China invasion of Taiwan POLL!

[romelus]

romelus, I cordially invite you into the $200/year conversation. I think Luiz just made an ass out of himself, and it's time to capitalize.

hehehe. he's already getting bruised everywhere, and i don't think he wants to extend the $200 remark he made

of course if he actually wants to elaborate i'll be more than willing to jump in

 

[luiz]

@romelus

Intsead of a making a gigantic reply to your gigantic and pointless post, I'll just post all that I said and ask you for evidence, in the form of a clear and trustworthy link, that proves me wrong. If you can't provide such link, then don't bother replying.

-There are too much posters of Mao. Mao was a mosnter, one poster is one too many. I know what you're going to say, because you're as predictable as a 5 year old. You're going to say that I said that Mao posters were everywhere, and that it's not true. Well, they ARE in many places. Are they everywhere? No. Nothing is everywhere, of course. But the point is there is glorification going on. If there was not glorification, there would be no posters. Why don't you debate the actual issue instead of pointless details(like the exact number of Mao posters)? I know why. Because you know nothing.

-The CCP won the civil war because it was fighting an enemy that was rotten from the inside. Both links state that the KMT was terribly weakened by the time the CCP took over, so there IS evidence to back this up. If the KMT was weakened, a majority of support was not needed to defeat them. If you have a link that clearly states that majority supported the CCP, then by all means post it. Otherwise admitt you're arguing over details because you have nothing.

-Today Taiwan is 100% independent. Maintanance of the status-quo means to remain 100% independent. Declaring formal independence means facing anihilation. They are not cowards, they just have self-preservation instinct. Like I said I would also be with the 80% if I lived there(I say who I would vote for, not you . Who's the one putting words on the mouth of others?). The point is 83% of the Taiwanese people do not accept reunification with Communist China. If the CCP leaves power and China becomes a democracy, then I don't know. But with the CCP in power reunification is not accepted(that was exactly what Dann said, BTW).

PS: Try to reply without insulting my country. It really doesn't help your argument.

 

[stratego]

No, becasue they damn effectvie in repression.
Why didn't Satlin fall?

Being effective at repression doesn't account for the increase in patriotism. In the past years, more and more Chinese scholars educated outside China are returning to China to work for the government. Also in the past years there are a lot protesters in China who has made successful changes in the Chinese regime. This means that China is not oppressive, and the Chinese government is making a legitimate effort at giving people what they want.

How come voting is not democratic?

I did not say voting is not democratic. I said voting is not the definition of democracy. As IglooDude as wisely pointed out, Iran is not a democracy even though they have a voting system.

Who brought racism into the discussion? I never accused the CCP of beign racist.
BTW, the link was of Reporters Without Borders. To call it anti-chinese, is laughable.

Ok, forget the black part, sorry I brought that up. The point I wanted to emphasize is that I lived in China for eight years, so I understand the condition there more than you. I also have friends who still have family there, and they do not feel repressed by the government.

What I WANT to have a say? What if the people WANT a change?You are indeed making an apology of tyranny. What you're saying could've well beign said by Stalin or some nazi propagandist. Votes are necessary, without them there is no democracy.

If voting is your definition of Democracy, then I ask you this. What if I WANT to have a say? What if the immigrants WANT to have a say? People under 18 and people who are not citizens are not even allowed to vote. This means that close to half the population is denied the right to vote. And if you say that 16 year olds and immigrants are too ignorant to vote, then you are defending tyranny.

If the people of China want change they can take their opinion to the government and protest. After Tiananmen (which I agree was bad), the Chinese government has made strict changes to their policies, by increasing negotiation, to prevent another Tiananmen from happening.

The only reason why Dann can read whatever he wants here is that the CCP has not found an effective way of censoring the internet from private access yet. In public internet coffe houses severall sites are already restricted. Don't trust me, trust the Reporters Without Borders.

If the Chinese government truly wanted to censor all anti-CCP speech and press, then they wouldn't allow internet to spread so fast in China. The government is still trying to increase the use of the world wide web, knowing that there'll be sites that may promote anti-CCP.

 

[luiz]

Being effective at repression doesn't account for the increase in patriotism. In the past years, more and more Chinese scholars educated outside China are returning to China to work for the government. Also in the past years there are a lot protesters in China who has made successful changes in the Chinese regime. This means that China is not oppressive, and the Chinese government is making a legitimate effort at giving people what they want.

OK, so add indoctrination to repression.
During Stalin's reign the soviets were very patriotic too. Does this mean that Stalin was not oppressive?
The germans were also patriotic under Hitler(VERY patriotic), and so on.

I did not say voting is not democratic. I said voting is not the definition of democracy. As IglooDude as wisely pointed out, Iran is not a democracy even though they have a voting system.

A FREE voting system is a charateristic of any democracy. In Iran the clerics must approve the candidates, so it's not free nor democratic.

If voting is your definition of Democracy, then I ask you this. What if I WANT to have a say? What if the immigrants WANT to have a say? People under 18 and people who are not citizens are not even allowed to vote. This means that close to half the population is denied the right to vote. And if you say that 16 year olds and immigrants are too ignorant to vote, then you are defending tyranny.

Immigrants who became citizens should vote, sure. The age stuff is a non-issue, really. Children are not mature enough to vote.

If the people of China want change they can take their opinion to the government and protest. After Tiananmen (which I agree was bad), the Chinese government has made strict changes to their policies, by increasing negotiation, to prevent another Tiananmen from happening.

How will they make their voices heard by the gvt if there's no elections? Will they personally talk to Hu Jintao?

If the Chinese government truly wanted to censor all anti-CCP speech and press, then they wouldn't allow internet to spread so fast in China. The government is still trying to increase the use of the world wide web, knowing that there'll be sites that may promote anti-CCP.

A complete ban on the internet would mean economic losses, what the CCP doesn't want. But they are working hard to restrict the internet.
Look, the Reporters without Borders are trutworthy.

 

[stratego]

-There are too much posters of Mao. Mao was a mosnter, one poster is one too many.

Didn't you read Dann's post that China is not glorifying Mao. You keep criticizing romelus of giving opinion instead of facts, but you are making posts like this and claiming it as facts. Even if there are still supporters of Mao, they have legitimate reasons to do so. They're not supporting Mao because he was a "monster," they support him because he was able to kick to Japanese invading army out of China.

 

[stratego]

OK, so add indoctrination to repression.
During Stalin's reign the soviets were very patriotic too. Does this mean that Stalin was not oppressive?
The germans were also patriotic under Hitler(VERY patriotic), and so on.

Hitler was good for Germany until he started the campaign against the Jews etc. At that point, it became racism and that can not be tolerated. Stalin was oppressive because he had random purges against a certain class of people. So did Mao, but the current government doesn't do that.

A FREE voting system is a charateristic of any democracy. In Iran the clerics must approve the candidates, so it's not free nor democratic.

Immigrants who became citizens should vote, sure. The age stuff is a non-issue, really. Children are not mature enough to vote.

I'm talking about immigrants who are not citizens, why can't they vote? Are they too ignorant because they don't have a piece of paper that says citizen? And for people under 18, you're saying that their opinion shouldn't be heard? If you're saying countries without FREE elections are tyrants, then you're saying America, Europe, and Brazil are tyrants because elections there are not FREE.

How will they make their voices heard by the gvt if there's no elections? Will they personally talk to Hu Jintao?

How will Brazilians make their voices heard in Brazil, will you personally talk to Lula? How will Americans make their voices heard, will I personally talk to GWB? No, we will either write to Congress, gather petitions or go to the steps of congress to try to make the change. And all these options are available in China. The Chinese government may not grant all petitions, but neither do the Brazilian or the American government.

A complete ban on the internet would mean economic losses, what the CCP doesn't want. But they are working hard to restrict the internet.
Look, the Reporters without Borders are trutworthy.

If the CCP wanted to lessen free speech and press they don't need a complete ban on internet. All they need to do is keep it from growing so fast. But that's not the case. The CCP is encouraging internet grow.

 

[luiz]

Didn't you read Dann's post that China is not glorifying Mao. You keep criticizing romelus of giving opinion instead of facts, but you are making posts like this and claiming it as facts. Even if there are still supporters of Mao, they have legitimate reasons to do so. They're not supporting Mao because he was a "monster," they support him because he was able to kick to Japanese invading army out of China.

So did Stalin with the Germans, and yet having a Stalin poster is terrible.
Mao did good things, just like Hitler, Stalin or any other dictator.

But he killed so many people that glorificating him is highly immoral.

And I repeat: if the CCP is not glorifying Mao, then why is ther a poster of him in the Politburo?

 

[alex994]

Immigrants who became citizens should vote, sure. The age stuff is a non-issue, really. Children are not mature enough to vote.

On contary, the childern i know knows more of the American government then even I know....they are also VERY good at history....

 

[luiz]

Hitler was good for Germany until he started the campaign against the Jews etc. At that point, it became racism and that can not be tolerated. Stalin was oppressive because he had random purges against a certain class of people. So did Mao, but the current government doesn't do that.

Hitler started his campagn against Jews as soon as he gained power. Remember the Nurember Laws?
As for Stalin, the first thing he did was to get rid of possible enemies. So they were never good, just like Mao.

I'm talking about immigrants who are not citizens, why can't they vote? Are they too ignorant because they don't have a piece of paper that says citizen? And for people under 18, you're saying that their opinion shouldn't be heard? If you're saying countries without FREE elections are tyrants, then you're saying America, Europe, and Brazil are tyrants because elections there are not FREE.

An immigrant who stays long enough in a country should vote, I agree.
As for younger then 18, well we have to draw a line somewhere. In Brazil it's 16. It should be done democratically, let the people decide what is the voting age.

How will Brazilians make their voices heard in Brazil, will you personally talk to Lula? How will Americans make their voices heard, will I personally talk to GWB? No, we will either write to Congress, gather petitions or go to the steps of congress to try to make the change. And all these options are available in China. The Chinese government may not grant all petitions, but neither do the Brazilian or the American government.

In Brazil or the US we make our voices heard through our votes.
Sure the chinese can send a petition. But they don't have the power to kick the government out. My people have this power, and so does yours. You obviously can see a big difference. The chinese have no way to put pressure on the government, we do.

If the CCP wanted to lessen free speech and press they don't need a complete ban on internet. All they need to do is keep it from growing so fast. But that's not the case. The CCP is encouraging internet grow.

They want it to grow fast to boom the economy, just like what happened in the US in late 90's. But they are working on a way to restrict it, just like the Iranian government. I doubt they will succeed, though.
And still the Internet doesn't change the fact that China has the highest number of arrested journalists in the world.

 

[JohnRM]

One should be less worried about children being too immature to vote. One should be more worried about their parents forcing them or pursuading them to vote a certain way.

 

[luiz]

of course some children are perfectly mature enough to vote. But the point is we must draw a line somewhere. It's not like we're going to allow 2 year olds to vote.

As I said, the best way to handle this situation is with a referendum to determine the vote age.

 

[10Seven]

This discussion has been interesting, but I do note, it's continuing tirade appearing to rest in great part on ignoring other people's statements - seemingly where those interfere with a good old rant I'm actually speaking to everyone to some degree.

For my part, I'm interested in the following aspects.

The concept that a government could not be tyranical when it is despotic - even where such despotism is affected by more than one - and little to no input is allowed by the vast majority of the population, and change continues to be resisted even to violence.

The issue of SEZ's and their affects appears to be entirely ignored - where the majority live outside of these zones, and experience vastly different lifestyles to those within.

Corruption is widely acknowledged to be a severe problem within China - including such activity as illegal trafficking by military warlords. There is, or was, one case of a General outfitting and upkeeping an army of 100k+ almost solely from proceeds from illegal activity - interestingly, this General able to command considerable loyalty, as the General was also allowed this army, only that the government provided inadequatly for it's upkeep.

The internet within China appears to be highly monitored, censored, and regulated. Access to international data-sources is largely restricted - again, this is a particular issue outside the SEZ's, and less of one within.

It might be good to clarify positions, and redefine the argument - I for one am a little confused - though there appear to be three themes of the discussion:

1. China is pretty good.
2. China is pretty bad.
3. Luiz bashing.

@Stratego.

Should I note that you did not answer the question as to areas of frequent during your stay in China?

 

[stratego]

Hitler started his campagn against Jews as soon as he gained power. Remember the Nurember Laws?

Ok, but China doesn't have any laws like this. We agree Hitler is bad. But that doesn't say anything about China

As for Stalin, the first thing he did was to get rid of possible enemies. So they were never good, just like Mao.

In my previous post, I stated Mao DID conduct purges. I'm just saying that the current government doesn't do it. You can't hold the current government responsible for what Mao has done, since they don't support Mao and their policies are very different now.

An immigrant who stays long enough in a country should vote, I agree.
As for younger then 18, well we have to draw a line somewhere. In Brazil it's 16. It should be done democratically, let the people decide what is the voting age.

The fact still remains that immigrants and people under 18 can't vote. And by your definition we would be tyrants because we don't have free election. Sure that may change in the future, but then I can argue that China can make the change in the future too.

In Brazil or the US we make our voices heard through our votes.
Sure the chinese can send a petition. But they don't have the power to kick the government out. My people have this power, and so does yours. You obviously can see a big difference. The chinese have no way to put pressure on the government, we do.

Despite what you may think, we DO NOT have to power to kick out the government. We can make minute changes, but do you think that our government would leave peacefully if we want to overturn it completely? The Chinese can put pressure on the government the same way we put pressure on the government, by petitioning and demonstrating. They'll get small changes just like us, but they're making a difference.

They want it to grow fast to boom the economy, just like what happened in the US in late 90's. But they are working on a way to restrict it, just like the Iranian government. I doubt they will succeed, though.
And still the Internet doesn't change the fact that China has the highest number of arrested journalists in the world.

China's boom was based on manufacturing, not dot-comers. This means that if China wanted to eliminate free press, they wouldn't even bother with the internet let along promoting it. China has the highest number of arrested journalists because it has the largest population in the world, and it has less freedom of press than the West, but that doesn't make them tyrants.

@Stratego.

Should I note that you did not answer the question as to areas of frequent during your stay in China?

I lived in Swatow, China for four years (It's by Fujian). Then I moved to Xinhiang village for the next two years. Then I moved to Guanzhou (Canton) for the next two years. Then I lived in Hong Kong for a month. I don't know if these names are going help you understand the place at all, but that's up to you.

 

[Dann]

There will be no invasion.

Taiwan will eventually be absorbed into the mainland peacefully years to come.
and just like Hong Kong, democracy will be tolerated.

Now this is a happy ending.

And for it to happen, China should already be almost fully democratic, so everyone will be happy.

There are posters in all national stadiums and government buildings, as Dann said. Not to mention the ones on city squares.

I never said ALL.

Here in Shenzhen, they have a huge mural of Deng Xiao Ping in front of a panorama of Shenzhen instead over at Lychee Park near City Hall. Not the most artistic mural but it's really apt since Shenzhen IS his baby. This city literally would't have existed if not for him.

And in my travels to Shanghai, Nanjing, Hangzhou and Xiamen, all I see on top of the main entrance of government buildings or in the main lobby is the great seal of China. No poster of anyone. The age of Maoist personality cults is over. You don't even see the current leaders often on newspapers.

Today Taiwan is 100% independent. Maintanance of the status-quo means to remain 100% independent. Declaring formal independence means facing anihilation. They are not cowards, they just have self-preservation instinct. Like I said I would also be with the 80% if I lived there. The point is 83% of the Taiwanese people do not accept reunification with Communist China. If the CCP leaves power and China becomes a democracy, then I don't know. But with the CCP in power reunification is not accepted(that was exactly what Dann said, BTW).

And luiz finally understands the real situation. Good. We all don't need to argue anymore.

Just a little final nit-picking. Taiwan is 99%, not 100% independent. It cannot get official recognition from a lot of countries, who have to abide with a one-China policy to be able to have diplomatic relations with China. Nations can still simultaneously deal with Taiwan though. Their embassies just have to be called by a different name, not as "embassy" but as so-and-so office. I know the situation sucks but as you can see, people on both sides are very practical. This way, everyone can still do business without running afoul into political issues.

The internet within China appears to be highly monitored, censored, and regulated. Access to international data-sources is largely restricted - again, this is a particular issue outside the SEZ's, and less of one within.

In the boonies, access to first-hand international data-sources may indeed be restricted, but people are resourceful. There are ways to go around any man-made obstruction. Why during the recent Taiwan elections, there was a running blow-by-blow tabulation going on at an inland politico-military forum! Where they're getting the raw feed, I have no idea.

I lived in Swatow, China for four years (It's by Fujian). Then I moved to Xinhiang village for the next two years. Then I moved to Guanzhou (Canton) for the next two years. Then I lived in Hong Kong for a month. I don't know if these names are going help you understand the place at all, but that's up to you.

I know the places. They're all still in Guangdong province, so conditions should still be better than other places.

My ancestral province (on the paternal side) is Fujian, BTW.

 

[10Seven]

I lived in Swatow, China for four years (It's by Fujian). Then I moved to Xinhiang village for the next two years. Then I moved to Guanzhou (Canton) for the next two years. Then I lived in Hong Kong for a month. I don't know if these names are going help you understand the place at all, but that's up to you.

well, I was interested - hadn't intended to come across as so hostile - but still can't think of better way to put the second...

Just helps me consider you're posts a bit better.

I'm finding it hard to accept the seeming argument - China not all that bad.

My understandings are that China continues to be little more than a dictatorship - much in the view of the former USSR - where advancement is only possible through corruption and the one party line. The party replaced the previous system with one little different except in name.

Press and information is controlled, restricted, and 'modified' all toward social engineering and indoctrination.

The regime continues to resist change even to violence.

Increasing patriotism does not equal good or representative government, but is more a reflection of social manipulation.

As to Taiwan, Mainland China must surely have no more 'right' to control of Taiwan, than, now, Taiwan China has right to the mainland. Plenty of time has passed for bygones to become, and yet the posturing continues - evidence of a continuing tendency toward Imperialism - as is Nepal. Imperialism appearing an extension of personal ego, and that somewhat evidence as to personal ego ruling China, and not even a moderately representative government - where representative government appears to reduce the power of a personal ego.

The same old powermongering and tendency toward oppression remains - only the rhetoric appears to change.

 

[10Seven]

Just a little final nit-picking. Taiwan is 99%, not 100% independent. It cannot get official recognition from a lot of countries, who have to abide with a one-China policy to be able to have diplomatic relations with China. Nations can still simultaneously deal with Taiwan though. Their embassies just have to be called by a different name, not as "embassy" but as so-and-so office. I know the situation sucks but as you can see, people on both sides are very practical. This way, everyone can still do business without running afoul into political issues.

Interestingly, a New Zealand politician - in government - was apparently recently threatened the Chinese ambassador for having the nerve to visit Taiwan...

 

[bobgote]

There are also millions of middle-class chinese with political consciense, like our friend Dann. They are beign denied their right to determine their rulers.
Furthermore, even if the poor chinese mass doesn't care about politics, they should have the right to vote.

If the CCP is so confident of making a good job, then why not test it and make a free and general election? Untill then, they are no better then tyrants.

yeah, but tyrants can still be pretty good

 

[stalin006]

@ stratego and Luiz:

where do you guys find the time to do such elaborated re-plys?

 

[stratego]

Nah, our replys aren't really that long. They just look long because we always quote each other. When I type a response, I try to predict how Luiz will answer to that, and I think of the response to the next post. But if you read the post you'll notice that we are actually saying the same thing every time . Luiz is claiming that the CCP are tyrants who hates Democracy. Luiz is also claiming that voting equal democracy. I'm making the claim that the CCP is doing a good job at providing what the people want and making the country more Democratic. I'm also making the claim that protests and demonstrations do more to change the government than voting ever will. Each response only takes about 10 minutes to type, but even if it's longer I don't care, because I like wasting my time on CFC.

 

[stratego]

I know the places. They're all still in Guangdong province, so conditions should still be better than other places.

These places are heavily populated. If the government wanted to stop free press, they would start there.

My ancestral province (on the paternal side) is Fujian, BTW.

Great, do you speak Fujianese? I speak Swatownese, so we may be able to converse if we speak slowly.
Do you also speak Tagalog? If you do, here's a joke for you.
"Why don't you ever put salt in holy water?"----"Tubig Asin"