If you are a founder of Republic of Taiwan, what visions do you have?
If you are a strategist, what’s the realistic way to create the Republic of Taiwan?
I would put in mechanisms to make Marxist, Communist or socialist subversion impossible. Also borrow the Singaporean “no surrender clause”.
I would put in place lifeline mechanism to form some sort of political union with US and Japan, or clauses to authorize government-in-exile to form quickly during wartime.
I would put in place clause to permanently prohibit union with any regime that resides in current day P.R. China. So, regardless of what or how many regimes China may become, Taiwan will stay out of China.
Other terms pertaining to a functional constitutional liberal Democratic state are conventional wisdoms that need no further elaboration
This would be unequivocally unconstitutional if you expect the country to have democracy.
I don’t like Communism either, but hiding things from people makes them ask questions. Communism doesn’t stand on its own in the market of ideas, why give it victim points?
3 Likes
What made you think so? If Canada can designate the Proud Boys as a terrorist organization, then surely Taiwan can designate Marxists Communists and socialists as terrorists and hate crimes.
Because hate speech and violence don’t fall into the realm of free speech.
Every country already has laws against violent overthrow of the government. There does not need to be a special clause for it.
It’s not hate speech to peacefully advocate to change the economic and social system.
Imprisoning someone because they peacefully advocate for and believe in socialism, despite my disagreements is wrong and I will defend their right to express their opinions.
That kind of country would be no better than the People’s Republic of China and I would want no part of it.
2 Likes
- Free beer for everyone.
- Free beer every day with a free cab-ride home thrown in.
1 Like
Violence doesn’t, but hate speech does. You are here every day claiming to hate the CCP. That is hate speech and must be protected. Saying you hate the CCP or saying you hate SEAs is no different.
1 Like
You are misunderstood on the meaning of hate speech.
Your misunderstanding on the definition of hate speech is misrepresentation of my post.
1 Like
How would you define it? I would define it as advocating for the removal of certain entities of society or the belittlement of these said entities. Would you not agree that’s how we approach the subject of the CCP?
1 Like
If you are sons and daughters of liberty beer, that could be arranged. bottom up! 
Many countries ban Communists and Communist symbols.
if Taiwan constitutionally bans Marxist Communists and Socialists, then there’s nothing unconstitutional about the banning.
It’s a matter of defining what constitutes infringement on individual’s right,
and thus,
recognize that Communist Marxist and Socialists doctrines inherently violate discriminate against individuals.
So , they can be automatically banned by default.
1 Like
If I say “I hate Islam” or more specifically “I hate Caholics” is different from saying “I hate Saudis” or “I hate the Polish”. Even saying “I hate Canada”(maybe because of its position on abortion) is different from saying “I hate Canadians”.
That’s the difference between saying “I hate the CCP” and saying “I hate SEAs.” The CCP has an avowed program and a track record- SEAs do not.
anarchist is ok?
Which ones? Names?
Obviously- the question is, should it?
Yes- you would define simply hearing or talking about socialism or communism as forbidden.
They advocate that, certainly. Some countries do ban certain aspects of free speech- Germany with Nazi symbols- other countries don’t.
Other beliefs inherently discriminate against individuals- both the KMT and DPP advocate for taxes, and arresting and imprisoning people who don’t pay them- would they be banned, too?
1 Like
Some mechanism/laws/regulations might need to be enacted, but in the level of laws rather than in the constitution.
Other than official way for precaution, a sketch like this one is as powerful:
John Cleese’s Lenin is really good, not even saying a word.
Found another one
Patrick Steward delivered an excellence acting. But he has too much genuine kindness and love inside him. That renders him unable to imagine and show the core evil radiating from Lenin no matter how much effort Steward put into his acting.
Anarchists are just Marxists in disguise.
I never said imprisonment. Civilized methods can be implemented to “depatform” or “cancel” Marxist Communist and Socialist entities without infringing on individual rights. Maybe with financial sanction they can ask their finanical backers to pay them bitcoins.
National socialists are still socialists thus equally banned.
FIFY