If you think they have to control the Senate in order to do anything then you are undermining the entire point of your call to action. The Senate is structurally a minoritarian body. 70% of the US population is represented by 34% of the Senate. That means that the Senate supermajority is determined by 30% of the population.
This cannot be fixed with voting.
:nelson-laugh:
They left it out most likely because it is irrelevant and puts the victim at greater risk of victim blaming
You prove it by doing the experiment. All societies are experiments. We can look at history and see the impact that control over mass media (newspapers, journalism, radio, TV, etc), has had.
For example, we can see the impact that bourgeois-owned media has in contributing to the conditions for war as far back as the Opium Wars, at least. We see how the crackdown on expression in the US against communists during the multiple Red Scares had the measurable effect of completely disrupting the communist movement.
Historically we can see how effective control over expression is at achieving large political aims.
As for whether the French neocolonial rule is worse than repression of free expression, well, we just do that logically, since all Western imperialism includes repression of free expression AND bourgeois imperialist control over mass media. The fact that it ALSO includes mass murder, mass social murder, unequal exchange and wealth appropriation puts it squarely in a negative balance.
Things that are related via causal linkages do need to be compared. The crack down on expression is NOT being done for its own sake. It’s being done to reduce the influence of the French specifically and the West more generally because the neocolonial oppression of the West is a worse problem than the negative impacts of domestic repression of expression.
You mean worse than the French cracking down on anyone that resisted them by having their military occupy the country and stealing all of the gold wealth of the country while also controlling the currency to ensure the entire country was their hostage? Losing some freedom to operate critically while wresting yourself free from European oppression is sort of par for the course.
Oh white European chauvinism. When will you finally end?
Hells yeah!
Someone that doesn’t consider themselves Chinese is seceding from China.
This is why you’re not worth talking to.
They do. Invading an island is as little self-defence as bombing Iran.
You’re a completely disingenuous person.
‘Since when can you choose your neighbours’ has nothing to do with ‘Western imperialist goals’ but is a fact that affects all countries globally.
You don’t argue in good faith.
The PRC/ROC split is the result of the Chinese Civil War, just as the NK/SK split is the result of the Korean Civil War
You have a delusional grasp of history that serves only your pre-selected conclusions.
Both wars ended in a status quo where neither side controls the entirety, de facto resulting in two separate countries since decades.
And your pre-selected conclusions are exactly matched to Western imperialist goals.
So, if you negate the possibility of such an outcome in the Chinese question, you should negate this possibility in the Korean question and hence argue for South Korea, as the stronger part, to be entitled to force ‘reunification’ with the crippling North, which is rightfully theirs.
And you argue like a right-wing youtuber with zero self-awareness for how transparent you are.
At this point it’s obvious you’re not here to discuss facts and reason about them. You’re here to filter facts and misinterpret them deliberately to fit your preferred conclusion.
And then you pivot to Korea in a way that is so disingenuous and so obviously ignoring literally everything I’ve said about the nature of sovereignty, Western imperialism, mutual security, nationhood and statehood, that it’s clear you’re having a discussion with yourself and not with me.
Talk about intellectual dishonesty.
I would love to Taiwan decolonized is true statement. Like I would love to see Canada, the US, and Australia decolonized. It’s also true that I don’t think there is a Taiwanese nation, much like I don’t think there’s a Canadian nation, a USian nation, nor an Australian nation. For Taiwan to be decolonized would not mean for the acceptance of a Taiwanese nation but rather to establish the sovereignty of the indigenous nations on the islands that are not Han, and to make the Han subject to the sovereignty of the indigenous nations.
None of that is inconsistent. None of that is imperialism. None of that is subjugation.
They have had 70 years to secede.
So? Now they want to do it
25% want to.
but the PRC threatens to throw a temper tantrum about it
The PRC is very clear that Taiwan becoming sovereign means Western empire at their doorstep. This has literally been the strategic situation for over 400 years. It’s not just a “now” thing and it’s not just a PRC. It’s a fundamental aspect of security. Security it always mutual. The US wouldn’t allow China to build a military presence in Long Island of they decided to secede, and you wouldn’t call it a tantrum. It’s obvious from your word choice that you don’t believe China is allowed to have legitimate security concerns.
Just let it sink in how a country of one billion is actively choosing to worsen its situation over an island of not even 25 million.
Are you serious right now? The US embargoed the PRC while it was the poorest country in the world, and prevented anyone in the Western world from trading with it, while the US and UK invested billions to develop the province of Taiwan under a fascist mass murdering dictatorship, and you think I need to let it sink in what China is doing?
The PRC could have moved on for a very long time and put its resources in its own prosperity instead of wasting the resources on a cause that will end in a war. It’s so petty.
This is so offensively dismissive it’s clear you have no ability to reason clearly about this. China has a literal multi-century security threat on its doorstep and it’s been spending money developing a military that is capable of defending against the world’s largest genocidal empire and you think that was “Wasting resources”. And before you go all paternalistic about China should have invested in its own prosperity, China accounts for literally all of the net poverty alleviation in the last century, while Europe and North America created more poverty than they alleviated. There are grandparents in China today that grew up subsistence farming and are now experiencing robotic self-driving vehicles. China is doing just fine developing its prosperity and also its national security posture against the world’s largest ever military threat.
The fact still stands: the PRC wants a piece of land they never established control over.
That is not, actually, what they want. They want to establish a security perimeter that is inviolable by imperialists. Again, literally the same motivation for almost 400 years. You consuming fan fic editorializing Chinese motivations doesn’t change reality.
The French, German, and Italian tribes living in Switzerland physically separated themselves from their nations of birth and then mutually agreed to integrate their tribes into a single tribe, and included everything in that choice from language to cuisine to marriage…
Just what happened in Taiwan. They don’t consider themselves Chinese, they are simply not allowed to openly say it
That’s literally not what happened. At this point, you’re clearly not even engaging in good faith. What happened in Taiwan, as I’ve stated many times, is that foreign militaries intervened in internal Chinese politics for the purpose of subjugating China militarily. That is not AT ALL like the situation in Switzerland. At all. The Han Chinese colonized Taiwan, and the dominated and oppressed the indigenous. This is far more akin to the situation in North America, where white people are still all European settlers. The Han Chinese in Taiwan are Chinese settlers and settlers don’t have a claim to a new new national identity. If they did, then genocide would be the result. We have to hold this line and you don’t get to have a double standard simply because you’re an anti-communist.
due to the giant fragile red snowflake next door. We’re pretending something that isn’t the case just to protect the fragile feelings of a giant that cannot accept the truth.
Again, it is so obvious that you can’t engage in this discussion in good faith that I the only reason I’m bothering to refute you is so that others can learn.
Chinese colonization of the region is necessarily a distinct process from European colonization.
Well, isn’t that handy! :D
If you’re entire grasp of history requires that everyone doing similar seeming things is actually part of the same historical process so that you can make false equivalencies to prove your point, you might not understand anything about history. It’s not handy, it’s reality. Of course the Chinese process is a distinct process from the European process. They were done by different people, under total different philosophies, in different geographies, with different outcomes. This statement shouldn’t be controversial. The fact you want to project all the evils of your own society onto China is a way for you to absolve yourself of supporting your empire by prioritizing opposing your empire’s mortal enemy.
Germans, Slavs, Romans might have had some rivers and mountains here and there, yet have a long history of conquering each others land. Somehow that’s colonialism, but when Hans crossed a river to dominate other cultures, it isn’t?
What? No, that’s not what I said at all. I said that Han colonization is a different historical process from European colonization. In the flat lands of Europe where there were no physical hard boundaries yes, the lands were constantly conquered and reconquered. That’s why there is a Swiss nation but no Belgian nation and no Austrian nation. These were just stretches of territory that various nations fought for control over. That wasn’t colonization. Colonization is when one group subjugated other nations in their distinct historical homelands. Europeans and Chinese did this, but they were distinct historical processes shaped by their unique geographical context which gave rise to distinct political, economic, philosophical, and technological development.
Yea. The most successful being the Hans (if there are no Mongols or Japanese around). Somehow you don’t seem to have a lot of problems with them establishing themselves as the master humans. Talk about double standards…
The concept of Han Supremacy is also not equivalent to the concept of Eurocentric Christian White Supremacy. Han Chauvinism, which is the idea that the Han were cosmically and divinely mandated to bring civilization to the world led to ethnic cleansing, genocide, and mass murder all over China, just like Eurocentric Christian White Supremacy did in Europe. But the result in China has ALWAYS been a multi-national multi-ethnic state, whereas in Europe the results were very often ethnostates with a single nation present.
That’s not to say one is better than the other, but it’s to show that they are different. In this context, the Hand “establishing themselves as the master humans” was absolutely problematic. But Han Supremacy died over a century ago and was replaced with Han Chauvinism, which was the belief that the Han knew better than anyone else. Han Chauvinism was endemic in the early PRC, but Han Chauvinism was deliberately ended under the administration of Deng Xiaoping when the CPC modified the constitution and specifically targeted the concept and its impact. Because the CPC came to the realization that even though chauvinism wasn’t nearly as bad as supremacy, it was still contradictory and would lead to ruin.
All you need to do is look at the One Child Policy to understand how fundamental this change was. When China established the One Child Policy, the same people who claim that China is just as evil as Europe pointed to the policy as fundamentally cruel. However, what most people never talked about was the fact that ethnic minorities were exempted from the policy. Some were unrestricted, some were restricted but to some number above one. The people who were constrained to one child were Han. Compare that to the social outcomes in Europe and their former and current colonies and it’s starkly clear that there is a fundamental difference now.
I don’t have to defend Han Supremacy, nor their genocides, nor their settler colonialism. It’s all bad, and the harm needs to be repaired. I’m happy to be consistent on that front.
This is why Tibet is historically a protectorate of China and not a colony or an occupied region.
Who says so? The Chinese? The Tibetans?
Historians, politicians, the UN, international law. I get that it doesn’t fit your narrative, but there’s a real difference between a protectorate and a colony. Tibet could not have been a resource colony when it first became a protectorate because no one was able to access the natural resources and build logistics to exploit them until after the PRC was established and finally industrialized. Meanwhile, the indigenous population of Tibet has more than doubled in the last 70 years. That’s not indicative of a colony. That’s indicative of an active colonial project. That’s indicative of a thriving autonomous region under the military protection of a larger regional hegemon.
Of course, the self-proclaimed master humans want to whitewash their oppression. Weird that you can only see the wrongdoings of one side, while completely whitewash the other side.
It’s not weird at all. I just operate with a different set of facts than you. China has over 250 indigenous languages with over 1000 living speakers, whereas in all of North America it’s less than 100. That’s a fundamentally different outcome. Of the many indigenous ethnicities in China, most of them maintain their cultural customs, celebrations, holidays, cuisines, and histories. The Chinese government actively funds the preservation of these cultures, practices, and histories. Meanwhile, indigenous folks in North America are so traumatized by European colonization that the older generations are literally disowning their own kids for abandoning Christianity. The US and Canadian governments continue genocidal programs of blood quantum, water rights, toxic dumping, and cultural erasure.
Again, you are characterizing Chinese national security as aggression when China is literally not committing acts of agression. I don’t know why you think that’s a form of honesty.
I am engaged in the topic of Taiwanese self-government - I honestly don’t believe they are entitled to it and I have stated my reasons why. If you think my honesty is being dishonest because the only honest position is believing that Taiwan should be a sovereign nation, then I hate to break it to you but you have no idea what honesty is and you are using the term “honesty” to mean “agrees with me”.
If you think that my arguments about nations, countries, being states having related but distinct historical processes that can be compared across continents, regions, cultures, and time periods is a set of thought-terminating cliches, then maybe I overestimated your ability to participate in discourse above the level of “I know you are but what am I”.
You have no idea what whataboutism is then. You said:
there is no realistic scenario that includes the US attacking China right now and there hasn’t been one in decades. The Taiwanese military infrastructure is purely defensive in nature.
and I said the definition of defense, according to the US, is genocidal force projection. If you think that’s whataboutism, then you can maintain your thought-terminating cliche and ignore the fact that the empire is consistently lying to you about what defense is.
U.S. forces remain vigilant and postured to defend against unjustified Iranian aggression.
Israel has a right to defend itself
We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people.
https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/hellscape-for-taiwan
The Western idea of “defense” is genocide.
Sorry what continued aggression? Do you mean bombing fishing boats with double tap strikes? Do you mean sending in death squads to terrorize the population? Do you mean sending guns, money, training, and logistical support to terrorist groups and separatists?
China is not acting aggressively towards the people of Taiwan, it is demonstrating combat readiness to the US empire who consistently states openly that they intend to turn Taiwan into military infrastructure that they will use to attack the mainland.
The fact that the Western media portrays this as aggression against Taiwan is a function of propaganda and not reality.
how exactly does further colonization by the Chinese mainland help with [Taiwan decolonized, the place names of the Austronesians reestablished, the nation of Austronesians self-determined and self-governing]
Because of the way contradictory historical processes actually work. Chinese integration is not a process of colonization, it is a process of resolving the contradiction of Western imperialism. Western imperialism imposed a contradiction on top of the Han Chinese settler colonial contradiction. Resolving the Western imperial contradiction creates the conditions necessary to resolve the Han Chinese settler colonial contradiction.
Your focus on the specific Austronesian ethnicity is IMHO extremely racist, and restoring them as the sole inhabitants would be nothing short of a genocide of a large part of the current population that chose peaceful democratic coexistence in the last couple of decades.
I thought you just said that it was settler colonialism and not peaceful coexistence. Now suddenly saying that Han Chinese occupation is settlerdom is racist? That’s like saying it’s racist against white people to deny them sovereignty over the territories in the Western hemisphere. Stop the duplicitous pearl clutching. The 16 Austronesian nations of the major islands that comprise Taiwan province are not Taiwanese by nationality any more than the Lakota, Dakota, Seneca, and Navajo are American.
a large part of the current population that chose peaceful democratic coexistence in the last couple of decades
Peaceful coexistence under the “protection” of the most genocidal violent psychopathic military empire in the world. Listen, this would sound very compelling if it wasn’t for the fact that US defense analysts and officials have spent years talking about the Pacific Kill Chain, Kill Web, and Hellscape infrastructure they are trying to build on the island of Taiwan. It would be compelling if the US didn’t have special forces stationed 2 miles off the coast the mainland.
But if you actually look at what’s happening, your story of peaceful coexistence is a lie by omission. Yes, all of the people of the province want peaceful coexistence, as do all of the people and nations in China. And China is an incredibly peaceful nation - no bombs dropped since 1989, no boats fired on since 1988. The majority of the world understands that peaceful coexistence is only possible after the vast genocidal white supremacist Western empire falls and their military presence is removed from the four corners of the Earth. Taiwan has peaceful coexistence except for that little nagging problem of literally being part of a genocidal empire’s infrastructure for mass murder. I know it’s a little nit to pick, but I’m gonna pick it.
Are you arguing that there is neither America, Canada nor Australia but only British Empire?
By America we will mean the USA. Don’t mix the concepts of country, nation, and state. There is no nation of USians, Canadians, nor Australians. The state of the USA is a breakaway state from essentially all of the Western European empires (except Portugal I guess). Canada and Australia are still part of the Commonwealth. If that’s not neocolonialism, I don’t know what is. Literally Canada and Australia still recognize the British Crown. Canada, the US, and Australia are full of European national people occupying the territory of and displacing the indigenous nations of those countries.
They have never seceded from China.
Because the PRC said that the moment Taiwan does so, there will be war. Taiwan is forced by the PRC to keep the ‘China’ label.
They have had 70 years to secede. They spent 42 of those years murdering everyone who talked about secession, both in Taiwan province and abroad. The PRC didn’t force them to do that. That’s what the Han Chinese local government of the province chose of their own free will.
But still, no other country in the world would tolerate a secessionary movement either. The US wouldn’t accept California seceding. Canada wouldn’t accept Quebec seceding. Mexico didn’t accept Texas seceding. Secession is always met with violence. Doubly so if the territory that is seceding is currently occupied by a geopolitical rival military that spends years talking openly about building a Pacific Kill Chain, Kill Web, and Hellscape infrastructure in the territory, as the US does regarding Taiwan.
How is it of relevance how Quebec handles its affairs? Canada is exerting control over Quebec. The PRC never did over Taiwan. Not now, not ten, not 50 years ago. Never.
This is a favorite line of the imperialist propaganda. The PRC is a government of the nation-state of China. China has included Taiwan as a province for over 400 years, even when it was illegitimately occupied by Japan. Ming China and Qing China are just China. The PRC is just China. China is a continuous concept that is not determined by which government it has.
In pretty much every context you can think of, a secession would cause a civil war.
There was civil war
Yes, but not because of secession, as we’ve established pretty thoroughly.
the PRC tried to conquer Taiwan but failed
This is more equivocation and weasel language to advance imperialist propaganda. The PRC did not try to conquer Taiwan. The PRC attempted to force the KMT to surrender. The KMT were occupying the Chinese province of Taiwan, much like the Texas National Guard and the US National Guard had a stand off, the US National Guard was not trying to conquer Texas, it was attempting to enforce the law and get the Texas National Guard to stand down.
And it’s very convenient to tell the story that the PLA failed to get the KMT to surrender while conveniently leaving out that the US turned the KMT into a protectorate and proxy 6 months after the PLA won civil war. Do you really think the KMT would have been able to even maintain military readiness as an isolated island? Absolutely not. The PLA’s failure was in not being able to get the KMT to surrender before the Americans decided they wanted a proxy in the region to threaten China with.
So there you go. De facto, Taiwan is not part of the PRC
Again, things are part of the PRC, they are part of China. The PRC is the government of China. The parts of the PRC are the parts of the government. The parts of China are the parts of the nation-state, and Taiwan is very much part of the nation-state of China, while not being part of the government of China. These are very distinct things. And the reason that Taiwan is not part of the government of China is literally the force of illegitimate military intervention by an imperialist super power whose goal is the subjugation of China, and who’s mechanism is to carve off territory from China and use it for military violence.
De facto, Taiwan doesn’t even want to be China anymore
Well, the Han Chinese in Taiwan don’t really get to choose to not be Chinese anymore than Washington could choose not be English. If you advocate for relocating the Han Chinese in Taiwan to the mainland and establishing a state for the Austronesian nations to self-govern, that would be legitimate. But that’s not what’s happening. Instead, we have a genocidal military imperialist spending billions on creating a political crisis in a country on the other side of the world to advance its global spanning imperialist ambitions while it maintains the cultural genocide and occupation of many nations.
Austrians are of German origin. Are you arguing there is no Austria but only Germany?
There are three distinct nations in Austria - Germans, Slovenian Slavs, and Croat Slavs. The Germans in Austria became Austrians by the military force of Western imperialists (France, UK, and US). There never would have been distinct identity of “Austrian” without it being forced on them. The Germans in Austria even tried to resist the forced split. So, what we have in Austria is another example of imperialism forcing people to adopt new identities in order to express imperialist dominance over them.
What about the Swiss? Should they be divided by Germany, France and Italy? Belgium
The Swiss proactively chose to form a new nation, not a new state, a new nation, over 700 years ago. Nation, the word, refers to the concept and context of birth. Belgium is the opposite. It is a bi-national state of French and Dutch people. They are incredibly distinct people and they have not merged their nations through a multi-generational process. The French, German, and Italian tribes living in Switzerland physically separated themselves from their nations of birth and then mutually agreed to integrate their tribes into a single tribe, and included everything in that choice from language to cuisine to marriage… everything became a subject of mutual agreement for the establishment of a distinct nation. Had a group if Italians just decided to do this as Italians, they would just be Italians, but by integrating multiple nations, the Swiss created a new nation. This is how nations have come about throughout human history and why we aren’t all just part of the “human nation”.
are you therefore arguing that the PRC should piss off from the regions they’ve annexed in the past and where they enforce Han culture since? Tibet, Shinjang? All the other parts of the PRC where the Han colonised?
Chinese colonization of the region is necessarily a distinct process from European colonization. The European concept of nation-states emerged from their distinct geography which was shot through with many many physical barriers that kept people isolated. This is why Belgium and Austria are different cases than Switzerland. Belgium and Austria are geographically contiguous with their historical forebears and the borders are politically drawn, whereas Switzerland was a physically isolated territory that could hold people as they became a nation.
The geography of China is essentially a huge flat bowl surrounded by impassable barriers. In this context, warring tribes could cross the entire region limited only by their momentum. In Europe, there were natural stopping points where tribes would dominate within their physical boundaries, and thus war-like cultures were a way of maintaining their distinct identities. In the Chinese contexts war was universally devastating.
Thus, the two phenomena developed entirely differently. European culture could afford to be as violent and belligerent as they could be because nature naturally stopped them. Chinese culture discovered that runaway violence would ultimately kill everyone and they needed a different solution - The Civilizational State. Under this model, the regions maintained their own identities, but not their own localized “monopolies” on force. The concept is contradictory in this context. In Switzerland, a monopoly on force means within the natural borders of the Alps. In China, a monopoly on force within multiple groups in the region is just not a monopoly on force but rather regional warlordism.
This is why Tibet is historically a protectorate of China and not a colony or an occupied region. The Chinese state recognizes the existence, history, validity, and culture of Tibet, but it will not permit Tibet to defend itself any longer. Once gunpowder entered the combat theater, Tibet was completely unable to defend itself. In the age of industrial war, Tibet remains completely unable to defend itself. China recognizes that this means the Tibetan territory will be protected by someone other than the Tibetans. The choices are the 600-year genocidal white supremacist monocultural Western Empire, or the Chinese civilizational state. The Chinese state could be just as genocidal and Han supremacist as the Western Empire, but it’s not.
History has demonstrated that this system has served all of the people in the region comparatively well at this point. In Western Imperial holdings, languages disappear, children are tortured and killed for speaking it, laws are created to criminalize being part of the occupied community, and settlers rape and murder without any accountability. Comparatively, Tibet, Xinjiang, and the other autonomous regions within China still maintain their culture, their language, their religion, their traditional practices, their history, their identity, etc. There are certainly tensions, and it would be much better if these tensions were not there and could be resolved more quickly, but unfortunately these tensions exist within the larger context of Western white supremacist genocidal empire and difficult choices are being made daily by everyone who is working to assert sovereignty against that empire and potentially aspire to a day when that empire falls.
There has been a native population with their own governance for most of its history.
The Austronesians of the main island lived on a couple of other islands around the mainland, but their inhabitance did not match 1-to-1 with the borders of the province of Taiwan. I agree with you that there was a country (and a nation) that the indigenous Austronesians of the region comprise, but that county is not Taiwan and that nation is not Taiwanese.
There have been some smaller trading outposts from the mainland Chinese over the course of history, but the Portuguese and Dutch traders actually had more influence on the island than those Chinese traders who carefully avoided conflict with the native population.
Correct, the Han Chinese were not anywhere near as brutal colonizers as the Europeans were. The Dutch in particular hunted the Formosa sika deer nearly to extinction. What that shows, more than anything, is that the Europeans shouldn’t be trusted in any of their positions relative to the region since they’ve been violent psychotic extractivists for 6 centuries and their only motivations are their own personal enrichment and the total subjugation of everyone else.
The claim over the island by the Chinese empire ever only existed on paper until a brief period in the late 19th/early 20th century when they tried to brutally colonize the island
Half truths are the worst kind. The Chinese empire invaded the region specifically to kick out the Europeans. Like, it’s very explicit that the purpose of the invasion was to get rid of the Dutch East India Company. Europeans went out colonizing proactively and committing genocide because their pope said they should. The Ming invaded Formosa to get rid of foreign invaders. That wasn’t in the late 19th century. The Dutch surrendered in 1662. Ming China held Taiwan at that moment. Qing China held Taiwan 20 years later when the Ming loyalists officially surrendered. When that occurred, there was a debate as to whether or not they should maintain occupation of the island. Some argued it wasn’t worth it. But the argument that won day? If we don’t hold, the Europeans will come back, establish their military bases on it, and attack us. Does that sound familiar? Because it’s literally the exact same argument that’s being made 400 years later because the Eurocentric empire is STILL establishing military bases in the region with the intent of attacking the mainland.
The Han Chinese occupation of the island is a relationship of settler colonialism. The Austronesians are the indigenous. The Han Chinese that live in the province today are not entitled to a distinct national self-determination. They are part of the Chinese nation. Taiwan seceding from China would be even less legitimate than the European colonists seceding from England because the colonists were not operating as a 70-year protectorate of a world power on the other side of the world with ZERO legitimate claims or history in the region.
I would LOVE to see to Taiwan decolonized, the place names of the Austronesians reestablished, the nation of Austronesians self-determined and self-governing. But we’re not going to get that by having a bunch of comprador Han Chinese in the province align themselves with the most genocidal military in the world that continues to exterminate the culture of its own indigenous people. It’s only going to happen through successive resolutions of contradiction, starting with the end of the Eurocentric empire’s presence in the entire region, including The Phillipines, Indonesia, Korea, the province of Taiwan, and the Western Pacific ocean. When that happens, and China has organized Taiwan province under it’s centuries-long demonstrated and proven One Country Two Systems approach, then the conditions for addressing the colonial contradiction will emerge and the work can begin. But America ripping the Han Chinese into two countries, one of them a protectorate and a proxy and the other a mortal enemy, is just a continuation of 600 years of brutal European empire building and it needs to stop.
Lol