Taiwanese-ModTeam

禁止亂版、洗版、散播不實言論

V8-Turbo-Hybrid

Why do you think supporting the KMT or closer ties with China is reasonable (or not)?

They’re still foolish wanted peace and to sure no war on that.

How should historical crimes factor into present-day political choices?

Despite KMT not a Taiwanese party, there are still members who pro Western world and against China.

How do people in China or pro-China communities view the risk of war versus resistance?

For this question, you should ask Chinese, not Taiwanese.

However, I sure that many they believe and crazy in nationalism. They don’t care the risk of war and even believe they would never go like Russia today.

How should Taiwan navigate survival without becoming a pawn of any major power?

Maybe, it isn’t a great option, but it’s time for Taiwan gotten nuclear weapons.

lovebitcoin

Ask yourself honestly: would you be willing to live long-term in China as an ordinary person? If not, then neither would Taiwanese people, nor Chinese people.

greatgordon

Why do you think supporting the KMT or closer ties with China is reasonable (or not)?

It is, of course, reasonable to have closer tie with neighboring countries, as long as they are not hostile. Which, unfortunately, is not the case between PRC and Taiwan, since they have been openly hostile toward our existence and way of life.

I don’t think this means we should absolutely avoid seeking friendship with them, either at governmental or private sectors. Instead, this make me extremely careful about “the cost” of getting closer with China. In my opinion, if we need to make any compromise in national security or sovereignty in order to get close with China, I would prefer not to. Since it is a price I’m not willing to pay.

The problem of KMT’s approach is excessive appeasement toward PRC officials. They failed to reassure me that they would safeguard our national security and sovereignty to degreea above lip service.

How should historical crimes factor into present-day political choices?

That is their resume. Their history tells us its culture and norms. So it is natural for people to choose or not choose a particular party because of its history.

How do people in China or pro-China communities view the risk of war versus resistance?

I’m apparently NOT pro-China, so I can’t say I know what the hell happened in their brain. I guess there are a few mindsets.

Some people consider themselves as Chinese. So for them, the war against Taiwan is meant to punish those ungrateful people who dare to abadon their ancestry and call themselves Taiwanese. If PRC wins, they also win, since they are also Chinese. And somehow they are very confident about Chinese weaponry’s IFF (only explodes on separatists), and probably have absolute confidence that reeducation camp will not include them.

Some people think it is futile to resist the might of PLA. So why delay the inevitable? Surrendering early is the best.

Some believe avoiding war at all cost, which includes sacrificing sovereignty and the current democratic system for maximal appeasement, is the best strategy. They think that way because they either consider the PLA invincible or they consider themselves as Chinese, and avoiding war is the only way to maintain the “brotherhood” between China and Taiwan.

How should Taiwan navigate survival without becoming a pawn of any major power

It is preferable to not to be controlled by another country. However, if it is the price we must pay to maintain our way of life, then the risk is tolerable. That is to say, the risk of being “a pawn” (whatever that means) has less priority than survival on my problem list.

However, in comparison with Korea and Japan, Taiwan actually has slightly more autonomy.

JoseYang94

Hi 👋🏼 If you want, you can DM me for more in-depth information…

Long-Cabinet6121

Short version: China and CCP magnifies everything that is wrong with human societies in this world. Ergo everything pro China is enemy of the mankind.

Long version: it is unproductive to hold a political party accountable for its historical agenda or atrocities. The Democrat party of 19th century strongly supported slavery and Republicans back then fought against slavery, sort of.

That said if a political party keeps making alliances and choices that align with other genocidal dictator regimes, then that pattern is problematic. KMT was aligned with Nazi Germany after it broke away from Soviet influence, and, 70 years after 228 atrocities, aligned again with CCP that killed tens of millions of Chinese during Great Leap Forward, famine and Cultural Revolution. If you just spent a month in China during COVID lockdown you would know that CCP hasn’t really changed a bit from back then. So it is clear: even if you want to have peace between Taiwan and China, KMT is not a political party with a track of record to entrust your life with.

razenwing

It seems like you’ve made up your mind somewhat, that’s not judgemental, just based on some language you used. let me try to reply as neutral as possible.

Why do you think supporting the KMT or closer ties with China is reasonable (or not)?

Let’s skip over all the broken historical promises and the history of the island, and just view KMT at its current platform.

Let’s first understand where they are basing this fantastical idea of negotiated peace from. During ex-President Ma, he signed ECFA and met with Xi in a historic first in Singapore, using framework he claimed existed as the 92 Accord, which stated that one China, but separate claim.

The good from that period is a high level of political stability where no country outside of Gambia dropped recognition of Taiwan.

What the KMT doesn’t remind people is the reality of the situation back then. Ma was able to achieve all these because he suppressed Taiwan’s international presence. While we lost no diplomatic recognition, we failed to secure any meaningful political and economic alliance, which is often more important than bought-for-recognition-countries. We accepted under classified ourselves as regions in many cases just to seek an attendance in international committees.

ECFA produced an immediate burst in GDP, but that burst was short term and non-sustainable. Fact is, elite class grew in wealth during that period, and specifically during this period that the housing market skyrocketed beyond affordability. The deal with China allowed China to gain access and technology that was not present at the time. SMB got obliterated as technology fled and resources consolidated amongst the few. Clearest example, check the market numbers and income figures for the administration’s 8 years, they are virtually stagnant. A lot of issues thst youth of Taiwan complain about today can be traced back to policies then.

All of these show signs to China that Taiwan was willing to capitulate eventually because they interpreted the 92 accord drastically differently. To them, there is no separate interpretation. There is one China, their China, and Taiwan is just waiting to rejoin.

The reality of the situation now is drastically different from his administration. We have over 10 years of data to evaluate Xi’s intention and the actual economic impact from dealing with China. In all cases, they were net negative except for the privileged class. Take example, South Korea. They saw what Ma did, and scholars urged their leader to do the same. Today, Korea is at risk of losing every single advantage they had outside of Samsung because of EUV sanction. They were leaders in ship building, electronics (LED and storage), and fabricators. Now, they lag behind I all of these industries from heavy to high tech because of their policies to bind with China. This is not even a threat analysis issue, is when you bind so heavily with single market with much lower cost, you will lose everything.

politically, we are stronger than ever with the major powers of the world. these include the EU, America’s, and Japan. and these predicated upon trust that we not give China the key to the silicon shield and another monopoly to world’s most precious resource.

KMT likes to tell you the good Ole days. But they don’t tell you the consequence of negating all the trust built up over the years with friends and allies, just to appease a dictator. Meanwhile, they put all faith in the hands of others instead of self to have peace, and they don’t tell you the political risk. They don’t tell you how Xi came into power as a hawk, not moderate, and ever since belts and road initiative failed, Xi needed a victory to prevent party discontent from spreading. Lying down now is signaling to China to have their easy history defining moment, which pragmatically speaking, even if you want to unconditionally surrender, is like the worst time to get a good deal.

Does continuing the current path necessitate a war? Maybe. But i would argue that by raising the cost of a historic victory sought by China, you stand a better chance to prevent wars than otherwise. Cause If China wants a war, he’s going to have a war outside of full unconditional surrender. And even KMT is not crazy enough to give that, so in reality, China wants to achieve that historical impact, and cause for war is present no matter how much KMT can give up for peace.

• How should historical crimes factor into present-day political choices?

You view “historical crimes” from the perspective of a Grand China theorist. We should understand that Taiwan was not subjugated by Japan. It was given willingly by the regime at the time, which was the Qin Dynasty. Japan also didn’t colonize in the ways of European exploitation of Africa. They governed and governed effectively. I am not going to say everyone was a happy camper under Japanese rule, but it certainly wasn’t filled with some mythical anger where everyone is longing for a return to Manchu rule. (which at the time, there’s is no China. China was an entirely new concept came up by early KMT to overthrow the Manchu for thr purpose of uniting as much ethnicities as possible under 1 banner to rebel against the regime.)

Was Nanjing massacre despicable? Sure, but any sane people would recognize that that regime has long collapsed. Any advance civilization would recognize the fault of people in-charge, but not the people themselves. Otherwise, the world will have so much beef to go around, lest not China itself. So much ethnicities either did crime against Han Chinese or were crimes against. If we really want to hold historical crime responsible, we may as well do a giant free for all and see who survived.

• How do people in China or pro-China communities view the risk of war versus resistance?

You know, if you judge from the response of very severed online community within China, they are like 90% pro war. If you think Xi is a great guy for holding that back, think again. Because invading Taiwan is never about some historical important event. I mean, it is, but it’s more important as a political tool, a trump card tucked away by Xi for when his own regime is in trouble. Then he can play that card and maybe displace that malcontent for a little while. (All the more reason not to give that to him)

How should Taiwan navigate survival without becoming a pawn of any major power?

Again with the language, our world is transactional. Would you say Costco is your pawn because it relies on you for profit? Ukraine is not a pawn. Taiwan is not a pawn. We are all doing transaction to keep the sovereignty in 1 piece. Being a pawn is a total submission, like Soviets with their satellite states, where they have 100% control over your livelihood. To see Taiwan as a pawn is having 0 sense of international politics. We take the security guarantee by forging stronger trades (key emphasis on trade, as we get somethign substantial in return like technology and money), not giving tributes. Which we would become a position of if we surrender to China. Then at best, we became a vassal state, or worst, just another front of China’s eventual war with the Pacific Fleet.

So yo your question, there is only 1 side that wants to make Taiwan a pawn, so the decision is really not hard at all.

Exotic-Screen-9204

Generally, revolution and regime changes have a long history of not really serving the best interest of the people. The outcome is often as bad or worse than the status quo. Taiwan is one of those sagas, but it eventually democratized.

The idealistiic visionary - Sun Yat Sen in this case - was eventually sidelined and ambitious men on both sides took over as autocratic leaders. So China got Mao and Taiwan eventually got Chiang Kai Chek. To both, ideology was a useful tool to hold on to power.

Over its years in China, the KMT had many internal power stuggles and failed to consolidate control of China under constitutional multiple party rule. Everything was a battle between factions. WW2 suddenly ended with the A-bomb. Mao revived his Civil War against the KMT. The KMT fled because they had no choice.

The Taiwanese were abandoned by Japan. and taken over under KMT martial law.

Taiwan’s democracy really did not arrive until Lee Dung Hwei was elected president.

So the KMT has had many years where it presented an ideal democratic image as its goal that it did not live up to. Some wasn’t its fault, but much was. Wealth, power, and privledge can easily blind many people when survival offers few or no choices.

So here we are today.

JerrySam6509

This is a very meaningful survey, and it can help you better understand Taiwan, so I’ll give you some healing points (press like).

In reality, political stances are neither right nor wrong; often, voters simply cast their votes against what they dislike.

The Chinese government and the Kuomintang (KMT) share the same opinion: to oppose the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Therefore, they have become temporary allies. (We don’t know if the KMT realizes it might one day be annexed and completely lose Taiwan and its own power. But they are clearly at a disadvantage when facing local parties and are gradually being rejected by the people.)

In fact, both the pro-China faction (blue parties) and the pro-US faction (green parties) claim to be the only way to prevent war. However, you see the consequences of Ukraine abandoning its nuclear weapons and losing its strategic deterrent capability. Their terrifying authoritarian neighbor immediately believes it can instantly overthrow the Ukrainian government and destroy its military capabilities. This is the peace plan claimed by the pro-China faction: reducing the defense budget, catering to the Chinese market, and gradually turning Taiwan into part of China, making it easier for China to insert more influence over Taiwan. When Taiwan also becomes an authoritarian state, and votes are as meaningless as in Hong Kong, the people will have lost their chance to change their minds.

This is aggression, not peaceful reunification. The word “reunification” itself is a form of aggression.

War crimes of the past should be remembered, but they should not be used by governments to incite nationalism. This is extremely dangerous; it’s a powder keg leading to the next war. If a political party is telling its people to remember hatred instead of the horrors of war, we have an obligation to condemn and reject them.

Taiwan should choose allies that are closer to its own political leanings. Choosing a failing nationalist authoritarian government as its patron will only lead to more suffering.

Exotic-Jellyfish-429

The CCP is incredibly good at propaganda, just like the USSR. Think about all the most talented artists and creators in the US in Hollywood and New York and all the universities and such. In China, those people can ONLY work for CCP propaganda. The West suffers a similar structural problem in espionage overall. It’s a massive waste of talent for China but they’re absolutely kicking the West’s ass.

The KMT nepotards aren’t just useful idiots for the CCP, they’re also useful idiots for Taiwan…their existence lets the CCP nepotards think Taiwan might actually peacefully “unify”. I’m frankly grateful for that at least.

As for what Taiwan might look like if the CCP took control. Actually there’s another island very similar to Taiwan which rarely gets brought up in discussion (it’s an embarrassment for both the CCP and KMT for different reasons). Look up how the CCP continually mismanages Hainan after taking it over.

Maximum-Flat

KMT is just a dictators’ party that lose the war and cling onto USA to survive. The only normal person in the history of the KMT will be the son of Chiang Kai-Shek. Heh, even the national father - Sun Yat-sen is a hypocritical lolicon. I am saying this from the perspective as the distant relatives that being burnt to death by him in Guangzhou since he refuse the idea of united state structure but dream about his big big unite China.

Much_Editor7898

I am not informed. I won’t research and discover on my own. BUT I have my opinions based on ?my conversation with my mom?. I am just going to go share online and ask questions on Reddit.

My goodness. Something is very wrong with people today.

Why not go read and learn instead.

No-Inside-4705

當和平溝通的努力換來更多的大規模軍演時，你就該明白想靠溝通來阻止戰爭是一種天真可笑的想法。

When efforts for peaceful communication are met with more large-scale military exercises, you should realize that relying on dialogue to prevent war is a naive and laughable notion.

Li-Ing-Ju_El-Cid

KMY the Chinese Nationalist Party had lost every negotiation with CCP, thus I don’t think they have any chance to get a great deal. They learn nothing from history.

Former_President6071

1. It’s reasonable if you believe the KMT has the skills to keep China at bay through its negotiation and appeasements. It’s not reasonable if you believe otherwise and see the KMT mostly caring about their own personal fortune and can be easily bribed.
2. Historical crime factors are very important to relationships between countries, but only to the extent of how government use these. Russia has committed tons of atrocities in China and the two countries were close to nuclear fallout in the 1960s. These days they are buddies. Japan was China’s best friend in the 1980s and 1990s when Japanese invested in China during its poorest time & post-Tiananmen isolation. Similarly in Taiwan, we experienced long periods of government-backed anti-Japan education and it’s much more laxed now. We understand what transpired in the past is important but not the only factor in current day-to-day life. Japanese people share more similar values to contemporary Taiwanese people for many reasons.
3. You have to ask the Chinese and there’s no good way going about it. It’s a question heavily controlled by their government. You won’t get an objective answer nor a statistically significant picture. Reddit China subs are full of propaganda/self-selected people who can go through the firewall for whatever reason. But most people don’t understand the full gravity of wars until it becomes a reality.
4. Define “pawn” first. This is such a weird framing of things. We live in a society that we are all “pawns” in the global economy. The best we can do is build our economy & education. Meanwhile, build strong relationships with people who care about us.