Quote:
Originally Posted by astralis
tronic,
look at the big picture. is china actively trying to grab these pieces of land back? is it willing to overturn the current system for these pieces of land? from your examples, nazi germany and imperial japan and soviet russia were. china, OTOH, is reliant upon and desperate to continue integrating within the global system, their bombastic propaganda notwithstanding.
|
astralis, I agree with your point. But the fact is that China is not willing to resolve these issues. It
wants to keep them alive to deal with them in the future. Infact, the 1987 Sino-Indian confrontation may just have been proof of that; reminding India that it is just as serious with its claims to Indian held territory in Tawang as it is with holding Aksai Chin. The 1987 debacle almost led to a second war.
Quote:
|
in that case, democracy won't make a big difference. to be honest, i believe this has to do more with the lack of a national ideology, with reflexive nationalism being a substitute for communism.
|
Right, but I'm looking it in the context as Tibetans and other ethnicities also having a say in this democracy.
Quote:
|
but most people will consider imperial england to be an example of liberalism; its constitution, civil/political rights, were all far in advance of other countries at the time. but if that example doesn't suit you, how about the US in the 1920s? it held what in effect were colonial possessions in the phillipines and latin america.
|
The British Empire with its colonies, was far from being democratic. The United States gained most of their colonies with the war against the Spanish; but again, democracy was not practiced there! And Astralis, again, my point being, that all those nations have evolved out of that era. China has not!
Quote:
|
at the risk of repeating myself, i don't think democracy is necessarily a block towards imperialism- it is only when the people's opinions about imperialism begin to change that democracy starts plaing a role.
|
It all depends. If they plan to apply democracy, then that goes applying democracy everywhere, including Tibet.
Quote:
|
sorry, doesn't cut it. how did the british get into india and hold onto an entire subcontinent with less than 30,000 troops? the british played a devilish game of divide and conquer, and it was ONLY when the indians developed nationalism that this no longer could work.
|
Agreed mate. Think we just misunderstood each other. My point was raised in regards to "Indianism". The concept has always been there but it was more of a cultural thing then a territorial or a national thing. Nationalism is a recent phenomena, not only for India, but for the world aswell.
Quote:
|
i think it's important to realize how malleable these claims are. chiang kai-shek, for example, "ceded" outer mongolia and parts of northwest china to the soviets, and there it remains. the important thing is not so much the claims, the important thing is how seriously the chinese take it. unfortunately for the tibetans, the chinese believe tibet is non-negotiable. fortunately for the indians, the chinese obviously do believe the contested area around the chinese-indian border to be.
|
Astralis, I simply don't know. China has refused to settle the dispute; again Chola incident and the Sumdorong Chu incident are examples of such!
Quote:
i doubt that very much- the US in 1860 wasn't going to allow a large chunk of the nation to pass away without a fight, referendums or no.  in any case, even were elections to be held, as you say, the flood of han chinese would make tibetan independence highly unlikely.
|
Astralis.. that was the 1800s..!!! This is the 21st Century. If half of those events that happened back then were to happen today, the world would be up in arms. Thinking and morals have changed from back then! Especially when it involves the sovereignty of multiple independent nations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ying
Ironically, Taiwan is a democratic society. When you guys support the independence of Taiwan, you say "If Taiwanese doesn’t want to be identified as Chinese, it is the choice made by Taiwan people democratically and so Mainland shall respect the choice". When Taiwan people support Mainland's claim on territory, like Tibet and Diao Yu Island, you guys turn to call Taiwan people "Chinese nationalists". |
Firstly when did I make any of those remarks, smartass? Secondly, Despite the fact, I haven't made any of those comments, I still agree with them! If Taiwan as a democratic society votes not to join China, then they should also quit acting like hypocrites and do the same for the rest. It is not us who are at fault for Taipei's hypocrisy.