A question for those of you in China.

[mrswdk]

Taiwan is a country, mrswdk. It's not part of China. It has an elected president and its own military.

ISIS also has its own military, leaders and currency. Does you recognize IS as a country?

Surely you're familiar with the old adage that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Do you think a repeat of June 4th is possible? Because I don't.

[macbone]

Incidentally, mrswdk, you'd like Alex Lo at the SCMP. He had a rather scathing critique of the University of Hong Kong's student elections this year.

One of the students running for office was from Guangzhou and was smeared by other candidates:

A mainland candidate from the University of Hong Kong, who is running in the upcoming Students' Union election, claims she is a victim of a smear campaign waged by the union's Campus TV.
Eugenia Ye Lushan, the proposed social secretary of the Smarties group, said she has been indirectly accused of being red-dyed and pro-Beijing in a four- minute video clip posted on YouTube.

The video also points out that she used to be an organizing committee member of the Union of Students External Exploration's orientation summer camp in the mainland.

The camp, held last summer, had Wong Yiu-ying, a research officer in the One Country, Two Systems Research Institute and a part-time member of the Central Policy Unit, as guest speaker.

Ye admitted she was on the committee but did not know until that night who the guest speaker would be.

"Inviting a guest speaker is the president's duty ... I was responsible for booking the restaurant and designing T-shirts," Ye told The Standard.

"I think it should be one's political beliefs which defines whether he or she is `red-dyed."'

Ye, who is from Guangzhou, said she chose to study in HKU because she was attracted by the university atmosphere of advocating freedom and democracy, and she joined the election as she shares the same beliefs as her group.

According to its platform, Smarties plans to promote democracy and the pursuit of genuine periodic elections.

It also wants the central government to officially rehabilitate those involved in the June 4 movement.

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_deta ... con_type=1



Well, crap, at least one student from China is interested in democracy and addressing June 4th! What will her parents think?

Here's what Lo said:

Smear campaigns, compromising sexy photos, accusations of communist association... Just another election cycle in the United States? Not quite.

It's the election of the student union at the University of Hong Kong and its referendum to break away from a federation of other university unions. Those unions apparently fret too much about democratising China while the HKU's big brothers and sisters want to focus on fighting for an independent Hong Kong, the rest of China be damned.

Now they have their wishes. After decades of being a member, it will leave the Federation of Students following a referendum with 2,522 votes in favour of leaving and 2,278 against. There were 1,293 abstentions. The turnout rate among HKU students was supposedly the highest in years, at 39 per cent. Humm, a mere 244 extra votes at a lamentable 39 per cent turnout... Such unrepresentative numbers rather prove how ridiculous it can be using referendums to decide on important issues.

And then there was the union election itself. Let's see. There was the smear campaign against Eugenia Yip running unsuccessfully for the union's social secretary, mainly because she is a mainlander. That included circulating magazine photos of a scantily clad Yip from her time as a freelance model. Billy Fung Jing-en managed to become the union's new president despite accusations that his family had a communist background. Recall that famous saying of Henry Kissinger? "Campus infighting is so vicious because the stakes are so small."

It's in this context that I read with much amusement HKU political science professor Joseph Chan Cho-wai denouncing officials and pro-establishment media for targeting his university. Well, you guys sort of make yourselves a red-painted target: the Undergrad magazine for Hong Kong independence, Occupy Central, democracy referendums, mob-style protests against the 2011 visit of state leader Li Keqiang , cultural-revolutionary-style denunciations of former HKU chief Tsui Lap-chee, which led to the premature departure of this distinguished scientist, gentleman and scholar...

But thank you, HKU student union, for showing us what real western-style elections are like.

http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opi ... -democracy

Taiwan is a country, mrswdk. It's not part of China. It has an elected president and its own military.

ISIS also has its own military, leaders and currency. Does you recognize IS as a country?

Surely you're familiar with the old adage that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Do you think a repeat of June 4th is possible? Because I don't.

Did you seriously just compare a democracy to a terrorist organization? Of course every terrorist group has fighters and leaders. So do gangs. Countries are defined by borders, systems of government, and international recognition, all of which Taiwan has.

It's interesting that North Korea doesn't recognize South Korea. It's all Korea to Kim Jong Un.

Yes, I definitely think a repeat of June 4th is possible. We almost saw it last year with the Occupy Central movement.

[mrswdk]

the literal meaning of disenfranchisement has been subject to some pop-bastardisation of late.

it is to be without agency to vote, not merely to feel apathetic or cynical about the process.

The right to elect a representative is one very, very small aspect of democracy.

Take America as an example. People vote for their representatives once every 4 years. So how do they make their voices heard in the 1,459 days between each election? They campaign, they advocate, they indulge in general complaining. Now sure, Americans have relatively more freedom to protest in the streets, petition government or complain on the internet (lol), but Chinese people are also perfectly capable of bringing pressure to bear on the government when they really care about something.

At the national level, just look at corruption and the environment. These are two things the central government is taking more and more seriously, due to public pressure. If enough people care about something, change will happen.

[khazalid]

the literal meaning of disenfranchisement has been subject to some pop-bastardisation of late.

it is to be without agency to vote, not merely to feel apathetic or cynical about the process.

The right to elect a representative is one very, very small aspect of democracy.

Take America as an example. People vote for their representatives once every 4 years. So how do they make their voices heard in the 1,459 days between each election? They campaign, they advocate, they indulge in general complaining. Now sure, Americans have relatively more freedom to protest in the streets, petition government or complain on the internet (lol), but Chinese people are also perfectly capable of bringing pressure to bear on the government when they really care about something.

At the national level, just look at corruption and the environment. These are two things the central government is taking more and more seriously, due to public pressure. If enough people care about something, change will happen.

utter nonsense.

corruption is an existential threat to the ruling class, as you well know.

the environmental issues facing china are equally a threat to the continued existence of the country as a functioning nation.

[macbone]

the literal meaning of disenfranchisement has been subject to some pop-bastardisation of late.

it is to be without agency to vote, not merely to feel apathetic or cynical about the process.

The right to elect a representative is one very, very small aspect of democracy.

Take America as an example. People vote for their representatives once every 4 years. So how do they make their voices heard in the 1,459 days between each election? They campaign, they advocate, they indulge in general complaining. Now sure, Americans have relatively more freedom to protest in the streets, petition government or complain on the internet (lol), but Chinese people are also perfectly capable of bringing pressure to bear on the government when they really care about something.

At the national level, just look at corruption and the environment. These are two things the central government is taking more and more seriously, due to public pressure. If enough people care about something, change will happen.

It's not only to vote, but to hold the representatives accountable, and to throw the bums out if they're incompetent. (This happens far, far too infrequently, though.)

What happens when Chinese people complain about serious issues, like the tainted milk powder scandal in 2008? Ah, yes, the parents get thrown in jail. China doesn't allow dissent, not when it will affect the country's stability.

China's not alone in this, though. South Korea and Thailand also keep a tight rein on what their citizens say, to name two neighbors. Hong Kongers don't know how good we have it.

[mrswdk]

Taiwan is a country, mrswdk. It's not part of China. It has an elected president and its own military.

ISIS also has its own military, leaders and currency. Does you recognize IS as a country?

Surely you're familiar with the old adage that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Do you think a repeat of June 4th is possible? Because I don't.

Did you seriously just compare a democracy to a terrorist organization? Of course every terrorist group has fighters and leaders. So do gangs. Countries are defined by borders, systems of government, and international recognition, all of which Taiwan has.

At the risk of rehashing an argument that has been had many times before:

- Democratic? Taiwan started hosting elections in the 1990s - up until then, it was authoritarian just like the rest of the PRC. In fact, Chiang Kai-Shek, the guy who originally fled to Taiwan with the KMT, was a horrendously brutal military dictator. Defend your 'democrats' if you like, but during the pivotal moment in Taiwan's history (1949) there was no democracy whatsoever to be found on the island of Taiwan.

- Taiwan is not recognized as a country by anyone who matters (the US, Japan, the UK, France, Germany etc.).

Even Taiwan does not recognize Taiwan as a country - it recognizes itself as the Republic of China, with legitimate authority over all of China, including the mainland.

Yes, I definitely think a repeat of June 4th is possible. We almost saw it last year with the Occupy Central movement.

There was absolutely no chance whatsoever of the students being stomped on by the army, even despite the fact they spent 3 months clogging up the city center with total disregard for their fellow residents.

[khazalid]

What happens when Chinese people complain about serious issues, like the tainted milk powder scandal in 2008? Ah, yes, the parents get thrown in jail. China doesn't allow dissent, not when it will affect the country's stability.

executions for fraud and corruption, particularly in regards to food safety, are now commonplace as well.

this is related to the last point about corruption being an existential threat to the CCP - it is so endemic in society at every level that something has to give, one way or another. the instinct for self-preservation has seemingly decreed that a kick-back is a short term gain for a long term loss, but they'll still have to go some to root it out. need a visa? slip a few kuai to the right guy. a criminal case to magically disappear? check. spurious planning permission? check. want to see a doctor sometime in the next 24 hours? check. etc etc

[khazalid]

There was absolutely no chance whatsoever of the students being stomped on by the army, even despite the fact they spent 3 months clogging up the city center with total disregard for their fellow residents.

i thought it was already clogged up with mainlanders buying i-phones?

[mrswdk]

As khazalid points out, corruption does get dealt with quite frequently and quite severely.

As for your comment about stability: do you think there is something wrong with the government taking stability into account in their decision making? The governments of the UK and US repressed a whole bunch of rights and freedoms while they were developing so as to preserve social stability, and they didn't even have China's unprecedented pace of development and social upheaval to deal with.

[mrswdk]

There was absolutely no chance whatsoever of the students being stomped on by the army, even despite the fact they spent 3 months clogging up the city center with total disregard for their fellow residents.

i thought it was already clogged up with mainlanders buying i-phones?

lol, touche. At least the mainlanders don't bring tents so that they can engage in 24/7 jaywalking though.

[mrswdk]

this is related to the last point about corruption being an existential threat to the CCP - it is so endemic in society at every level that something has to give, one way or another. the instinct for self-preservation has seemingly decreed that a kick-back is a short term gain for a long term loss

Talk about a lack of gratitude

'You're tackling corruption, but for the wrong reasons!'

[khazalid]

this is related to the last point about corruption being an existential threat to the CCP - it is so endemic in society at every level that something has to give, one way or another. the instinct for self-preservation has seemingly decreed that a kick-back is a short term gain for a long term loss

Talk about a lack of gratitude

'You're tackling corruption, but for the wrong reasons!'

you can say that about a lot of things. climate change, for instance. animals, ecosystems, climate apparently only have value in their relation to human interest. getting round slowly to doing something about it is a good example of doing the right thing for the wrong (anthropocentric) reason.

point being made was that the anti-corruption drive was not some benighted striving to improve society (your implication), but to save their own skins. the distinction is an important one, no?

[mrswdk]

this is related to the last point about corruption being an existential threat to the CCP - it is so endemic in society at every level that something has to give, one way or another. the instinct for self-preservation has seemingly decreed that a kick-back is a short term gain for a long term loss

Talk about a lack of gratitude

'You're tackling corruption, but for the wrong reasons!'

you can say that about a lot of things. climate change, for instance. animals, ecosystems, climate apparently only have value in their relation to human interest.

So?

point being made was that the anti-corruption drive was not some benighted striving to improve society (your implication), but to save their own skins. the distinction is an important one, no?

I never implied they do it to improve society. I said that public pressure to tackle corruption grew and grew, and so the government started tackling corruption more seriously.

[macbone]

Taiwan is an island which has for all practical purposes been independent since 1950, but which China regards as a rebel region that must be reunited with the mainland - by force if necessary.

China has claimed sovereignty over Taiwan since the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949, when the defeated Nationalist government fled to the island as the Communists, under Mao Zedong, swept to power.

Long-standing tension with the mainland has eased since the China-friendly President Ma Ying-jeou took office in May 2008. In July 2009 the leaders of China and Taiwan exchanged direct messages for the first time in more than 60 years, albeit in their respective party functions, and not as national leaders.

And in June 2010, the two countries signed an historic trade pact that was described by some analysts as the most significant agreement in 60 years of separation.

Mr Ma's predecessor, Chen Shui-bian, had angered China with moves towards formal independence, and relations had been severely strained.

Despite the recent thaw, Taiwanese officials complain that Beijing has kept increasing the number of short-range missiles aimed at Taiwan.

In the past the military threat from the mainland has been partly offset by the pivotal relationship between Taipei and Washington, which is the main weapons supplier to the island - one of the world's biggest buyers of arms. Beijing regularly expresses anger at US arms sales to Taiwan.

China insists that nations cannot have official relations with both China and Taiwan, with the result that Taiwan has formal diplomatic ties with only two dozen countries - Pacific, Latin American and African states in the main.

Taiwan has no seat at the United Nations, having lost it to China in 1971. Repeated attempts to regain representation at the UN have been blocked.

Despite its diplomatic isolation, Taiwan has become one of Asia's big traders. It is considered to have achieved an economic miracle, becoming one of the world's top producers of computer technology.

And past tensions notwithstanding, Taiwan and China enjoy healthy trade links. China is Taipei's number one export market.

For decades, the island was an authoritarian one-party state ruled by the Nationalist Party (Kuomintang or KMT), which under Chiang Kai-shek controlled much of China before the Communists' rise to power in 1949.

In the early 1990s, however, Taiwan made the transition to democracy and the KMT's monopoly on power ended completely in 2000, with the election of President Chen Shui-bian of the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

Unlike the KMT, which seeks a united, non-Communist China, Mr Chen was a passionate supporter of formal independence, straining relations with Beijing.

Corruption allegations undermined Mr Chen's popularity and contributed to the DPP's loss to a resurgent KMT in the 2008 presidential election.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-16164639

Whelp, the BBC has declared Taiwan a country. Debate's over. Sorry, mrswdk. You can have a tissue to dry your tears if you'd like.

Oh, and geography.about.com, too! Sorry, this isn't looking so good for the CCP, dear friend.

There are eight accepted criteria used to determine whether a place is an independent country (also known as a State with a capital "s") or not.

Let us examine these eight criteria in regard to Taiwan, an island (approximately the size of the U.S. states of Maryland and Delaware combined) located across the Taiwan Strait from mainland China (the People's Republic of China).

Taiwan developed into its modern situation following the Communist victory on the mainland in 1949 when two million Chinese Nationalists fled to Taiwan and established a government for all of China on the island. From that point and until 1971, Taiwan was recognized as "China" in the United Nations.

Mainland China's position on Taiwan is that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China; the People's Republic of China is awaiting reunification of the island and mainland. However, Taiwan claims independence as a distinct State. We will now determine which is the case.

1. Has space or territory that has internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK).

Somewhat. Due to political pressure from mainland China, the United States and most other significant nations recognize one China and thus include the boundaries of Taiwan as being part of the boundaries of China.

2. Has people who live there on an ongoing basis.

Absolutely! Taiwan is home to almost 23 million people, making it the 48th largest "country" in the world, with a population slightly smaller than North Korea but larger than Romania.

3. Has economic activity and an organized economy. A country regulates foreign and domestic trade and issues money.

Absolutely! Taiwan is an economic powerhouse - it's one of the four economic tigers of Southeast Asia. Its GDP per capita is among the top 30 of the world. Taiwan has its own currency, the new Taiwan dollar.

4. Has the power of social engineering, such as education.

Absolutely! Education is compulsory and Taiwan has more than 150 institutions of higher learning. Taiwan is home to the Palace Museum, which houses over 650,000 pieces of Chinese bronze, jade, calligraphy, painting, and porcelain.

5. Has a transportation system for moving goods and people.

Absolutely! Taiwan has an extensive internal and external transportation network that consists of roads, highways, pipelines, railroads, airports, and sea ports. Taiwan can ship goods, there's no question about that!

6. Has a government that provides public services and police power.

Absolutely! Taiwan has multiple branches of military - Army, Navy (including Marine Corps), Air Force, Coast Guard Administration, Armed Forces Reserve Command, Combined Service Forces Command, and Armed Forces Police Command. There are almost 400,000 active duty members of the military and the country spends about 15-16% of its budget on defense.

Taiwan's main threat is from mainland China, which has approved an anti-secession law that allows a military attack on Taiwan to prevent the island from seeking independence. Additionally, the United States sells Taiwan military equipment and may defend Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act.

7. Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.

Mostly. While Taiwan has maintained its own control over the island from Taipei since 1949, China still claims to have control over Taiwan.

8. Has external recognition. A country has been "voted into the club" by other countries.

Somewhat. Since China claims Taiwan as its provoince, the international community does not want to contradict China on this matter. Thus, Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations. Plus, only 25 countries (as of early 2007) recognize Taiwan as an independent country and they recognize it as the "only" China. Due to this political pressure from China, Taiwan does not maintain an embassy in the United States and the United States (among most other countries) has not recognized Taiwan since January 1, 1979.

However, many countries have set up unofficial organizations to carry out commercial and other relations with Taiwan. Taiwan is represented in 122 countries unofficially. Taiwan maintains contact with the United States through two through an unofficial instrumentalities - American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office.

In addition, Taiwain issues globally recognized passports that allow its citizens to travel internationally. Taiwan also is a member of the International Olympic Committee and this sends its own team to the Olympic Games.

Recently, Taiwan has lobbied strongly for admission into international organizations such as the United Nations, which mainland China opposes.

Therefore, Taiwan only meets five of the eight criteria fully. Another three criteria are met in some respects due to mainland China's stance on the issue.

In conclusion, despite the controversy surrounding the island of Taiwan, its status should be considered as a de facto independent country of the world.

http://geography.about.com/od/political ... ountry.htm

If I were you, I'd sent about.com a strongly worded email.

[mrswdk]

Here is what happened, and which you don't seem to get:

The KMT and CCP were a joint authoritarian government that ruled all of the Republic of China, a country which Taiwan was a part of. They then splintered and ended up at war with each other. The KMT lost this war and fled to Taiwan, where they managed to avoid total elimination. The CCP, having achieved victory, re-founded the Republic of China as the People's Republic of China.

The CCP administered all of the mainland while the KMT administered Taiwan. Both sides continued to recognize that China was a country of which Taiwan was a constituent part, and both sides claimed sovereignty over all of China. The majority of the international community, along with the UN, now recognize the winners of the civil war - the CCP - as the legitimate rulers of China, and they all recognize Taiwan as being a part of China.

That situation has continued up until the present day.

[macbone]

That's right, but Taiwan claims they're separate from China, and many countries unofficially recognize Taiwan as its own sovereign state.

Kim Jong Un is in a very different situation as far as power goes, but he claims that he rules all of the Korean peninsula, that there's only one Korea.

China frankly allows Taiwan to continue to operate independently. If they wanted to, they could sweep into Taipei and conquer the island. Taiwan would put up a fight, but the war would be brief. China's not going to do that, though, at least not in the current environment, especially since the KMT has always sought reunification, only with them leading China, not the CCP.

After the founding of the Republic of China in 1912, the central government (a different central government) was too weak to hold power for long, and the KMT arose as the strongest group militarily, and under Chiang Kai-shek, the country was reunified in 1928, but only briefly. Then, infighting resumed, and the CCP rose in power. Meanwhile, Japan had been growing increasingly militaristic adn sought to take advantage of the civil war in China. The CCP and the KMT put aside their differences to fight back against Japan, and the war bled into the Second World War, with the Soviet Union and the US providing military support to China's war against Japan.

The war left Chiang Kai-shek's KMT weak (and corrupt to the core, much like the South Vietnamese government during the Vietnam war - the US sure knows how to pick some real winners), and although they were nominally in power, the CCP was able to kick Chiang's ass and send the KMT running to Taiwan. The KMT had used up a great deal of its fighting strength hitting Japan's forces head-on, while the CCP engaged in guerilla tactics in the frontier, limiting their losses. (Or, as the CCP says, they fought even greater numbers of Japanese forces, and the KMT was too weak to handle their share of the fighting.) Of course, Chiang still claimed the KMT were the rightful lords of China, but in practice, his dictatorship was only sovereign over Taiwan.

Complicating matters even further are Japan's treaties at the end of the war.

So, yeah, China allows Taiwan to continue to exist. Taiwan still clings to their claims that they're the Republic of China, but they lost that battle back in 1949, and it took until 1971 for the PRC to finally assert itself as the rightful government of China.

China has no direct control over what happens in Taiwan, though. It's as if after the US Civil War, the South had fled to Puerto Rico and was now ruling that island in exile. That's basically what happened. China may claim to assert sovereignty over Taiwan, just like Kim Jong-un claims sovereignty over all of Korea, but in practice, it's just not so.

[mrswdk]

That's right, but Taiwan claims they're separate from China, and many countries unofficially recognize Taiwan as its own sovereign state.

No they don't, as you acknowledge later in your post. Taiwan's policy is that the Republic of China still exists and that the CCP have illegitimately seized power over the mainland.

So, yeah, China allows Taiwan to continue to exist. Taiwan still clings to their claims that they're the Republic of China, but they lost that battle back in 1949, and it took until 1971 for the PRC to finally assert itself as the rightful government of China.

China has no direct control over what happens in Taiwan, though. It's as if after the US Civil War, the South had fled to Puerto Rico and was now ruling that island in exile. That's basically what happened. China may claim to assert sovereignty over Taiwan, just like Kim Jong-un claims sovereignty over all of Korea, but in practice, it's just not so.

I know that Taiwan administers itself with relatively little deference to Beijing. That doesn't make it a country though (Kinda like how Hong Kong isn't a country).

[khazalid]

not yet, anyway

[mrswdk]

lol. Not ever, dude. Not ever.

[mrswdk]

http://thediplomat.com/2013/06/governme ... -in-china/

Government for the People in China?

An apparent contradiction exists at the heart of political commentary on China. On the one hand, some foreign China watchers frequently discuss how ordinary Chinese citizens are growing increasingly dissatisfied with their government and communist party rule. On the other hand, public opinion polls have shown a high level of popular support for the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

Indeed, in a major national face-to-face survey we participated in, the results of which we published recently in an article in Political Research Quarterly, we uncovered an extremely high level of public satisfaction with the national government. Based on responses from a national random sample of 3,763 Chinese, we found the average person’s support for the government in Beijing was about 8.0 on a 10-point scale.

This result is consistent with calculations from other recent surveys. For example, according to the 6th Wave World Values Survey, conducted at the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013, the average level of support among Chinese respondents was 7.5 on a 0-10 scale. This level of support compares favorably with many democratically elected governments across the world. From these numbers, then, the Chinese government hardly appears on the verge of collapse, as some commentators would have it.

Instead, our research shows that, with respect to the political psychology of the Chinese people, political trust – a belief in the legitimacy of the government – appears as the dominant reason for their broad support of the political system.

[macbone]

So you believe that Kim Jong Un rules all of Korea?

I generally find that Chinese people are devoted to the Party. The only people from mainland China that I've ever heard criticize the Party are those who left China and now live either in Hong Kong or abroad. Frankly, I'm not surprised that the citizenry says they're happy with the government.

More and more Chinese are returning to China to work, too. In the past, the Chinese students educated abroad would stay there. They're moving back to the country in greater numbers now.

China's not going to let Hong Kong break away. There isn't broad popular support for Hong Kong as a free city-state, either, although they have made a nice new flag supporting that position. =)

[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10923766_897443603633474_6045868992353140247_n.jpg?oh=1b4df2b836816966d16848a08c669ad1&oe=55B6A6D9&__gda__=1434431073_55ea130d8548dcd555c99b5d82f291cd
[/img]
Mrswdk, the KMT wants a unified China with themselves at the head. The opposition Democratic party wants a free and independent Taiwan. Either way, they're operating separate from the CCP, and in China, the CCP = the central government.

Forbes calls them a country: Why Does The U.S. Fund Countries, Like Taiwan, That Attack American Businesses And Intellectual Property?

Here, perhaps you could learn more about Taiwan by reading about it? This book, Taiwan in Perspective, edited by Wei Chin Lee, might provide you with more understanding. (Spoiler alert: Taiwan's a country, according to the book).

[url=https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=MneIergR2d4C&lpg=PA135&ots=eSWZnJw50H[/url]

Here's an excerpt from John Fuh-Sheng Hsieh's essay in the book "East Asian Culture and Democratic Transition, With Special Reference to the Case of Taiwan."

1. Introduction

It has often been claimed that East Asian culture is antithetical to democracy. In a typical argument, Lucian W. Pye (1985) asserted that:

[T]here do seem to be some features of Asian civilizations that have set them apart from Western civilization. Probably the most significant of these is the Asian tendency to place more value on the collectivity and to be less sensitive than the West to the values of individualism. (P. 26)

Given that democracy is closely associated with individualism, group consciousness featuring East Asian culture is clearly detrimental to democratic development in the region. However, in the past few years, we do find a number of East Asian countries, including Taiwan, moving toward democratic rule, and even for those countries that remain totalitarian or authoritarian, a trend toward greater liberalization is also obvious.

Hsieh is a professor in the department of political science at the University of South Carolina. Here's his bio:

John Fuh-sheng Hsieh received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Rochester in 1982. Currently, he is Professor at the Department of Political Science, University of South Carolina.

He has been active in scholarly activities, serving as secretary-general of the Chinese Association of Political Science ( Taipei), chairman of the Comparative Representation and Electoral Systems Research Committee in the International Political Science Association, and coordinator of the Conference Group on Taiwan Studies, a related group in the American Political Science Association.

His teaching and research interests include rational choice theory, constitutional choice, electoral systems, electoral behavior, political parties, democratization, foreign policy, and East Asian politics. He is the author or co-author of A Comparative Study of Referendums [in Chinese], Party-List Proportional Representation [in Chinese], Popular Will, Checks and Balances, and Efficiency: On the Values of Democracy [in Chinese], On the Participation of Interest Groups in the Political Process [in Chinese]. He is also the co-editor of The Scope and Methods of Political Science [in Chinese] and How Asia Votes ( Chatham House, 2002). His English works appeared as chapters in many books and in such journals as International Political Science Review, Electoral Studies, Party Politics, Public Choice, Representation, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, China Quarterly, Journal of Contemporary China, Journal of Asian and African Studies, American Asian Review, Issues & Studies, and Chinese Political Science Review.

This man has forgotten more about Taiwan than you or I will ever know. I know, I know, I'm making an appeal to authority, the weakest form of argumentation there is, but I think it's safe to say Tsieh is an expert in this field.

The editor of the book, Professor Wei-chin Lee, teaches at Wake Forest University. He's also from Taiwan. Here's his bio:

Professor Wei-chin Lee has published several books, including the forthcoming edited volume on Taiwan’s Politics in the 21st Century (2010). His articles have appeared in various scholarly journals, such as Asian Affairs, Asian Security, Asian Survey, Journal of Asian and African Studies, Journal of Chinese Political Science, Journal of Contemporary China, Journal of Comparative Communism, Journal of Economics and International Relations, Journal of Northeast Asian Studies, Nonproliferation Review, Pacific Focus, and World Affairs. His teaching and research interests are foreign policy and domestic politics of China and Taiwan, US policy toward East Asia, international security, and international institutions.

Again, another expert who understands vastly more about Taiwan than you and I put together.

Let's see. They proclaim themselves as the Republic of China. They have their own military. The conduct diplomacy with more than a hundred countries globally. 22 countries recognize their sovereignty. Experts and scholarly works recognize their sovereignty. Yeah, sounds like a country to me.

[mrswdk]

So you believe that Kim Jong Un rules all of Korea?

I know almost nothing about Korea.

Mrswdk, the KMT wants a unified China with themselves at the head. The opposition Democratic party wants a free and independent Taiwan. Either way, they're operating separate from the CCP, and in China, the CCP = the central government.

Forbes calls them a country: Why Does The U.S. Fund Countries, Like Taiwan, That Attack American Businesses And Intellectual Property?

Despite Forbes, John Fuh-Sheng Hsieh and the University of Canberra Young Conservatives' Association referring to Taiwan as a country, there is still the matter of the UN plus every major country in the world calling Taiwan a part of the PRC.

Let's see. They proclaim themselves as the Republic of China. They have their own military. ISIS also proclaim themselves a state and have a military They conduct diplomacy with more than a hundred countries globally. It's not diplomacy if the country in question refuses to recognize you as a nation. 22 countries recognize their sovereignty. More than 160 don't Experts and scholarly works recognize their sovereignty. Lots of experts and scholars don't Yeah, sounds like a country to me.

[mrswdk]

Re the diplomacy thing:

The US on Tuesday expressed disappointment over Taiwan's holding of a flag-raising ceremony last week at the Twin Oaks estate, the former residence of R.O.C. ambassadors to the US in Washington, DC, saying that the move violated the long-standing pact on US-Taiwan relations.

"We're disappointed with the action," US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said when asked about the raising of the R.O.C. flag at the compound on New Year's Day.

"The flag-raising ceremony violated our longstanding understanding on the conduct of our unofficial relations," she told reporters.

"We have a robust set of cultural relations, but we do not have diplomatic relations. And we'll continue to discuss this with the proper officials," she said.

http://www.asianewsnet.net/US-disappoin ... 70101.html

[macbone]

Ah, interesting. Let's see what else The China Post has to say.

"Top US congressman backs Taiwan TPP bid"
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/nati ... Top-US.htm

show

Gosh, three visits in 3 years? Royce must really like Taiwanese street food!

Hm. Taiwan's chief of staff visited the US recently? Interesting.

"Chief of general staff visited Washington: report"

show

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/nati ... ief-of.htm

Here's some more snippets:

show

https://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/nat ... ile-no.htm

I love how you side-stepped Kim Jong Un's claim to rule over all of Korea. So if someone says he controls all of a territory, does that make it so?

I asked my wife if she thought Taiwan was a country, and she responded with "Of course. They have their own military, their own economy, their own government."

Does every country need the U.N.'s stamp of approval to declare themselves sovereign? Or China's? Or the United States'? Does the international community get to decide who can call themselves a country and who cannot? Everyone seemed to think Taiwan was its own country before China started rumbling her throat, so we're basically talking about one country getting to decide if another country is sovereign or not.