• OfCourseNot@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wouldn’t the separatists be mainland china? Honest question. Like there’s continuity from the former china government to Taiwan’s, the people’s republic is the newest entity.

    • Antmz22@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      No. The ROC has no more of a claim to be Chinas rightful ruler than the PRC does, except the PRC won the mainland.

      Sure the KMT led by Sun Yat-sen overthrew the Monarchy, through revolution under a united nationalist front and formed the ROC.

      But you can’t ignore the decades after, during which a civil war and literally WW2 happened (which stopped the civil war).

      During this time the KMT turned radically to the right under the leadership of Chiang Kai-Shek which led to a massive rift within China.

      The CPC grew massively during the war and many of the left wing of the KMT sided with them.

      The CPC carried out their own revolution against the current KMT and took control of the entire mainland while the KMT held only Taiwan (and carried out a little ethnic cleansing see: white terror).

      The CPC then formed the official government of the PRC and was internationally recognized as the ruler of China, while the ROC continued to hold it’s islands and claim rightful ruler over the mainland launching multiple attacks, by this time it was over, even the United States who had strongly supported the KMT over the CPC had no choice but to declare the PRC the rightful ruler of China.

      So the KMT has a claim to rule all of China in the same sense that a Qing descendant would. They uses to rule sure, but they lost the revolution and their still existing doesn’t grant them any power or recognition.

      • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m not talking about who’s ‘rightful ruler’ or not. The roc was a country and the communist revolution took a part of the territory and made it into the prc (a new country) while the roc still exist in the remaining territory. That’s the definition of a secession. I was just pointing out one of the holes in your analogy.

        Now that you took the time to write that I have a couple of questions. Was the white terror an ethnic cleansing? I might be under informed on the matter but I don’t know anything about any ethnic groups targeted in particular. Your last paragraphs imply that the sovereignty and territorial questions about Taiwan and the People’s Republic aren’t a settled matter for the whole world (except maybe the prc). Are there many voices claiming for the Taiwan government to be the ruler of mainland China anymore? Or any territorial ambitions other than staying an independent island nation?

        • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Chiang Kai-shek’s claim to a legitimate ROC government are tenuous at best. He basically used his position to launch a right wing coup against the unity government and attempted to purge it of all left wing elements. Claiming legitimacy when you’ve basically used force to try and take full control over a government is par for the course for fascism. That’s why I don’t believe the CPC demonizes the ROC prior to Chiang Kai-shek. They still holds Sun Yat-sen, a key founder of the ROC, in high regard.

          Also, IIRC most of the dissidents in Taiwan were mostly people who lived there or who were indigenous to the Island prior to the KMTs arrival. As such, the white terror did involve suppression of a Taiwanese ethnic identity.