Post AMeStCoc3SmqjXtICO by ombres@438punk.house
 (DIR) More posts by ombres@438punk.house
 (DIR) Post #AMeStBovknRleF223U by ombres@438punk.house
       2022-08-17T13:26:29Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       The Guardian printed an essay from the Chinese ambassador to the UK, who writes:"Taiwan has been an inalienable part of China’s territory since ancient times" ok lol noIf we are to accept the "inalienability" of territory, we must accept one of two other things, neither of which applies to China before a certain time period.The first is some kind of conception of "the Chinese" (of whom there are ethnic subgroups, if we wanna go there) as an organic "indigenous" entity, e.g. the people of the land, comparable to other conceptions (but over a vaster territory than is usually argued). Seems a bit rich given Taiwan has its own indigenous people, who speak multiple (Austronesian) languages that bear no discernible genetic relationship to any Chinese (Sino-Tibetan) language of the type that is more common on the mainlandThe second is a "republican" and "national" conception that, while certainly widespread now, was very late to come to ChinaBefore that, lots of parts of the Chinese territory were pretty damn alienable, and indeed were alienated by treaty. I think it is fair to repudiate foreign powers and the authority of Qing dynasts, but like, what makes the 1895 loss of Taiwan different from only slightly earlier cessions of territory to Russia?
       
 (DIR) Post #AMeStCMFku6NJacdzk by ombres@438punk.house
       2022-08-17T13:44:00Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       like, an obvious difference is that Taiwan, you can make an argument - and maybe even have a war - that does not involve fighting with Russia over some territory that, in the grand scheme of things, isn't going to be that valuable, but which will be hard to secure and defend in a long-term wayone could also make an "international law" argument from that, like, 20th-century socialist states are the successors to Romanov-Qing dynastic diplomatic arrangements, such as they were, whereas - and this seems to be what Zeguang is doing - the second world war, which crushed and dispossessed Japan of its imperial possessions, means that there is no continued legitimacy for pre-war Japanese territorial predations. and of course Taiwan was removed from China as a Japanese colony firstso, fine, okbut like. don't tell me shit was inalienable in like the first millenniumthe fact that the territories of national states are considered inalienable today is... I mean. Frankly it's one of the most dangerous ideas in the world, insofar as it literally prevents straightforwardly sensible things from taking place, leading to wars that end up with larger territorial scope. I have things to say about Ukraine and Kosovo, but whateverBut backlating this view to Dynast Time is laughable
       
 (DIR) Post #AMeStCoc3SmqjXtICO by ombres@438punk.house
       2022-08-17T13:53:18Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       like, broadly speaking, everywhere and all the time, a dynast will give up territory (and all the prestige that supposedly comes with it) in exchange for being the continued despot of his own palace (it's usually a "he") which is gonna continue to be full of toys and servantsdynasts = badI am most familiar with the concept of inalienability in the context of Norway's constitution (don't ask 😑) and that is a conception that 100% comes from nerdy middle-class poet types, not from anyone who wore a crown or somethingalso, like. for dynasts. historically, their realm is literally anywhere they can wrest from the control of anyone else, haha. like people are more familiar with the European style of being king of Norway AND Sweden, lord of Buckingnut and Fockendom, and that is because of, like, complicated intra-European nonsense. in lots of places, tho, a person just had... a title with no geographic referent. like "Shah of Iran" is both modern and eurocentric, cuz he was just... "the Shah", e.g. "king of kings", e.g. there is no theoretical limit to how much territory this guy controls, just a practical limitanyway I'm done, lol
       
 (DIR) Post #AMeStDHKKhkuAbKDxI by austin@ieji.de
       2022-08-18T12:00:58Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @ombres Well, China is still very much obsessed with the concept of unification, be it territorial or cultural, despite the obvious incompatibility... In fact the first emperor of Qin is widely respected for unifying China for the first time, despite his torturous behaviours (book-burning, mass murder of scholars, etc.). Anyways, China got the same social issues as the US, something is needed to "rile up the base" / distract people, so maybe don't think too much...