government in Name only. Several of my great grandmothers side of the family was in it. To hear my dad talk about it, they were no different then bandits. My used to tell how a bunch of Bandits would once a month come by and pay tribute to his uncle. Every month there would be a pile of coins and valuable in court yard.

Also the Warlords who ran the province ignore or only pay lip service to it. there was already a undeclared civil war when the Japanese invade. The Japanese invasion only delay it.

and there was Mao's Communists. The Japanese drove the Communists deep into the heart of China while the Nationalists and their Western Allies fought the Japanese in the south and the coasts.

just a clarification, The Nationalist were more interested in fighting the Communist then the Japanese. The Communist fought Japanese and defeated them on more a few occasions.

By question is: If the Nationalist Government started on the Mainland...why can't something like that happen again if the Communist Government falls?

The nationalist government beat the Qing Dynasty because one of the Qing General(Yuen Sai Hoi) refuse to fight. However his motive was to make himself Emperor. Without the Internal struggle i seriously doubt the Nationalist could have beaten the Qinq dynasty that easily.
Also while a Democratic Government could rise up form the Ash of the Communist government. Most likely you will see a huge Civil War between various Governor who runs the provinces.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

just a clarification, The Nationalist were more interested in fighting the Communist then the Japanese. The Communist fought Japanese and defeated them on more a few occasions.

Very true. There was also the epochal Long March which literally made heroes out of an entire generation of communist leaders, from Mao Zedong to Zhou Enlai and Deng Xiaoping. Meanwhile, the various factions of the nominally Nationalist forces lived off the fat of Allied war contributions, waiting for the chance to strike communist forces weakened by conflict with the Japanese.

It is therefore not hard to see how the Nationalists had long since lost the moral high ground well before the Japanese surrendered. Any Chinese who professed to be a patriot would fight with the communists, with a fervour that antagonised the Japanese sufficiently to inflict bloody reprisals against Chinese in all occupied territories.

Also while a Democratic Government could rise up form the Ash of the Communist government. Most likely you will see a huge Civil War between various Governor who runs the provinces.

Given historical experience and present-day realities, that represents a depressingly likely outcome, should the central communist government suddenly fall apart today. And, to be completely cynical, that's something I suspect Western leaders would especially love to see, all in the name of "democratic" progress, no less.

[Kokukirin]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

it was a democratic government in Name only. Several of my great grandmothers side of the family was in it. To hear my dad talk about it, they were no different then bandits. My used to tell how a bunch of Bandits would once a month come by and pay tribute to his uncle. Every month there would be a pile of coins and valuable in court yard.

Also the Warlords who ran the province ignore or only pay lip service to it. there was already a undeclared civil war when the Japanese invade. The Japanese invasion only delay it.

Correct. The war between Nationalists and Communists already started when Japanese invaded China. The Nationalist government was more of a dictatorship, or more precisely, the biggest warlord.

just a clarification, The Nationalist were more interested in fighting the Communist then the Japanese. The Communist fought Japanese and defeated them on more a few occasions.

This is false.

Nationalists continued to target Communists only for a short while after Japanese invasion. The Xi'an incident in 1936 changed that. Zhang Xueliang (warlord from Manchuria) kidnapped Chiang Kai-shek and forced a temporary peace between them that lasted until end of WWII.

In the war against Japanese. Nationalist government took Japan head-on in a few occasions, most notably Nanjing where a massacre followed. Communists mostly engaged Japanese in guerilla warfare. They suffered much less loss than Nationalists.

[Crusify_me]

Had the Communists not defeated the Nationalists, there probably would not be a Taiwan as we know of today.