Comments by "神州 Shenzhou" (@Shenzhou.) on "Wendover Productions"
channel.
-
163
-
The people of Taiwan do not realize that USA doesn't truly support ROC. USA did nothing to punish Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine, except impose sanctions that's all, so what makes ROC believe USA would be willing to go to war with China for Taiwan's sake? They are being led to believe that USA will come to their aid, when there is no actual guarantee.
Chinese government has proposed extending the One-China Two-Systems policy shared with Hong Kong and Macau to encompass Taiwan as well, but ROC rejected this offer and has not offered counterproposal of its own. As far as I know, ROC still claims all of mainland China as belonging to them, including Xinjiang, Tibet, whole of Mongolia and parts of Russia, Burma, Bhutan, India, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Taijikstan, etc. according to following source:
Republic of China Administrative claims
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ROC_Administrative_and_Claims.svg
51
-
36
-
+randomguy8196 It goes to show that USA is unreliable partner for ROC, since it doesn't want war in the region. USA sells weapons to Taiwan because it wants ROC to continue remaining a thorn in China's side, and prevent true unification of China, which would decrease USA influence.
As for 1-China 2-System policy, of course it isn't fair, but how else do you expect Chinese government to negotiate? At least under the policy, ROC can keep its own government, and PRC can keep ours, but if ROC rejects it, then what exactly does ROC want then? To divide China equally into half and have equal governments for both sides? That will only tear China apart so how else does ROC propose to solve this problem?
The Chinese government hasn't attempted to take Taiwan back by force because they are still our countrymen and if possible, a peaceful approach is always better that outright war. The government can always fully integrate Hong Kong back into China (by force if necessary) and unlike Taiwan, USA doesn't care about Hong Kong, but of course, the Chinese government doesn't do that, and instead uses 1 China 2 Systems so that both our governments can keep our systems.
Why don't you explain what is wrong with this policy then and how to better improve it?
21
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
13
-
13
-
Chad Leach You are talking about political stagnation in China, but the communist party has undergone great change since PRC's founding in 1949. The party is pragmatic, such that when they discovered Marxism did not help Chinese economy at all, they abandoned it and switched to capitalism instead. For example, the government's One-Child Policy was effective at limiting China's population growth, but once it was discovered that China has shrinking birth rates, it was changed recently to a Two-Child policy instead. When pollution levels were reaching intolerable levels, it was decided to ban further further incorporation of non-electric vehicles. It is this flexible approach that allows CPC to learn and adapt to changing environments.
USA despite being "democratic" also suffers from political stagnation. Trump was voted in because he promised to "drain the swamp" because of political stagnation. Previous US presidents followed more or less the same path, starting wars in Middle East and making sure the 1% keeps the wealth away from the 99%. If Hilary Clinton had been elected, it is no doubt that she too, would have followed this same path again, which was part of the reason why Americans choose voted for Trump instead.
12
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
8
-
Opiniones de JACC's Opinions Actually, Tibetan government signed an agreement (Seventeen Point Agreement) back in 1951, acknowledging Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. Today, countries all over the world, including USA, UK, France, Russia, etc, have accepted Chinese sovereignty over Tibet as whenever you draw the modern map of PRC, Tibet is always part of China. Even in uploader's video, Tibet is part of China.
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Both Singapore and China actually have a lot more in common than Singapore and USA. Singapore and China both curb freedom of speech, and even though Singapore is "democratic", it has been ruled its entire life by a single party, PAP, for 50+ years. Similarly, China has been governed by the communist party since the PRC's founding in 1949, 60+ years ago.
But this does not necessarily mean that this is bad thing. When a party is in power for a long-term, they can make long-term plans to benefit the country, unlike in America, where each candidate can only run for president for 4-8 years maximum. That means the US presidents only make short term plans lasting less than a decade, since that is the term of their presidency. For example, the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has been in the works by Obama administration for about 8 years, but after Trump took office, he cancelled TPP and thus, all those taxpayers money spent on planning just go down the drain.
5
-
+Chad Leach If you look at the government, the older hardcore communist party members are slowly retiring and dying off, and the younger newer generations of CPC members are educated (many with Western degrees). China's change is slow and steady, not abruptly, like when Trump became president of USA. For example, President Obama was working on Trans Pacific Partnership for 8 years, then when Trump took over, he cancelled TPP because he doesn't like Obama (Obama humiliated Trump with his birth certificate) So all those taxpayers money in TPP all went down the drain because of sudden changes to governance like Trump coming to power.
As for foreigners in China, remember that China is world's most populous country. We are already somewhat overpopulated, so why is there a need to accept more foreigners as citizens at the moment? To China, the rest of the world is severely underpopulated, so China doesn't see much wrong with foreigners leaving China. Only rich Chinese leaving China pose a concern for the CPC, because it means China's wealth is leaving with them. This sounds harsh, but you have to look at this from China's perspective, not from foreigner perspective. If you are foreigner in China, you are expected to obey China's laws.
The government also realized that fossil fuels are polluting China, and are taking steps to slowly ban coal power plants in possibly 2018. Coal fuel burns dirty and is responsible for much of China's smog, even in Hong Kong, so China is slowly reducing coal imports to reduce oversupply of power from coal and switch to renewable energy sources instead.
China poised to ban new coal-fired power stations
afr.com/news/china-poised-to-ban-new-coalfired-power-stations-20160711-gq3izc
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
+Trel carbyx In modern century, China did not wage wars on the same scale as Japan and USA, so what makes you think Japan and US are far more greater than China? Did China invade Philippines like what USA and Japan did to your country? As for South China Sea Islands, China first claim those territory back in 1947, under ROC's 11 dash line, which PRC's 9 dash lines is based upon.
Nobody objected to China's claim back then, not Vietnam, nor Philippines. North Vietnam had acknowledged that the Paracel and Spratly islands were historically Chinese. When Philippines became independent, it did not include Scarborough Shoals within its national boundaries. Even USA supported China's claim, and sent warships to help China reclaim those islands.
But then slowly Philippines and Vietnam began encroach on Chinese territory. Philippines crash an old rusting WW2 vessel in 1999 onto one of our islands and began secretly removing Chinese markers. Chinese government protested and offered to help Philippines by sending ships to remove the vessel, but Philippines declined Instead they began reinforcing it to prevent it from disintegrating, so that they can claim our territory. So who exactly who is being sneaky here? If Philippines object to China's claim, why didn't you voice it out back in 1947, when China first made the claim?
Taiwan independence is not recognized by many countries over the world, including USA, UK, France, etc, even Philippines. Chinese PLA troops continue to patrol our land at Donglong, not Bhutanese troops. The Diaoyu islands were historically Chinese, but stolen from us by Japan during the war. After Japanese WW2 surrender, Japan pledged to return all its occupied territory, so shouldn't the lands be returned to China? You are just biased against China that's all in your views. You complain of so-called Chinese "aggression" when China did not invade Philippines at all, but forgive Japan and USA when they invade and occupied your lands already shows that you have prejudice against different countries.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
China also once believed we will never get invaded, but 19th century British wanted continue drinking our tea, which China did not want to sell, so they waged two bloody wars with China and force us to buy opium from them at gunpoint, which we didn't want because it made us sick and was poisoning our people. Ports like Shanghai were forced open to distribute the drug throughout China and Hong Kong was also stolen from us.
Next during Boxer Rebellion, Chinese people wanted foreigners out of our lands, but 8 nations (USA, Russia, UK, Italy, France... ... even Japan) made an alliance to invade China and kill our people on our own soil. There was even widespread looting and raping of Chinese women. Afterwards, China's territory carved up like pie for the Western powers and China forced make massive payments to them.
Japan wasn't satisfied, made 21 demands and also invaded Manchuria, kicking off Sino-Japanese war, years before Nazi even invade Poland. Japan committed vast atrocities like Rape of Nanjing, Unit 731 and "comfort" women. In the past, Japan was starving and tribal country, but China taught Japan how to grow rice to feed themselves, how to cultivate silk for pretty kimono, and even how to read and write Chinese characters. Japan repaid this kindness by invading our lands, stealing our territory, killing our men and raping our women, even when Chinese army had never set foot on Japanese soil.
Nobody cares about China except Chinese people. Nobody can defend China from invaders, except Chinese people. Today, PLA is world's largest land army and because of that, Britain, Japan and USA think twice before invading China like they did in the past. A big country with weak army is ripe target for invasion, but a strong army acts as deterrent to invasion.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
Mickey G Africa is quite rich in resources and raw materials, but until Africans learn how to effectively harness it themselves, its resources will remain inaccessible, and African nations will continue remain poor as result. It's no use blaming other countries for making use of resources that African countries are unable to make use of themselves. China imports raw materials from Africa and exports finished goods to Africa, simply because Africans unable to make those same products themselves. But does that mean that Africans do not benefit from this arrangement? Africans still get access to technology like mobile phones, computers, electronic appliances and so on. They are not at the stage where they can make their own goods, but at least the roads and infrastructure form the basis of eventual African industrialization.
After China build those infrastructure, many overseas educated Africans are returning home to develop their homeland. It should also be noted that unlike Western colonialism, African nations are not being forced to do business with China and Africans still have negotiating power over their own resources, unlike with Western colonialism. Western powers have been one-sidedly looting Africa for centuries, whereas Chinese arrangement is mutually beneficial for decades.
2