Question for LAW people. (And Poll)

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

I love that last pic!

And your point, zeugmite?

No one takes TI seriously, not even TI. Getting a bunch of kids who have no political opinion to be use as props, not to mention one of the kids has their display on up-side-down.

zeugmite: Showing news stills accomplishes nothing. Everyone knows that even “unbiased” reporting is totally biased. There’s no such thing as an objective viewpoint, try hard as one might. Anyway, I also saw some footage of some guy getting beat up because he was calling the protestors crazy.

cctang: I agree with you that the “status quo” is merely whatever the three sides accept. We shouldn’t play on semantics so much… which is what people with no solid ground for argument tend to play on. Right? Of course!

ac_dropout: I actually WENT to that protest… and no, I don’t think they included pets in the head count. What is your source for this accusation?

The one problem with Taiwanese politics is that the pan-Green and pan-Blue supporters don’t usually show support for each other - even on issues they agree on. For example, that anti-“ASL” protest was organized by the pan-Greens, and people came out not only in support of the cause, but also in support of their local politician, and the party. A majority of pan-Blue supporters also agree that the “ASL” was an exercise in autocracy, but they still won’t march the streets alongside their in-country political rivals.

The ridiculous thing about the “ASL” was the vote-count, “for, against and abstain” in the NPC (or whatever they call that thing) - it was something like 2,000+ FOR, 0 AGAINST, and 3 ABSTAIN. coughriggedcough

[quote=“ac_dropout”]Like most TI arguments, your poll and your questions have no coloration.
:laughing:[/quote]

What do you mean?! Of COURSE they have “coloration” - the letters are gray, and the background is white!

The cops had a count of 500,000 to 750,000
The pan-Green had a count of over a million.

Shawn,

No single event in life, love, or politics should be analyzed on its own merits alone. There’s always context.

I agree with you that many pan-Blues didn’t support the passing of the ASL. How many could support a law passed by a government that doesn’t represent you, which threatens the use of force against you and limits your political options?

So, you ask, why didn’t they march alongside the pan-Greens?

The answer is that although the “pan-Blue” (and I’d argue the entire moderate sector of the political spectrum) might not support the ASL, they’re willing to accept it… by taking into account the entire context. The ASL isn’t just a law promising to use force, it’s also a legal promise that Beijing can not use force until all opportunity for peaceful reunification has expired. It might not be what the pan-Blues “want”, but it’s something the pan-Blues can accept.

It’s a legal guarantee that Beijing won’t launch a sneak attack tomorrow, just because the ROC military is in the midst of a repositioning. It’s a legal guarantee that Beijing won’t launch an economic embargo, as soon as the United States military becomes tied up in Iran, to force even the pan-Blue populace to accept reunification right now.

The Taiwanese would prefer to deal with this issue entirely on their own, just as I’d prefer to never pay income taxes ever again. But neither of these are options. But the vast majority of Taiwanese at least recognize that Beijing’s ASL doesn’t represent an unacceptable threat to their life, prosperity, and future interests.

It’s only the hard-core TI activists who see the ASL as an undue burden, only because it strikes directly at their core goal: the establishment of an independent Taiwan. And for them, I have little sympathy.

On issues of similar national interest significance, you very often see unanimous votes in the US Congress. While there is genuine disagreement on many details of the strait issue as well as the form of the end result, there is a high level of concensus in the PRC on the issue of stopping the immediate threat of TI. The ASL is carefully phrased in a way that satisfies the other concerns within the spectrum of opinion in the PRC, so the voting record on the ASL shouldn’t be surprising at all.

And advice to you: if you want to be taken seriously for your remark about the NPC, which you seem to think very clever, you might want to first look at past NPC voting records. Some of it may be in the news, others in studies published in academic journals.

Typical TI mentality, when a democratic process works agianst your political position, it must have been dirty politics.

Assuming these were the results of NPC on the issue of Supporting TI, I’m sure your attitude would have been “This is the clear indication of the will of the people.”

cctang: Good points you bring up, and admittedly, I’ve never thought of the ASL in the light you just described it. Interesting… but still, China has no rights to Taiwan. They might as well pass ASL on any territory they please!

zeugmite: Yes, there may be unanimous votes in US Congress. Aside from the political machinery involved, and the possible manipulation (think IRAQ… so you’re saying it’s good, eh?) at least in the USA, there is freedom of press and discussion. If people don’t like what the policies the government of the USA pursued… they can protest it, make documentary films, etc. AND still walk the streets without fear of their lives. Can you categorically say that this happens in China?

ac_dropout: Stop attacking the debater, and attack the issue. It seems you are an immature debater. Firstly, I’ve said before that if the people of Taiwan vote in FAVOUR of joining China, so be it! Just as long as there isn’t outside manipulation.

shawn_c, you misunderstand. I’m not saying the US Congresses manipulates its votes to get unanimous results. I’m saying, on certain issues of core national interest, in whichever country you might be in, you get people agreeing to begin with, then you get the “speaking with one voice” effect on top of that, so that what you see in the ASL voting is quite a realistic reflection of mainland opinions, not because people are forced to vote that way.

Okay, I agree with you on that. But dig deeper! Is that MANIPULATED “mainland” opinion, or UN-MANIPULATED “mainland” opinion? And what percentage of Chinese are we talking about here? And what stratum of society?

I’m sure you understand that many Chinese feel China absolutely has “rights” to Taiwan. Your point is really that this feeling is unfair, illegitimate.

The truth is the world’s just patently unfair. But how do we uncoil the unfairness of it all?

Is it fair how Taiwan was conquered and lost originally… is it fair that starting in the early 19th century, opium was forced upon the Chinese as a way of balancing trade? Is it fair that European countries carved out regions of Chinese territory as their own colonies? Is it fair that a Qing government, corrupt and obsessed with only maintaining their own power, could sign away Chinese territory without any pretense of caring what the Chinese people wanted? Was it fair that Japan could launch a war of conquest and claim Taiwan as its own? Is it fair that the United States would interfere in a Chinese civil war, permanently creating a split between the two sides?

Maybe you’ll tell me I should be focusing on the now. Maybe you’ll tell me that I shouldn’t worry about historical injustices… they’re history, they’re not relevant. If that’s the case, maybe I’d tell you that if the PLA military “liberated” Taiwan and forcibly reunified it in the year 2006… by about 2050, the Taiwanese people will be thankful for it. Then, strangely enough, something that you believe to be patently unfair today would’ve become “fair”, again!

Bottom line… you can’t balance out fairness. All nations have an innate desire to act in a good, and noble way. Most human beings do not wake up in the morning deciding that they’ll hurt another human being for no reason, today. Most human beings have an innate desire to behave in a fair way. And yet wars, conflict, and violence still happen… Osama decides to bomb the World Trade Center; George Bush decides to bomb Baghdad… because we’re all ruled by our own perceptions of the world, our own definitions of fairness.

In this sense, Taiwanese nationalists are acting in their own noble way in defending their nation. I want you to understand that Chinese nationalists are also acting in their own noble way, to defend their nation. Unfortunately, it’s not possible that both will succeed. One group will eventually be eliminated from history.

But I’m happy to say that I believe that the Chinese, and the vast majority of the Taiwanese, can find a peaceful solution which all will find acceptable. I can easily see a roadmap to a future, to a happy middle point, in which everyone (except the Taiwanese nationalists) can find a shared sense of fairness.

How do you define “manipulated”?

Are these people who were raised to be patriotic and love their nation, their nationality, and their culture? Absolutely. Are these people who were taught that a stronger China is the only way to protect ourselves from foreign exploitation? Absolutely.

What other sort of manipulation do you think is possible? Think on it, and give me a list of hypotheticals. I can’t even imagine what powerful lie about Taiwan could have been generated by the Communist Party, that could possibly fool a mostly literate nation of 1.3 billion (of which 150 million have internet access, of which tens of millions have been overseas) to a serious degree.

And as far as “percentage” or “stratum”… why not go find out yourself?

bbs.1931-9-18.org/ - Chinese nationalist chat site
chinabbs.com/ - generic domestic Chinese site
www4.bbsland.com/cgi-bin/politics.cgi - overseas Chinese chat site

Who makes this decision (in bold), cctang?

And do you seriously think that Beijing is going to announce to the world, “O.K. everyone. We’ve tried everything. Military force is now necessary.”

A lot of pan-blues may accept this, because they couldn’t give two shits whether or not Taiwan is annexed by China.

[quote] But the vast majority of Taiwanese at least recognize that Beijing’s ASL doesn’t represent an unacceptable threat to their life, prosperity, and future interests.

It’s only the hard-core TI activists who see the ASL as an undue burden, only because it strikes directly at their core goal: the establishment of an independent Taiwan. And for them, I have little sympathy.[/quote]

Do you have any stats to back this up?

Last time I checked, an overwhelming majority feel that the issue of unification should be decided by the 23 million people of Taiwan – not China.

This is pure double-speak drivel.

Let’s get this clear…

The PRC is not “defending” anything. It is AGRESSIVELY pursuing the annexation of another nation. It wishes MORE CONTROL over Taiwan.

Okay, I get you, STOP_Ma, I really do.

(1) You don’t trust the PRC one bit; and
(2) You believe any ultimate strait resolution should be decided by Taiwan only and mainland Chinese don’t have a say

Fine.
I don’t think there is any point in arguing with you on either of these points, because they are just ideology. Since you don’t trust the PRC, nothing the PRC ever says should mean anything to you. You just dismiss it out of hand. You are pretty much deaf on that count. And since you don’t believe mainland Chinese should even have a say, then nothing mainland Chinese could say is going to mean anything to you either.

For most people in Taiwan, even if they understand the ideology behind the same (1) and (2), they themselves are not ideologues and so temper their worldview with the reality on the ground. You, on the other hand, are a pure ideologue, a fundamentalist. So you believe in absolutes. Not only do you believe you are absolutely right, but you also believe others are absolutely wrong. Pan-blues and their supporters and how they act? Wrong! They can’t possibly know what’s good for them. You’ve got the green man’s burden to patronizingly guide them along to what’s good for their own sake.

All I can say is, good luck. This world doesn’t treat ideologues well.

[quote=“zeugmite”]
(1) You don’t trust the PRC one bit; and
(2) You believe any ultimate strait resolution should be decided by Taiwan [/quote]

Nice try at miscommunicating what I have said.

First of all, #2 is not an idea that I communicated above. This “absoluteness” that you attribute to me is misdirected. It should be attributed to the PRC. It is China, afterall that is dealing with “absolutes” here.

Here is an accurate version:

(1) I don’t trust the PRC
(2) I believe the question of whether Taiwan should unify with China should be decided by the Taiwanese people.

This more accurate analysis of my above comments reflects the MAJORITY of Taiwanese people.

Great, even better, add one more to the list

(1) You don’t trust the PRC one bit;
(2) You believe any ultimate strait resolution should be decided by Taiwan only and mainland Chinese don’t have a say;
(3) You think Taiwan is already de jure independent

Whatever you believe the majority ideology of Taiwan to be (and that’s the majority you are talking about), it means next to nothing. Why? Because I can assure you most Taiwanese are not ideologues that cannot compromise, whether they are closer in belief to your ideology or any other ideology.

Because of this, 80% of the Taiwanese still just want the status quo and don’t give a shit for your patronizing designs in their name. That’s the majority I’m talking about.

[quote=“zeugmite”]Great, even better, add one more to the list

(1) You don’t trust the PRC one bit;
(2) You believe any ultimate strait resolution should be decided by Taiwan only and mainland Chinese don’t have a say;
(3) You think Taiwan is already de jure independent[/quote]

You obviously don’t read well. :frowning:

Try improving your comprehension skills and we’ll chat later.

I apologize if you feel my comments are personal attacks. That is not point I’m trying to make.

In all political conflict there situation which exist, but the participant all percieve the situation differently due to background, education, experience, etc. So if the Strait Issue is a glass of water on a table. Some say “It is half full,” some say “It is 7-up,” some say “It H20 in a transparent container which effects the index of refraction” (okay I never say that but I think it sometimes)

You see the vast majority of people on Taiwan don’t support your position. And they don’t percieve the issue the way you do. Which is why I bring up these question which illustrate your innate biases.

For whatever reason you believe the NPC voting results were rigged. But posters like cctang have been giving us first hand sentiments of people on the mainland over the Strait Issue. It seems consistent the NPC would have that result. The will of the mainland populace has manifest itself into law.

I will bring up this bias in an more object voice.

I know when TI use the word “outside” they mean anything from the mainland. To the extent even Taiwan citizens of WSR descent.

But do they ever contemplate that the USA and Japan are also “outside” and they too manipulate the ROC in their interest to the detriment of Taiwan as well.

Japan has taken territory away from Taiwan in terms of EEEZ. USA is try to extort money from Taiwan for an arms package, if Taiwan wish USA to enforce the TRA.

This is what the majority of Taiwan percieve the situation as. This is why the majority of Taiwan doesn’t support TI. Because they don’t see Taiwan as us “Taiwanese/Hoklo” vs “Chinese/WSR”

They see the Japan/USA alliance as coming at a cost, perhaps greater than the cost of what the PRC is offering at this time. That the PRC can be used as a counter balance to the USA and Japan, to forward ROC interest in the world.