Invading Taiwan without damaging the things that make it valuable seems tough.
post
Alternative headline:
China's authoritarian leader Xi Jinping reiterates intent to subjugate neighboring country Taiwan in New Year's Eve speech.
It's not a neighbouring country, it's the same country. Ask Taiwan.
Okay, I looked at what the current President of Taiwan has to say. He says this:
Taiwan is already a sovereign, independent country called the Republic of China.
That's not the same as the PRC.
archive.is seems to be down right now.
The People's Republic of China and the Republic of China are two different governments that both claim sovereignty over mainland China and Taiwan.
They both want to unite China, but only one of them is in the position to do it.
Internal to Taiwan, there are parties that support reunification and support independence (opposing views), but Taiwan has not yet reneged on its claim of mainland China.
Their president reneged it like 30+ years ago but that doesn't mean much because it's basically baked into their constitution. Changing the constitution to reflect their real borders would require triggering a vote and a bunch of formal processes that would absolutely instigate a conflict with the PRC.
Nobody wants that, including the voting population. Thus you see a milquetoast shuffling between independence and reunification parties in order to maintain the status quo (independence for all practical purposes) without being too radical for Beijing. In terms of polling:
- 48.9% are pro-[eventual]-independence
- 11.8% are pro-unification
- 26.9% want status quo
And when forced out of status quo, independence support jumps to out 60%. But for now they're caught in a Catch-22 that allows the PRC to spit out this propaganda that people gobble up.
As @stickly@lemmy.world pointed out, polling shows that Taiwanese people mostly want the status quo (de facto independence of Taiwan from the PRC) or they lean towards formally declaring independence.
As for Taiwan claiming sovereignty over China, maybe that is still in their constitution, I don't know. But I'm pretty sure modern Taiwanese leaders are not asserting this claim. Instead they seek to preserve the status quo, where Taiwan is de facto independent.
Yes, it is imperialism. Also, China has an authoritarian state controlled by a privileged ruling class and is therefore far-right.
Was just about to say the same.
Authoritarian state-capitalism is not a leftist ideology.
What do you mean? 99.99% of the chinese people are charing 0.000001% of their countrie's wealth like true communists.
/s
Could you please provide us with some data regarding wealth inequality between citizens and politicians in China vs, say, the USA for comparison?
Since China carefully controls access to information, that's functionally impossible but traditionally corruption by party officials in China was notorious and wide spread. China's only recently been able to tackle it, partially thru advances in technology, but the true extent of their success is difficult to gauge. Critics have also argued that eliminating rivals and ensuring loyalty was the true purpose of anti-coruption efforts. It's suspected that Xi Jinping's extended family has amassed a hidden fortune of around a Billion Dollars.
I wonder how many people living in Taiwan were alive back when China controlled it. Probably 90% + of the population has never known anything but independent Taiwan
100%, because Taiwan was in the Japanese Empire from 1895 to 1945, and was pretty much independent from 1945 to the KMT arrival in 1948.
Since when does an "independent Taiwan" exist?
They call themselves the "true" China to this day.
Did they declare that tho? I thought they viewed themselves as the legitimate government of all China.
Lol calling China Leftist isn't quite the thing. They are technically "communist" but no more so than the National Socialist German Workers' Party was socialist.
Yeah, and no wonder why hardline Maoists hate Mainland China for what it is now, completely deviant from Maoism and becoming the very enemy they tried to destroy.
China is a socialist country, and a developing country as well. China belongs to the Third World. Consistently following Chairman Mao’s teachings, the Chinese Government and people firmly support all oppressed peoples and oppressed nations in their struggle to win or defend national independence, develop the national economy and oppose colonialism, imperialism and hegemonism. This is our bounden internationalist duty. China is not a superpower, nor will she ever seek to be one.
What is a superpower? A superpower is an imperialist country which everywhere subjects other countries to its aggression, interference, control, subversion or plunder and strives for world hegemony. If capitalism is restored in a big socialist country, it will inevitably become a superpower. The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, which has been carried out in China in recent years, and the campaign of criticizing Lin Piao and Confucius now under way throughout China, are both aimed at preventing capitalist restoration and ensuring that socialist China will never change her colour and will always stand by the oppressed peoples and oppressed nations.
If one day China should change her colour and turn into a superpower, if she too should play the tyrant in the world, and everywhere subject others to her bullying, aggression and exploitation, the people of the world should identify her as social-imperialism, expose it, oppose it and work together with the Chinese people to overthrow it.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/deng-xiaoping/1974/04/10.htm
Also, fuck the 996 System.
China isn't technically communist. The Communist Party of China is technically communist in ideology. They have implemented a type of a mixed state that has both socialist and capitalist parts, decently described by the term - socialist market economy. Or socialism with Chinese characteristics as it's been called in the past. Why socialism? Because the socialist part controls the capitalist part of the economy. Why socialist? Because it's controlled by the CPC/CCP which has over 100M members and growing, which means the wider society is decently represented within the party that controls the state.
A horse can call itself a duck, but that doesn't make it a duck; it's still a horse.
Likewise, a country that calls itself communist while practicing capitalism under a hierarchical ruling party isn't communist. Even if every member of the CCP had equal say in the country's policies and direction, 8% of the total population is far from representing the working class, let alone being led by them.
They're not communist, correct. They're capitalist.
8% of the total population is far from representing the working class, let alone being led by them.
Yup, it can and it should be much larger. I saw a chart showing membership growth of 2-3% per year. That said even at the present numbers it means every third family or so has a party member.
Again, China isn't calling itself communist. And I don't think they're. That said capital is subordinate to state control, which is subordinate to an org that most people can participate in, so personally I grant them the socialist (market economy) label that they tend to use. But I do understand why not everyone does.
To be clear, if you're not communist, it doesn't mean you're capitalist. There's a lot in between and it's often a matter of degree of one thing or another. Feudalism didn't turn into capitalism the moment the fist capitalist firm formed. It transitioned to capitalism as more and more production became capitalist, at some point becoming the dominant mode of production.
That said even at the present numbers it means every third family or so has a party member.
This is assuming an even distrubution. I have seen no reason to believe this. Certain segments of society are likely far more represented, which means the others are far less represented.
You mean like the parts that weren’t Mandarin Han Chinese decent?
Yeah it’s impossible to ignore what The CCP has done to vulnerable populations that they have decided need to be assimilated into their idea of a dominant culture.
socialism with Chinese characteristics
It's literally the same functional mechanics as free market capitalization EXCEPT that the state owns a part of every company. The people don't. The state does. And only uses it for authoritarian control, which is the Chinese characteristic. China is functionally a capitalist market with state owned companies.
If China controlled the 3rd party companies in the country then maybe it could be construed as socialist but they own nothing about Apple or NVidia yet billions of dollars flow through them. China is an open market that uses subsidies to offset poor management in those companies. Basically the same thing America did to failing companies in 2008 (looking at you GM).
China has a large fully state-owned sector which tends to operate key industries. They also have outsized control over private firms because the banks doling out capital are state-owned. It's how they can effectively direct the private sector to build EVs, chips or whatever other strategic commodity is desired, in addition to having partial ownership in large private firms. Yes Apple and NVIDIA aren't state-owned. You can read about the state owned sector and how it affects the economy. The structure is very differrnt than the US today. It resembles somewhat FDR's US in the 1940s but with even more state control and direction.
Nice deflection, as all discussion of economic policy is nothing more. Authoritarianism (coercion through power) is right wing by definition.
Isn't any democratic structure performing coercion through power on people who comprise the minority opinion, by doing what the majority decides?
Authoritarianism (and all Right Wing politics) is about the minority performing coercion on the Majority. A political elite makes decisions. The further Right you go, the smaller the minority.
Sure, when the conservatniks are in power. Some of us still fight for progress for them and for you, even though you try endlessly to destabilize us from afar.
They have implemented a type of a mixed state that has both socialist and capitalist parts
Personally, I find it very similar to corporatism.
I would describe the CCP political ideology as "authoritarianism" and the economic ideology as "corporatism".
I don't really see anything about the communes, the economy is not socially owned (not run by cooperatives) and the social aspects are veeery limited.
China is only nominally left; they're deeply conservative, and don't exactly empower the people. They are imperialist, as was the USSR.
And Taiwan did democratically decide what they want. It would be better if China also got to democratically decide what they want.
Now is the perfect time for them to do it, I can see why! America may not even respond.
Yes, I know we are an ally and we're supposed to immediately go to war. So what? We promised to defend Ukraine from Russia, too. Look what happened.
Japan has openly vowed to defend Taiwan if China invades.
How will that stop China? Japan's military is very limited (by design).
Japan is but a USA lapdog. They won't do anything that would displease their master.
I don't know about that. Most of the world isn't happy with the US right now. They may have been the case 10 or 15 years ago.
I don’t know about that.
Well... current PM of Japan self-identifies as Trumpist.
As a side note, she also admires Margaret Tatcher. And also has complimented Hitler's policies.
it really sucks for the 90%+ of Taiwanese people who don't want to become part of China
There is an expression in science that needs to be used more in polysci 'all models are wrong" The right wing vs left wing political spectrum is a model of political ideologies and a very simplistic one at that. It is also used interchangeably for fundamentally different political tenants. Large government-small government, authoritarian - libertarian, capitalist - socialist. Models are only as good as their ability to predict reality and they are always wrong, they are just simplified models of reality. The moment you are confused saying "but if this country is X-wing, why are they Y" You are either misunderstanding the model, misapplying the model, or are misunderstanding the actual value of a model.
China, a country which is supposed to be left-wing
Uhh, citation needed? Communism by name only does not a left wing country make
So it's never left unless things work perfectly fine? It's always fake left? China's government control of the economy is very very lefty.
I'm left myself, but this easy escape by some left people really annoys me. Things can only improve if one acknowledges the mistakes and flaws.
I mean it's the same reason the Nazis weren't socialist despite being the national socialist party. It's in name only. I don't see a single way in which China is making steps towards becoming a stateless, classless, moneyless society.
Nazis were national-socialists, the contradiction was in the name already. But they also had socialists as main enemies.
China is ruled by the communist party who still issues vast left literature. If China is not left, no country is left or ever will, as there are no perfect countries and that seems to be the condition number one to count as real left.
top 98 comments