If TI can only be achieved through ethnic stife, by pandering to racist elements in Taiwan, and a possible war with the PRC, want kind of nightmare is this dream suppose to be?
Maybe waiguoren like watching Taiwanese beat each other like hooligans at a football match. But to equate that behavior with “democracy” and “noble” is truly rubbish.
Intelligence is wasted when it is use to argue on the blue side of the equation? Is that to imply the green side of a equation is a “force multiplier” to intelligence?
Perhaps one shouldn’t degrade why some intelligent people side with the Blue, and perhaps start asking themselves why so many intelligent people have come to same conclusion of siding with the Blue recently?
Roger C. S. Lin has resubmitted the case into the USA court system in November, 2008. The appeals don’t look very promising, it rest on the US Government agreeing that it misunderstood everything about Dr. Lin’s case.
His orginal case hinged on some strange premise if a specific international law on succession for a particular case didn’t exist can a succession of government actually occur. That’s like saying before the establishment of anthropology, could societies actually form. But that’s just my silly opinion.
Although I’m curious on how you come to the conclusion “Taiwan should belong to the Taiwanese” if you agree with Dr. Lin’s premise that “Taiwan has always belonged to USA after WWII” argument.
I don’t think once ROC administered territory is claimed by the USA, it will have any chance at de jure independence. It will be treated like a 2nd class terrority, like slum island, Guam.
Glad to see you found an English translation of the ROC map after all these years.
If TI can only be achieved through ethnic stife, by pandering to racist elements in Taiwan, and a possible war with the PRC, want kind of nightmare is this dream suppose to be?[/quote]
If Chinese unification can only be achieved through ethnic strife, by pandering to authoritarian elements in China and a war between China and Taiwan, what kind of a nightmare is that supposed to be?
The simple answer is that just as Taiwan can peacefully unify, China could peacefully recognise independence. Just because the Chinese bully may not do the latter does not mean that Taiwan should be forced to do the former.
Unless of course you think that the current constitutional situation can be sustained, which I think is wishful thinking. Eventually one generation will say that it’s stupid to have a constitution that is meaningless to them (claiming China, Mongolia, etc) and want to overhaul it.
Many Taiwanese don’t feel that way about the Strait Issue, that’s why they support Status Quo.
Both sides have already agreed not to talk about the sovereignty issue of Taiwan.
If you follow the news, you’ll note the diplomatic fight is now about the WHO presentation for ROC, in return for USA scaling back arms sales to ROC.
I mean you can be like the clueless DPP and keep talking about the perpetual crisis to Taiwan, which is really code for the death of TI movement, but reality is already moving in another direction.
[quote=“mr_boogie”]Well, one can also dispute that the ROC invaded Taiwan, and therefore, it is part of it’s territory, just like what Indonesia did with East Timor.
That will probably give more legal claim to the ROC over Taiwan…[/quote]
Who tried proving Taiwan is still part of Japan?[/quote]
Many of the ex-KMT members that form the Taiwan Solidarity Union party in Taiwan are actually of Japanese descent non-Hoklo Taiwanese (This was part of the strategy to make the KMT an inclusive party when it was 1 party gov’t in Taiwan). Their leadership were hand picked by LTH for having similar sympathies like himself towards Japan. Constant visits to to Yasukuni Shrine by their member and spiritual leader highlight their Japanese bloodline, since like Taiwan, Japanese citizenship or ethnicity is strongly related to bloodline.
Achieving Taiwan Independence by any means neccessary is just political code on Taiwan to really state it is okay to be proud to be Japanese and to move Taiwan to be within Japan’s sphere of influence in the region.
Because of the fact there are very few Taiwanese of Japanese descent (CKS gave those with loyalty to Japan an option of peacefully leaving in 1945), and even less openly proud of their Japanese heritage, which would be in contradiction to Hoklo nationalism movement promoted by the DPP, the TSU have of course lost all their seats in the LY and are currently in default, no more effective than their blue counter part known as the Patriot Association of Taiwan. This lost of popularity is strongly link to LTH behavior of being more and more pro-Japan in recent years.
Roger Lin probably has similar sympathies towards Japan like LTH, but he at least realizes Japan is going to fall into PRC sphere of influence soon or later, given their satellite state mentality, and has opted to try and convince people that USA, a natural competitor to PRC sphere of influence in the region, is sovereign over Taiwan. His docket was tossed out in his first attempt, now they are in the appeals process, which also looks like it is going to lose as well. In my opinion his legal team is not large enough to actually win the case, and could be setting a precedent of Taiwan never being able to pursue this legal avenue again.
Bringing Taiwan into Japan’s sphere of influence and saying that these people are making an argment that Taiwan is a part of Japan are not one and the same. Taiwan is not part of Japan, NOR is it part of China. However, being closely alligned with Japan and the USA is FAR PREFERABLE to close alignment with China, which is bound to implode sooner or later.
Perhaps you should visit the US more often, many feel the US is imploding now.
Your arugrment is not really pragmatic if USA become less influentianl in the region, why remain with it sphere of influence. It would be like ex-Soviet states remaining loyal to Russia out of idealogy.
What many TI supporters fail to recognize due to their idealogy, is the shifts in balance of power will occur with PRC and USA. To assume the balance of power will always be in USA favor is not pragmatic for Taiwan.
That’s how most Taiwanese feel about the situation.
Perhaps you should visit the US more often, many feel the US is imploding now.
Your arugrment is not really pragmatic if USA become less influentianl in the region, why remain with it sphere of influence. It would be like ex-Soviet states remaining loyal to Russia out of idealogy.
What many TI supporters fail to recognize due to their idealogy, is the shifts in balance of power will occur with PRC and USA. To assume the balance of power will always be in USA favor is not pragmatic for Taiwan.
That’s how most Taiwanese feel about the situation.[/quote]
Funny how you claim to speak for most Taiwanese.
The US has had difficulties before - it will rebound.
China’s growth and the way it is going about its development is far from sustainable. They are destroying their environment, they have massive inequity of wealth like few others, a lack of transparency that is troubling and a political system that will not be able to maintain itself over the long haul. I am FAR from convinced that the PRC as it operates now will be viable over the long haul.
[quote]It is such a shame that someone started a topic about an issue that is very serious and it is then followed by a bunch of idiotic comments. I really hope people don’t rely on the Taiwan Politics forum for informing themselves about Taiwan Politics.
[/quote] I’m going to be drug to my death bed laughing at this.
The second sentence makes leaps and bounds of sense.
The precursor will be addressed as ‘dear little Pollyanna’.
Dear little Pollyanna;
Let me give you a small measure of how real life works - nothing goads an alcoholic into a continuing diatribe like people like you.
As much as know ac has his head where the sun don’t shine re culture economics and politics he has enough common sense to not joust a
sot.
Boy (if you are a boy) you ought to hear my idiotic comments about Abrahamic religion and the ongoing ruination of mankind.
It’s the “shame” that makes me puke.
I’m days away from my 60th year. My father got cancer when he was 60 and died at 61.
When I have both feet in the grave I wiil be laughing at people like you dear little Pollyanna.
[quote=“Elegua”][quote=“ac_dropout”]I don’t think government needs to “steal” property it’s called eminent domain, compulsory purchase, resumption/compulsory acquisition, expropriation.
The government has a right to take property from citizens with proper compensation without the consent of the owner. You can argue what is proper compensation, but doesn’t diminish the fact the government has the authority to do this.
Not many people would try to argue land redistribution after WWII was a bad policy. On the contrary most scholars, felt it was integral for the economic explosion that occur after WWII in Taiwan.
I’m not comparing land redistribution to slavery. I’m comparing the liberation of Taiwan’s tenant farmers from the few land owners under Japanese occupation to the liberation of Black slaves in the America South.
Particularly lincolnunit’s sentiments towards the KMT is similar to White Southern American views towards the Republican Party for freeing the slaves (aka. Southern Democrats). White Southerns hated Republican led Reconstruction of the South after the US civil war. Just as land owners during Japanese occupation hated the KMT for land redistribution. In both cases, neither group saw the benefits that their personal loss leading to the greater good for the nation.[/quote]
Not true. Most people in the south generally feel that land reform was a positive thing overall and good for development of the country. After all, they got money, (if not exactly a fair price), and most invested the funds received in some kind of business or light industry whereas their like across the straits merely got a bullet. As you might know, most in the south were tenent farmers, not landowners - so why would the south be so, "green’ then? The fly in the ointment came with how the KMT used local institutions like the Nong Hui, Yu Hui and the sugar plantations as political patronage and the general levels of corruption. I couldn’t be bothered to dredge up the studies, but this is what the economic research was saying.[/quote]
If land was owned by someone before WW2 (with deed), then used by the Japanese in WW2, then taken by the KMT Govt. in the aftermath of the war with no compensation given, what would be the status now?
[quote]7.The return of confiscated land during the Japanese occupying period to pleading civilians
There is a law for solving the problem currently. After discussing with M.O.F and other organizations, we came out these guidelines. Municipality or county/city government should check the registration of the land pleaded by civilians. If any deed or notification from the past can be presented to prove the estate was confiscated by Japanese authority without any compensation during the Japanese occupying period, the local government should report to M.O.I and attach the evidential document. After the meeting of related institutes and approval from Executive Yuan, the land will be returned to the original owners.[/quote]
EDIT: BTW, the last 3 posts (and some mid thread posts) are waaayyy off topic and really deserve their own thread about land appropriation-because there’s a gap/lack there. If any keen moderator wishes to oblige, it would be good, cheers.