Except the government changed a few times under bloody revolutions.
There are several good new books out about Xinjiang. Caves has one, itâs Christian Tylerâs âWild West China: The Taming of Xinjiang.â
In his analysis, which I think is basically right, the region we call âXinjiangâ has historically either been dominated by outside powers, or else not governed much except at the very local level. Between the Manchu annexation and the Peopleâs Republic it waxed and waned between being a KMT-allied warlord state, a would-be Soviet Republic, and an independent nation.
The largest ethnic group there is the Uighurs. To call them âChineseâ in the ethnic sense is a political act. It makes no anthropological sense, since they are most closely related to the other Turkic groups in Central Asia. Almost all Uighurs hate the Chinese (the âHanâ as weâre supposed to call them now). The Chinese know this and donât careâthey know they have superior political strength. The Uighur are divided among themselves, and for that matter must also calculate what stance to take toward several other minority nationalities in the region.
Thank you for proving my point. Ive always maintained as do many China experts that imperial dynasty is the only thing keeping the conquered nations inside the PRC under Beijings flag, but they would soon become independent under a democratic system. If Beijing adopted the universal human right to self determination, it would kill their mythical claim to Taiwan.
By the way, that so-called âinvasion of the 8 allied armiesâ of 1901 that Beijing lies to its people about wasnt an invasion at all. Anyone who knows anything about history is not so easily fooled.
Why, are you fresh out and need more?
Taichungmafia,
You have a strange view of âdemocracy.â Basically, you are denying any central government the right to hold sovereignty.
So the USA civil war, Hawaii independence, PR independence, should not have been interfered with by the USA federal government. Hence, the USA should have stayed collapsed shortly after the Revolution when the 13 states demanded state government be stronger than the federal government. Quite a strange view of the world.
So why do you dismiss the history of Imperial China? It obviously happened and is the basis of the current foreign policy. Do you intend to be a renowned China revisionist and spout nonsense about the Aryans settling in China first?
Compared to the bullshit you spout around here, that would sound like a reasonable statement 
Donât you have to go back to the hive once in a while to commune with the other drones or have political study sessions from your red book?
,
[quote]You have a strange view of âdemocracy.â Basically, you are denying any central government the right to hold sovereignty[/quote].
No, its you that has a strange view of democracy. Basically, youre denying any conquered nation the right to regain their independence or for nations like Taiwan who are already independent the right to keep it. Democracy involves the right to self-determination.
Apples and oranges and unworthy of a reply.
China doesnt tell truth of its history as your previous post illustrated and thats my beef. Lucky for you though, I dont see Beijing democratizing anytime soon, so they can keep their current borders and try to expand them to include Taiwan.
You know not my race, gender or nationality and as Ive read in your previous posts its you that sinks to this gutter-level tactic of race when you know youve lost the argument or you just dont know what youre talking about. Ill give you a chance to recant.
Incorrect.
Taiwan is not independent. Proof: Since the end of WWII, no major world nations have recognized Taiwan as a sovereign independent country ⌠however, due to the world communityâs fervent anti-communist leanings, for some twenty years after WWII, many nations did in fact recognize the (government in exile) of the Republic of China as âthe legal government of Chinaâ ⌠but not as âthe legal government of Taiwanâ ⌠so you are seriously confused on this issue.
Also, the fact that Taiwan has a very strong Taiwan Independence movement proves the fact that Taiwan is not indepedent. For examples (since you seem so confused on the issue of what an independent nation is ⌠) Does Singapore have a vibrant âindependence movementâ? How about Australia? New Zealand? And why these countries donât have strong independence movements, you ask?? Because they are already sovereign independent nations ⌠case closed. Taiwan is not independent. [quote=âTaichungmafiaâ]Democracy involves the right to self-determination.[/quote]
Incorrect.
Proof: Do the aborigines in Taiwan have the right to independence? The Taiwan government says no ⌠How about the North Island of New Zealand? How about Hokkaido in Japan? How about Alaska? ⌠oh the examples are too numerous to mention ⌠but they all point to one obvious fact â Democracy does not necessarily involve the right to self-determination.
hsiadogah,
Haha unlike you country bumpkins pan-green supporters that read propaganda by the firefly light and hamsters generating electricity for your I-Pod to surf the internet. We have Wi-Fi and electricity for our fearless leader to transmit their enlighten messages to us. 
Taichungmafia,
I donât deny them their right to be dissidents. I am merely pointing out to various events in history where political conflicts like this are only resolved via military conflict. The state which is dissenting must be able to demonstrate that it can be militarily independent before it can be political independent.
Taiwan, Hawaii, Xinjiang, Tibet, Puerto Rico, California, Texas, the Southern States of the USA all failed in the military front. Hence the political aspect of their cause falls on deaf ears internationally.
I reckon the voices come through loud and clear without the need for technology :loco:
[quote=âsquealer the pigâ]
Taiwan, Hawaii, Xinjiang, Tibet, Puerto Rico, California, Texas, the Southern States of the USA all failed in the military front. Hence the political aspect of their cause falls on deaf ears internationally.[/quote]
I note you omitted East Timor from that list, not to mention all the ex-Soviet satellites.
hsiadogah,
With the aid of psychic friends all is possible.
Only if you believe the central government of PRC is currently as weak as the former USSR or Indonesia central government.
Looks like East Timor is going to lose to Australia over the oil rights in the Timor Sea. Oh well.
[quote=âac_squealerâ]
Looks like East Timor is going to lose to Australia over the oil rights in the Timor Sea. Oh well.[/quote]Try not to be too upset over that 
Why would I be upset? It just proves Australia had no interest in the East Timor human right issue when they sent in their armed forces to help liberate the East Timorians. It was just ensure that no one region could have enough political clout to challenge their claim to the entire oil reserve in the Timor Seas.
So the question then becomes what is the ulterior motive for USA âunwaveringâ support of TI these days? Another pawn in US-Sino relationships.
Taiwan is an independent state according to the terms of the Montevideo Convention of 1933. Its also not subordinate to any other national government. Taiwan was ceded to Japan in perputuity in 1895 by treaty and no such treaty since has given Taiwan to China. In strictly legal terms, Taiwan is an independent state even if most countries dont recognize it.
What you are referring to is changing the official title of the nation. The two major parties in Taiwan recognize that Taiwan is a sovereign nation.
Legally, they would if they could prove they were independent states prior to European and Asian settlement.
The difference in all this is that Tibetan and East Turkestan nationals are not allowed to enjoy the basic human right to self determination that the other states you mentioned enjoy. Again, this would change if PRChina becomes democratic.
Taichungmafia,
How would it change if the system were democratic? PRC would send their version of the CIA to kill and imprison any dissident like the USA did to all the dissidents in the land we conquered.
We flooded Hawaii with Mainlanders. We killed or imprisoned everyone who would have been an effective PR independence leader. We flooded California and Texas with settlers.
The USA for the longest time didnât give women, Blacks, nor Chinese a right to vote in the USA.
You make it sound as if democracy is a process that cannot be tampered with nor weighted against dissidents and minority groups. How na
speaking of puerto rico, you guys DO realize that they hold votes there every now and then to decide whether they should be independent, right? people who are so against self determination bringing up puerto rico is a bad idea. 
so by your proof, communist china was not recognized by the un or most world nations in the 50âs. therefore, communist china was not a country independent of the roc during that time. what exactly are you trying to prove with this argument again?
Flipper,
PR referendum would be similar to TI, if and only if, you let the PRC send in agents to assassinate and imprison all TI leadership for the next 50 years, then hold a TI referendum.
I assume you will find the results to be quite surprising how many more people might vote against TI at that point.
Anyways last time Taiwan held a referendum it was an utter failure, so what make Taichungmafia so confident if the PRC held these mini-referendum for every province and wannabe warlord in the region that China would fall apart.
uh, 228. the mainlanders already assassinated enough people, donât you think?
Flipper,
I think you wanted to refer to the period known as âwhite terror.â 228 is ROCâs Tiananmen now. But notice how the older generation are all stauch KMT supporter still.
It is a political reality that capital punishment is one of the best ways to deter criminals, dissenters, and other would be enemies of the state.