No he didn’t.
Can we get an article that at least attempts to be objective and doesn’t tell us how to feel? Half the damn thing is moralizing about Taiwanese independence (which I support BTW) rather than providing new information.
Taiwanese isn’t an ethnicity, Taiwan is mostly Han, though there are a few percent of indigenous people.
Edit: Anyone downvoting this doesn’t know the most basic history of Taiwan and should refrain from having an opinion. Here’s the wikipedia article citing Taiwan’s govenment’s statistics.
Are you somehow under the impression that the only possible identity is ethnic? Like when people say “I’m a New Yorker” do you reply back “Um, actually, New Yorker isn’t an ethnicity”?
And would the lack of ethnic New Yorkiness justify a ban on people labeling themselves or organizing as New Yorkers? Should we abolish the city of New York in the name of national unity then?
This is about a law pertaining to ethnicities.
Not really though. It’s a cudgel against political autonomy used against those the CPC declares dominion over, regardless of how those people feel about the fact.
They’re ML. ML generally think cultural identity, gender identity, etc are all bourgeoisie attacks on class solidarity. There is only one identity to them. Government.
There’s plenty of mls around if you want to ask them what they actually believe instead of just making shit up.
Not making anything up. I’ve seen the sentiment plenty of time’s and I’m not alone. And I wouldn’t go to an ML for “truth” about themselves or anyone else any more than I could go to a capitalist for similar.
Either you’re lying, misunderstanding, or you found someone with insane views. I kinda suspect its a mix of all 3, I can imagine someone pointing out that gender identity, race, national identity are all exploited to keep the working class divided against itself, but you have to have the most bad-faith interpretation to think they mean marginalized people should be ignored instead of that their struggle is a part of the struggle against capitalism. There’s a lot of marxist takes on intersectionality, but none of them are “your only identity is government”, that sounds like something a conservative would make up.
I could go to a capitalist
Capitalist=someone who owns capital. Liberalism is the philosophy of capitalism.
It’s literally the justification I’ve seen many times for the way minority groups are treated in China and other similar areas. It’s kind of the whole point of the stupid One China initiative. If that doesn’t describe you, then great. Maybe you’re a slightly reasonable statist. But even you slipped and started to acknowledge the lunacy of others that espose that ideology. Statist have a ton of insane views. Not just on the left. I have no issue acknowledging the good things places like China has done. I legit hope they break the current RAM cartels. The system I am posting from is currently using a fanxiang ssd. None of that makes up for the crimes of the state. And this sort of BS defending it. Yeah the headline here was hyperbolic and wildly editorialized. Just as much as your defense is dismissive of the same issues.
It’s literally the justification I’ve seen many times for the way minority groups are treated in China and other similar areas.
Minorities in China have special rights and autonomy. Cultural chauvanusm exists, but the government tries to prevent it, such as the law in question which increases penalties for discrimination against ethnic minorities. I have no idea where you’re seeing people justifying something China doesn’t do. Or by treatment did you mean building schools and using affirmative action?
one china initive
Did you mean the One China Policy? Where PRC won’t work with countries that acknowledge the RoC, due to both parties claiming to be the government of all of China?
That is entirely irrelevant.
If China is attacking Taiwanese people for thinking of themselves as Taiwanese under an Ethnic Unity law, perhaps you should be complaining about China, and not people, conflating them. Even in the article it refers to a national identity and not an ethnic identity.
Rolling up on July 4th (on an English speaking forum) to make vague posts to suggest another country’s ethnic identity isn’t distinct enough to merit national independence kind of makes you sound like an asshole.
That’s why you’re being downvoted.
Not wrong, just an asshole.
-
“Taiwanese” isn’t even their ethnic identity, the government of Taiwan identifies the big ethnicity as “Han”.
-
You don’t need ethnic nationalism for a national identity, wtf?
Then again, maybe the 4th of July isn’t the time for that conversation.
I don’t know why you felt it necessary to put Taiwanese in quotes, nor do I understand why you find it so important to post–over and over again–that Taiwanese isn’t an ethnicity.
I never said that it was. I said that a country does not have to have a distinct ethnic identity to merit independence or self-determination.
I think you’re talking past me, here.
-
