> From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves.
For China it’s not about the chips. It’s about getting rid of the humiliation that is having a small island, that was originally part of China, not be a part of China.
A 'small' island with one of the most successful and thriving democracies in the East, that has world class industry. China cannot have a successful democracy on their doorstep, it undermines their perception of absolute Chinese superiority.
This doesn't really make sense, the Chinese standard of living has risen to very comfortable levels over the past couple decades. There aren't throngs of desperately poor Chinese people longing for the capitalist democratic paradise over in Taiwan.
If anything, China's rising wealth and living standard is a threat to the United States' sense of superiority. I don't see the US saying "Screw it, let's try totalitarianism" if it wasn't falling behind.
They don't hate them, but it is an emberassment that a group from the same culture is so successful under a different political system that allows for more freedom. That combined with cultural revanchism about not breaking up the country (and having spent a lot of time there I can tell you it is strong) makes the existence of Taiwan as an independent nation a real sore point.
I don't think the CCP views Taiwan as more successful than mainland China. The CCP position is that Taiwan is already part of China and by that logic Taiwanese success is automatically Chinese success. I agree that cultural revanchism plays a major role.
They might not be more successful, but they are still very successful given the difficulties they face, and any Chinese person with half a brain can realize they give lie to the idea the CCP likes to propogate that there's something intrinsic to Chinese culture that requires an authoritarian approach.
This seems like one of Putin's motivations for invading Ukraine. He couldn't stand having a prosperous Ukraine aligned with the EU and the US that could foment discontent inside Russia.
Ukraine was the poorest country in Europe, and by most metrics, worse off than Russia before the war.
Sure, you can write all sorts of alt-history fanfiction about how great it would be if 2014 didn't happen, but that's just one of many possible futures.
Leaving aside the war, Ukraine has many of the positive resources of the Baltics (just more so.) There is every reason to believe that an EU-aligned (or member) Ukraine would be an economic success story.
It's not just that he couldn't stand it, but rather what it does to his position inside Russia. If your business model is to rabbit on about how wonderful Russia is, and how sucky all other countries are, if there's a more successful more free country next door containing almost the same kind of people, then your words are hollow.
USA will, from all signs, not only continue to have a hostile Cuba, but also create a hostile Mexico.
And that's even before considering the internal hostility to the regime that the deliberately-engineered major economic collapse--that is already happening despite numerous policies that will deepen it still being in the pipeline and not yet in place--will create.
The US withdrawing from international engagement, trashing alliances, and trashing its own economy may enable competing powers more space to dominate their own regions, but it doesn't do anything to strengthen the US's regional position, it radically weakens it.
China is a democracy. It's literally what you're describing Taiwan as. That said I do agree that it does cause China's superiority to be called into question. Imagine if the Confederate states of America managed to take hold of Cuba and hold out.
EDIT: I'm literally factually correct. In 5 of the 6 indexes China has a Democracy score where as Brunei, an absolute monarchy, doesn't!
Legally (according to their constitution) USSR was also a democracy. But that hardly meant much in practice. Of course the Chinese society is probably much "freer" than than the Soviet one was prior to Gorbachev's reforms but again.. an extremely low standard.
Brunei isn't on the Bertelsmann because it is small (<1 million people), not because of its political structure.
The EDI explicitly does not try to asses whether a country is democratic or not, but just allows relative comparisons. It also doesn't include smaller countries but doesn't have as clear of a cutoff.
If you are going to use inclusion on one or more of these lists as an argument, you'll have actually cite where those lists use status as a democracy as a criteria for inclusion and how that is assessed.
China has a fig leaf of a democracy. It meets the simplest definition of a democracy, the citizens do get to vote on something. Compared to most of the developed world, it's a far cry from a liberal democracy that allows for dissenting positions and parties. China's flavor of governing is objectively neither good nor bad (they have managed to become a superpower after all) but it's nothing like the democracies of the West.
China has "democracy" in the same way it has the freedom of speech.
In China, you can vote for The Party, or, for The Party. Much like how in the USA, you can vote for the red wing of the Centralized Corporate Power Party, or the blue wing of the Centralized Corporate Power Party.
Much like how in China, you have the freedom to stand in Tienanmen Square and shout "Down with the USA, long live Chairman Mao, long live The Party" much like you can do so in Times Square or in front of 1600 Penn or in downtown LA.
More like the Union holding out for 70 years in Puerto Rico after the Confederates won. In what sense do you mean China is a democracy? I may be brainwashed on CIA propaganda, but as far as I understand only party-vetted candidates may stand for election.
Wait do you not know what the KMT did? They're a rightwing party that killed/disappeared 30k journalists and intellectuals in Taiwan. How in the world is that comparable to the "union"? (But also yes Puerto Rico might be a better example).
In the sense that they're on the V-Dem index, they have election laws, they have voter rolls, they have voter turnout, etc. Yes they have one party, so you don't directly vote for the President, but neither do Americans.
It's democratic because it's on the index? Every state is on the index. China ranks 177 out of 179 states on the index lol. So sure, where a perfect democracy score is 1.0, they score 0.015. It's not zero.
Yes, the KMT dictatorship era was awful. You might be surprised to know that in Taiwan there are national holidays commemorating those persecuted by the KMT. The reason The ROC (Taiwan) is more aptly comparable to the Union when making an analogy to alternative American history is because it was the original, legitimate government of China and the PRC were the rebels, just like the USA and Confederacy.
You are confused. Look at Taiwan's present, not its long gone past. As I mentioned in another thread, during my last trip to Taiwan, I revisited the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, which features a museum where Chiang Kai-shek's life and rule are documented. The errors and brutality of his rule in particular are well-documented and preserved, officially accessible to all citizens and visitors. This is a wonderful example of transparency. You won't find anything like this in mainland China.
Democracy isn't when you have multiple parties. It's when you elect people to govern. Many americans think that America has a uniparty, despite all appearances.
I feel like you have it the wrong way around. There are a lot of political setups where you "elect someone" that are absolutely not democracies. I can be an authoritarian supreme leader who allows citizens to elect who will run their province (from my choice of candidates of course!) and I really don't think it's reasonable to claim that this situation is a "democracy".
It's autocracy with democratic characteristics.
I agree your criticisms of democracy in the US and Taiwan have some validity but in terms of deciding whether China might be a democracy or not they seem like whataboutism.
What you mean like hong Kong? That humiliation pales in comparison to the damage done domestically as taiwan's defenses would necessitate a gross loss of life. Then consider the diplomatic posture of every major economy on the China sea.
> That humiliation pales in comparison to the damage done domestically as taiwan's defenses would necessitate a gross loss of life.
There was life lost in Hong Kong. Potentially not the same amount, but yes lives were lost (not just what was mentioned in the media or from protests).
And also a vibrant democracy, potentially serving as an example (foreign and domestic) that alternative political systems are an option and perhaps even desirable.
I have a strong impression there are similarities with Russia and Ukraine. Having a neighbor with a similar culture and overlapping histories that also has independent, democratic government was likely viewed as a direct threat to the Putin regime and one of the driving reasons for the invasion. I could see a similar calculation with Taiwan/China.
1) The USA does not have launchable nuclear weapons in neighboring countries to Taiwan that necessitate a buffer
2) Taiwan does not represent unprotected border territory. Heck, attacking it sustainedly would require significant and slow naval logistics
3) Other than human intellect, there is little in the way of natural resources to obtain out of Taiwan. It's economy is manufscturung and export driven.
Other than some nationalistic pride to recapture teritority, they are not much alike.
> Other than some nationalistic pride to recapture teritority, they are not much alike.
To add, Taiwan uses traditional Chinese and is more conservative to traditional Chinese culture. China abandoned all of that during the cultural revolution. There's been a recent nationalist push to embrace "traditional" Chinese identity, involving mainand Chinese people going to sites in Japan and elsewhere wearing "traditional" Chinese clothing.
Imagine the nationalistic outrage if someone wore a kimono in China. In practice, these traditional Chinese clothing are cheaply made cosplay from Taobao
> 1) The USA does not have launchable nuclear weapons in neighboring countries to Taiwan that necessitate a buffer
Existing US land and sea based nuclear weapons could hit targets in China in a matter of minutes. Being based closer to China/Taiwan might shouldnt matter in the age of ICBMs.
> 3) Other than human intellect, there is little in the way of natural resources to obtain out of Taiwan. It's economy is manufacturing and export driven.
Why do people keep spreading misinformation?
E.g. Taiwan grows and produces some of the best tea and coffee in the world. High end tea leaves costs more than some stock grants here. China tried for years to replicate it and has some success but definitely still far off.
Taiwan is renown for many things - not just semiconductors. It's just you might not know about it. A lot of your every day life might have something to do with Taiwan.
Yeah, I subscribe to your theory too. It's odd how Putin and his defenders spout all sorts of theories about the evil of NATO and "the West", but if you (addressing the dictators here) have faith in your arguments, why suppress viewpoints that disagree with yours, with media company closures, network firewalls and threats of years in the gulag?
Because their argument, in which they do have faith, is that a cacophony of disagreeing viewpoints casting doubts on the common national project is hurtful, even if those doubts are unfounded and those viewpoints unsubstantiated.
I'm not defending autoritarianism or communism, but I think you're just not putting yourself in their shoes and looking at things from their POV. They supress other viewpoints not because they're afraid to be shown wrong, but because they believe it's best to supress them and not have people confused by enemy missinformation.
(Not an expert, but this is my impression from talking to both chinese and vietnamese people who defend or at least don't oppose their communist governments, and also spanish autoritarians who defend the Francoist regime. I used to think they were brainwashed/dumb/evil, and now I think their worldview makes a bit of sense, even if it's still misguided.)
One of the reasons for the collapse of the USSR was that the propaganda done by the US was better than the propaganda done by the Soviets. So it's not like there isn't a historical reason for this either.
A much bigger reason for the collapse was that the planned economy and distribution (plus military spending) failed to produce enough basic goods and quality of life for many started dropping.
To the extent that party elite started building their own, parallel universe of food, summer camps for kids, apartments, shops, etc. closed to the ordinary people. It was clear to many people that the Soviet road, as followed, goes to a variant of a North Korea lifestyle.
If we want to argue historically, is it not more that the Taiwanese government is a more direct successor of the historical China? So maybe China should really be part of Taiwan? Or should it belong back to the Japanese?
Just goes to show how ridiculous arguments by "history" are.
Considering they are one of the most democratic countries in the world (as per The Economist Democracy Index), even outranking the United States, I think they are more than capable of determining themselves what their future should be through their right of self-determination.
Is Ireland historically and culturally British? Sort of.
Is Czechia historically and culturally German? Sort of.
Is Ukraine historically and culturally Russian? Sort of.
Is Pakistan historically and culturally Indian? Sort of.
Once you have to ignore the wishes of the population and resort to historical arguments, forced reunification becomes a conquest.
I certainly wouldn't like my own government to start expansive wars into, say, Silesia, because it used to belong to the Czech crown for 500 years. But I have a say in this. The Chinese population might not.
I bet you're located in the USA?
Because nowhere else in the world would anyone even think that somehow logic, sanity and common sense should be suspended just because Israel is mentioned in a conversation.
> I bet you're located in the USA? Because nowhere else in the world
CCP and internet police are much more likely to use this logic than anti-Israel Americans. If they were, in fact, an American that was anti-Israel, they wouldn't be so riled up about defending the CCP first and foremost. I'm reminded of the island of Truth Teller and Liar problem: https://sites.millersville.edu/bikenaga/math-proof/truth-tel...
My argument had nothing to do with pro or anti-Israel, I was just point out that I've only encountered this archiemedean lever/pivot point namely "Israel" in the USA.
It usually goes exactly like in this thread -- someone saying common sense things like not re-drawing borders and killing other humans today, just because something someone did 100 years ago -- and someone, from the opposite side (nothing to do with Israel) asks if this applies to Israel as well -- because they know damn well it applies to Israel and the point either puts Israel in a bad light or Israel would not like that particular point.
At this point if someone asks if "does this apply to Israel" it's usually the bad guys trying to use Israel's name as a logical nuclear weapon.
You suspect OP to be based in American and influenced by some American line of reasoning towards Israel. I'm saying that someone from the CCP is more likely to change the target by attacking American hypocrisy towards Israel
It's also the case in Germany, but Germany sees Israel as a unique situation to which normal rules do not apply (and pointing out this contradiction may land someone in jail) and does not say "what about Israel?" when the context is any other country.
No problem. Neither of the current populations in Israel should have the right to ethnically cleanse the other one, regardless of historic demography in 1900 AD or 1 AD.
You're Chinese police aren't you? This seems to be the whataboutism script Chinese bots have been using on other social media platforms in recent months.
I don't support Israel. I just find it too obvious the way
you try to shortcircuit and distract away from accusations towards the CCP by moving the point of contention elsewhere. Yes, America can be hypocrital but it doesn't change what people have said here about the CCP.
Never underestimate the power of saving face. The Taiwan invasion had a dry run with how they handled Hong Kong. This is going to happen and my guess is it will be on Trump’s way out. That way it all gets done during the 2028 election season, and all the next President can do is pout.
It’s a win-win for Trump because he keeps China at bay for three years, which is good enough for him.
How are Taiwan and Hong Kong at all comparable? Hong Kong never had their own military, was never an independent nation, and was officially handed over from Britain to China in 1997. There was no armed invasion of Hong Kong - Chinese military was already garrisoned there for 25 years.
There are, or were, talks in Taiwan and China about the possibility of a "one party two systems" style unification similar to Hong Kong. It was pretty fringe but growing in popularity until China cracked down on Hong Kong. I don't know if it's much of a thing anymore, but I do know a couple of old Taiwanese that still believe in it.
For China it’s not about the chips. It’s about getting rid of the humiliation that is having a small island, that was originally part of China, not be a part of China.