liberal democracy png
(234.07 KB, 556x468)
>>/46282/
> has the ultimate scientific worldview
This is language which harkens back to cold-war-era philosophers and ideologues. Is liberal democracy scientific or beholden to "science"? Is that why the best liberal democracies today affirm that men can be women too? china btw is starting to close the gap with the west in scientific output, despite the (apparent) limitations on "innovation" or "creativity" often observed among east asians, so it doesn't look like their system is stunting scientific development by imposing an ideologically-motivated "scientific worldview". An "optimistic" guess is that whatever "scientific marxism" they spout is rhetoric to prevent other politicians from outflanking them from the left (which is how "cultural revolution" spirals can start)
> the Party is China, the Party is the Emperor and the Party is God.
This is hyperbolic language. I used quotes when I wrote "dynasty". I'm reminded of the libs' outrage about God Emperor Trump, a fake outrage used as a rhetorical weapon, I suppose
> but a subgroup among the Chinese with their own history
This is ridiculous. The split between mainland and Taiwan is less than 70 years old. Less than the lifespan of an asian person. Chinese people on both sides of the strait share ethnic and cultural history of many thousands of years. By Chinese civilization standards this separation is a blip
> It will want the Taiwanese to be Party members, and Taiwan, a province like any other.
I think this is a fair forecast except that, even supposing reunification, taiwan will by itself (its social capital, geopolitical relevance, geography, history) remain a specially important province
> the last remnant of the Nationalist regime and thus, would have to be demolished.
Would Beijing try to influence the civil-war narrative in Taiwan? Probably, if given the room. Would they need to "demolish" political forces in taiwan? I don't see that. As I see it, as long as there is security that the island won't drift apart, alone or towards geopolitical adversaries, it is not very costly for Beijing to tolerate political disagreement (same applies, in my view, to the SARs, it should be ok as long as they won't try to pull apart). The reason was already given by someone (maybe you): under those conditions, the sheer scales involved almost ensure that given enough time cultural and economic interactions will eventually draw them closer. As a side note, I read that in the mainland Chiang's reputation seems largely rehabilitated. For example, the most important mausoleum atop the highest promontory in Nanjing, old RoC capital scarred by the Japanese invasion, is dedicated to him, there is also an old village named after him and preserved for historical tourism
> a dark period of history in the official public consensus.
So in their view HK and Macau have been in a "dark period of history" since returning? Sounds hyperbolic again
> to be Chinese but also something else
This also strikes me as ridiculous. The "de-sinification" agenda, intended to set the stage for a withdrawal of territorial claims and a resolute pursuit of independence, is (so far) exclusively DPP rhetoric and policy. And, although this woman in particular has been known as a "secessionist" in taiwan itself for decades, this DPP govt and official agenda is only 5-6 years old.
> It is natural that Taiwanese who want to be Chinese, but not any random Chinese province, ..., don't trust the Party in the long run.
But, ignoring the previous, this I find understandable. Of course it is quite impossible to avoid such misgivings given the situation. IMO the mainland should consider that, as long as security is not compromised (meaning as long as there is no declaration of independence, or a military power growth that defuses or diminishes the threat of forceful annexation), time is on their side, and so they can afford to give it time