Just so you know, vast majority of the people out there vote based on party lines. No seriously, that’s how most people vote. This is based on gov. classes I taken in college, and studies show people vote their party line in the US and the same appears to be true in Taiwan too. Meaning people who are blue are going to vote blue, and people who vote green are going to vote green. Either parties will not concentrate their efforts on them, but they concentrate their efforts on swing voters.
But anyways having seen a bunch of elections it just feels futile. It’s always choosing between piss and shit.
As long as Taiwan don’t declare independence and stops trying to restrict trade with China (more Taiwanese than you realize depend on this, we’re talking about jobs here), I don’t care who’s in office.
Most democracies seem to have resulted in a choice between piss and shit. Or enlighten me as to which current democracy doesn’t fall into this comparison?
Which implies the trade arrangement is not working. In years past, that was my beef with the Sunflower Movement and their opposition to anything with China. I think such a trade arrangement, even with China, is a good thing, if it works properly. Because that is what such arrangements ideally do: ensure trade remains open even with political-jackass leaders, except in the most exceptional circumstances when governments can initiate what is called “safeguard measures”–Tsai did her PhD on such measures.
And that dispute resolution chapters in such arrangements often mean that any disagreement is adjudicated fairly, and without too much political pressure.
So not against trade agreements or the one with China, but if China blocks products as you mention, it highlights the inefficiency or the weakness of the arrangement that was negotiated because blocking products from certain covered sectors would be offside the arrangement, no?
How is joining a communist dictatorship that many of its most successful businessmen are actively trying to flee even remotely a good idea if you are concerned about what’s best for Taiwan’s economy?
China became more developed mainly in spite of the communist party not because of it. More driven by western economies being willing to invest in an opening up China. If China were to become a democratic, open economy then you could make an argument that joining China is better than status quo or independence
Taiwan can’t stand alone, it lacks the industry or military to do so. If you are confined to the market in Taiwan you might be able to support yourself and maybe a handful of people… but Taiwan became successful because they are dependent on outside for work or materials.
I’d much prefer Taiwan to join the United States but we know this is extremely unlikely to happen, and if it happens it would place Taiwan in mortal danger, as this will actually be worse than Taiwan independence, China will attack regardless.
Or Taiwan can go back to being a part of Japan. But independence to Taiwan places trade barriers which only hurts Taiwan.
I think this is why nobody, even the most hardcore independence supporters, won’t push the issue. Right now Taiwan’s literally playing both sides and this can get dangerous fast.
Democracy is strange. We all like to talk about it especially when contrasting to China etc. but yet I don’t think anyone is enamored with their current leaders and with no exciting leaders waiting in the wings? While democracy is the buzzword, together with independence, most countries seem content and indeed find it necessary to follow a superpowers directions which just serves to make a mockery of those two concepts, democracy and independence?
And how is dictatorship better? The choice is not between the real world democracy and ideal dictatorship. It’s between real world democracy and real world dictatorship. The choice is simple.
The fact alone that you can state this opinion without fear of being put into prison or worse is an indicator that we’re in fact not living in a dictatorship…
Democracy doesn’t mean that one has to be fully content with the ruling party. It means that the power of those in lead is not unlimited (i.e. they are kept in place by the opposition and the courts). And it means that even if one’s opinion opposes that of the ruling party, one is still free to publicly state that opinion without repercussions (well, within limits when it comes to bringing harm to others).
A dictatorship would have neither of those - if the ruling forces decide that you’re an “enemy”, you cab disappear without ever seeing a lawyer or a neutral judge.
Not really, it just means that the government doesnt view a person’s ramblings as a threat. Say something that they don’t agree with and you can end up on watchlists even in democracies.
Why are you arguing this point in such an abstract manner?
The thread you are posting in is about “Taiwan’s 2024 Presidential Election.” If you have anything specific to say about this topic, please contribute. And if you prefer to discuss the democracy / dictatorship / human agency questions at an abstract level, please go ahead and start your own thread on it in the General Discussion forum.
How is Taiwan not already independent? If it’s not independent then it must already be ruled from elsewhere. Where is Taiwan ruled from pray tell? Your beloved China?
And do trade or bank or send funds, or be friendly with someone your government doesn’t agree with, and one could easily end up on the street or in prison.