Right, and although Germans and Belgians look the same we are not … neither are we the same as the French and Dutch … and for sure we are not the same as the English … looks is not everything
That’s true, but I am more on the positive side that “All birds of the same feathers will flock together”. Whatever temporary hiccup that we may have right now, will very much depends on the future leaderships who may see a different ballgame.
–
yo
Ask the Aborigines! 
[quote=“ac_dropout”]There are Chinese on Taiwan?
That’s news to most green supporters.
I mean most of them think they are US nationals by now.[/quote]
that and/or japanese and/or aborigine
(anything is ok, just NOT chinese, thank you )
[quote=“almondbiscuit”][quote=“beebee”][quote=“ac_dropout”]There are Chinese on Taiwan?
That’s news to most green supporters.
I mean most of them think they are US nationals by now.[/quote]
To the Americans, Taiwanese is just another Chinese, nothing more, nothing less.
Physically, culturally, linguistically, pyschologically, etc whatever you named it, … all of them are still Chinese.
Any trademark that they are different??
–[/quote]
(collective) sociopolitical identity is the most fundamental factor for nation state identity. regardless of ethnicity, culture, etc - which may or may not matter. hence ethnicity/culture is not decisive and can’t be used to disregard countries with solid national identities/borders/political frameworks such as singapore, canada, the USA, australia.
well put.[/quote]
exactly. YOu may resemble your brother a LOT, but still not only want to be considered on a separate basis, but also NOT want to live in the same household
Having said that, supposedly it’s still a shade better having the feud of 2 brothers instead of the feud between 2 enemies. As long there’s some form of statue quo (of which the majority are in favor), there may be sometimes in future, a new set of talented leaders who are willing to mitigate the feud from a broader angle. CSB is definitely a goner and Ma a doubtful starter with the current situation. Maybe 10-30 years from now…maybe.
Nothing new obviously but as long as it’s not a lost hope, it opt to be accentuated.
–
Having said that, supposedly it’s still a shade better having the feud of 2 brothers instead of the feud between 2 enemies. As long there’s some form of statue quo (of which the majority are in favor), there may be sometimes in future, a new set of talented leaders who are willing to mitigate the feud from a broader angle. CSB is definitely a goner and Ma a doubtful starter with the current situation. Maybe 10-30 years from now…maybe.
Nothing new obviously but as long as it’s not a lost hope, it opt to be accentuated.
–[/quote]
yes its a feud between big brother China and little brother, Little China, except that Little China is a bit tired of being LIttle China and would rather be BIG TAiwan now.
Still as iv said before. China should be pragmatic and just let TAiwan call itself what it will. Afterall its only a small island , and they cant sail it away somewhere else? And it only has a small percentage of the entire population of China. Taiwan and China has to work together in the new millenium (as they already have started)
But greens have 2 fundimental problems.
-
There the whole other part of Taiwan’s democracy that doesn’t agree to this and will use the democratic system on Taiwan to prevent it from happening.
-
There is the whole mainland government that is also against the green TI solution.
Can the greens survive a two front war that they are proposing to fight?
Wouldn’t it just be easier for greens to emigrate?
But greens have 2 fundimental problems.
-
There the whole other part of Taiwan’s democracy that doesn’t agree to this and will use the democratic system on Taiwan to prevent it from happening.
-
There is the whole mainland government that is also against the green TI solution.
Can the greens survive a two front war that they are proposing to fight?
Wouldn’t it just be easier for greens to emigrate?[/quote]
maybe the greens are planning to split taiwan into North and South Taiwan???
thats why they are planning on relocating the capital?? what a harebrained idea i think
I suppose they’ll be renaming “Taipei” to “Daibak” or somthing soon. I wonder will “Chung Ho” become “D’yong Haw”.
“Yong Ho” should just have “u” added.
‘Zhong Ho’ should add ‘old’. And probably knock off ‘Zhong’.
[quote=“tommy525”]
maybe the greens are planning to split taiwan into North and South Taiwan???
thats why they are planning on relocating the capital?? what a harebrained idea i think[/quote]
I have a better idea. We should divide Taiwan into Top and Bottom. The Greens can have all of Taiwan 30,000 feet above sea level. The Blues can have all of Taiwan below that point.
[quote=“ac_dropout”][quote=“tommy525”]
maybe the greens are planning to split taiwan into North and South Taiwan???
thats why they are planning on relocating the capital?? what a harebrained idea i think[/quote]
I have a better idea. We should divide Taiwan into Top and Bottom. The Greens can have all of Taiwan 30,000 feet above sea level. The Blues can have all of Taiwan below that point.[/quote]
Man, your brain is hay-wired … the pan-blues can move to China and become pan-purple … than all well meaning people can have a peaceful, fruitful stay and existence (life) on Taiwan …
But anyways, this is so off-topic …
The DPP should keep everything the way it is and just remove the statue … if there would have been a ‘Hitler’ statue left in behind in Belgium after WWII, with a park, we would just remove the statue not demolish the park … especially not when it’s landmark function for foreign tourists and locals …
How about the Greens can have the part of Taiwan 30,000 feet below sea level? 
Imagine the French government tearing down the Arc de Triomphe because Napoleon was a brutal dictator.
Long live the green cultural revolution. The slogans that Mick posted on the first page of this post (from TP Times) are gems.
forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 265#698265
The thing about removing symbols of imperialism is: why doesn’t CSB start with the office he sits in? It was built by Japan as the seat of the colonial government in Taiwan.
I’ve added a poll about the wall to a separate thread: [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/cks-memorials-wall-what-should-be-done/36177/1 Memorial’s wall – what should be done?[/url].
[quote=“Lord Lucan”]I suppose they’ll be renaming “Taipei” to “Daibak” or somthing soon. I wonder will “Zhonghe” become “D’yong Haw”.
“Yong Ho” should just have “u” added.[/quote]
daibak? haha correct tho in taiwanese, then TEONG HO, and YING HO to be correct on the other two.
[quote=“tommy525”][quote=“Lord Lucan”]I suppose they’ll be renaming “Taipei” to “Daibak” or somthing soon. I wonder will “Zhonghe” become “D’yong Haw”.
“Yong Ho” should just have “u” added.[/quote]
daibak? haha correct tho in Taiwanese, then TEONG HO, and YING HO to be correct on the other two.[/quote]
How about renaming all place names to what they were before the Qing Government started changing them between 1875 and 1885, and the subsequent Japanese renaming?
Hsinchu -> Teuk Cham
Taoyuan -> To-a-hung
Dadaocheng -> Twatutia
Wanhua -> Banka
Chungli -> Tiong Liek
Puli -> Polisia
Hualien -> Chokeday
Chiayi -> Kagee
Kaohsiung -> Takow
Lanyu -> Botel Tobago
Then making Tainan the capital again and calling it Taiwanfoo!
Seems like every time a new government asserts control (Qing, Japanese, KMT, DPP) they have to change names.