Under Trump

[dawei]

About being a bull in the diplomatic china shop...politics have changed in America. That is all.

 

I start most of conversations with my step-daughter with, "what is the problem?"

 

Most of the time, there is no real problem except in thinking.   I just want real examples.   Show me the problem.   

 

Change?  Is that a problem?  

 

Let's just wait and see and then debate it all in a year or four...  

[dust]

Possibly.  But the vast majority of Taiwanese believe it is not.

 

...

 

So, I wouldn't discount the possibility that it wants to stay distinct and separate, and that a politician who notices what the population of a particular place thinks of where they do or don't belong is not all that unreasonable.

 

In black and white terms of right and wrong, one might believe it is wrong to deny the people of Taiwan the recognition that they are a separate nation -- and yes, they are a separate nation, whatever China would have us believe. But politically, I don't think that's the main point. The main thing, however bad it smells, is to play nice with the ever-increasing superpower that far outstrips Taiwan in basically every area.

 

And yeah, to the majority of Westerners who don't know much about the politics involved, it might seem reasonable. Trump is just talking to the president of a friendly country! What's the fuckin' problem! But I think it's a little naive for those of us 'in the know' to believe that Obama and all his predecessors didn't notice that Taiwan is a separate nation -- of course they did. They're not buffoons. They knew very well, and they also knew that it's more important to pretend that China is the only China.

 

 

 Oh, and it's never been a "democratic" country.  It was a puppet military dictatorship since its inception, in a semidemocratic wrapper.  Again, not all that unreasonable for a president who is a foreign affairs virgin to familiarize himself with what most Americans, presidents or not, haven't the foggiest about, and do it first hand...  unorthodox, but not unreasonable.

 

Do it first hand? The only way to understand the situation is speak directly to the president? And then he needs to tweet about it?

 

He could easily have a secret phone call, if it were really necessary. Actually I think we can assume that most recent US presidents have had communication with Taiwan's government... but they don't shout about it to piss of the Chinese! He's clearly playing games! Maybe not WW3-level danger games, but still pretty stupid.

 

And... I'm pretty sure that Taiwan is democratic. The fact that the current governing party is the DPP, not the GMD (KMT), is a decent indicator (that free elections have resulted in a change of ruling political party). However, I am not entirely clear on the election process, so if you have info showing that their elections are not meaningful I would certainly be interested (though it probably would deserve its own thread!).

Edited December 4, 2016 by dust

[Marblehead]

That is the problem. Relations between the US and Taiwan are unofficial.

 

 

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35855.htm

 

But Trump's phone call was unofficial.  He is not yet an official of the government of the USA.

[dust]

But Trump's phone call was unofficial.  He is not yet an official of the government of the USA.

 

It doesn't really matter. As president-elect, he is as representative of the nation as Obama now. Everything he does from now on is being watched, and carries the unofficial seal of approval of the nation. Using the fact that he's not president yet as an excuse, or pretending that he doesn't understand the levity of the situation, is either reckless or childish -- or he's playing a deeper, more dangerous game.

 

And it's all well to say "But Taiwan is a separate nation so they deserve to be recognized as such," but I think we all know that international politics isn't that simple. We can recognize Taiwan openly, but a world leader needs to step more carefully.

 

I don't know what his game is, but I know I don't trust it.

[Aetherous]

We can recognize Taiwan openly, but a world leader needs to step more carefully.

 

That sounds more like a world follower than a leader.

[Marblehead]

It doesn't really matter. As president-elect, he is as representative of the nation as Obama now. Everything he does from now on is being watched, and carries the unofficial seal of approval of the nation. Using the fact that he's not president yet as an excuse, or pretending that he doesn't understand the levity of the situation, is either reckless or childish -- or he's playing a deeper, more dangerous game.

 

And it's all well to say "But Taiwan is a separate nation so they deserve to be recognized as such," but I think we all know that international politics isn't that simple. We can recognize Taiwan openly, but a world leader needs to step more carefully.

 

I don't know what his game is, but I know I don't trust it.

 

WoW!  Political correctness to the max.  Or should I say political wrongness?  Better to tell lies and pretend to believe something that doesn't exist rather than admit to the truth?

 

You would rather put your trust in Clinton?  Haven't we learned anything? 

 

It's time to stop the bull poop and start being real people.  At least so far Trump is being his same ole self.  We might not like what he is saying but at least it seems to be the truth as he understands it so far.

 

And to pretend that the USA has no interests in Taiwan is ignorant and childish.  Just more lies.

[Marblehead]

That sounds more like a world follower than a leader.

 

I will be more bold.  It sounds like a liar.  But then, is there a difference between a politician and a liar?

[ralis]

WoW!  Political correctness to the max.  Or should I say political wrongness?  Better to tell lies and pretend to believe something that doesn't exist rather than admit to the truth?

 

You would rather put your trust in Clinton?  Haven't we learned anything? 

 

It's time to stop the bull poop and start being real people.  At least so far Trump is being his same ole self.  We might not like what he is saying but at least it seems to be the truth as he understands it so far.

 

And to pretend that the USA has no interests in Taiwan is ignorant and childish.  Just more lies.

 

 

What is being left out of this discussion is that diplomacy is a complex delicate art which can and will have consequences both positive and negative.

[Marblehead]

What is being left out of this discussion is that diplomacy is a complex delicate art which can and will have consequences both positive and negative.

 

No, I'm not really leaving it out.  I just haven't mentioned it yet.  The delicacy of politics is what got the USA involved in WWI and WWII.  Our leaders lied and we, the American people fell in line.

 

China is well aware of the fact that the USA supports Taiwan.  They are not stupid.  Sure, China would love for Taiwan to embrace Mainland China.  And that may well happen down the road.  And the USA will have no say in the matter.

 

More often than not lies are what causes war to be declared.  Even more recently, Vietnam and Iraq.  Both based on total lies.  I don't need those types of politics.  Tell me the truth.  At least I will then know what another's position is.

 

Just look at what Obama and Clinton did in Egypt.  Egypt was our ally.  We supported a known terrorist organization (Moslem Brotherhood) in order to over-throw the leader of our ally.

 

I'm very tired of the lies.  Tell me the truth even if I might not like it.

[Taomeow]

I'm very tired of the lies.  Tell me the truth even if I might not like it.

 

I could do that, but I'd have to be talking nine to five, for a year.  And someone would have to pay me.

 

But on the latest little tidbit, I don't mind supplying a tiny little truth to fix the tiny little lie:

Trump did not call the president of Taiwan.  She called him.

[dust]

WoW! Political correctness to the max. Or should I say political wrongness? Better to tell lies and pretend to believe something that doesn't exist rather than admit to the truth?

 

Yes, 'political correctness', but unlike the relatively minor things we normally label 'PC' and complain about -- not saying swear words, for example -- a politician dealing with crazy foreign politicians and international affairs does actually have to watch what he says.

 

To think that all being a leader is about is saying whatever is on your mind, whatever the consequences, is a bit simple. At this point in history, if all world leaders started telling the truth we'd all be dead in weeks.

 

I'm not saying the truth doesn't matter, it does. I'm saying that what's true and what's false is secondary to what might destroy the delicate relationship that has been cultivated over the last few decades.

 

I've had a similar discussion on truth with Aetherous once before, if I recall. His opinion was that speaking the truth is good always, never to lie. I believe that sometimes it's preferable to lie, or to be diplomatic in one's speech.

 

If you were hiding Jews in your attic in '40s Germany, and the SS asked you straight out... you wouldn't lie?

 

And how is Trump being defended all of a sudden as some kind of beacon of truth? He lies almost every time he opens his foul mouth. He tells non-truths all the time, it's what got him elected. And now suddenly he's a great leader because he decides to piss off the USA's third largest trading partner and largest holder of debt?

 

 

And to pretend that the USA has no interests in Taiwan is ignorant and childish. Just more lies.

 Nobody's pretending that...

Edited December 4, 2016 by dust

[Marblehead]

Hi dust,

 

I do understand what you are saying.  I don't agree but that doesn't matter.

 

And BTW, I am not a Trump supporter.  But I do support the process that will likely validate his election even though I prefer the popular vote.  I'm glad it isn't the standard because then Clinton would be the next president.  I dislike her more than I dislike Trump.

 

But I doubt Trump pissed China off.  China has offered the USA assistance with rebuilding USA's infrastructure.  They haven't negated that offer since the phone call.

 

What Taomeow said above may actually be the truth; that she called him.  I don't know.  And it doesn't matter to me.

[dawei]

I'm not saying the truth doesn't matter, it does. I'm saying that what's true and what's false is secondary to what might destroy the delicate relationship that has been cultivated over the last few decades.

 

But our very system to vote every four years is a kind of built-in destroyer of whatever was done in the previous 4-8 on some level.  Now, I will toss a bone that you're talking more international relationships and that likely will tend to be more delicate and more stable in most cases but it doesn't mean it is going in the best direction either.   

 

We may see lots of shake-up over the next several years but I'm not convinced it is wrong till I see what actually occurs and in some cases, we can't really state the benefits for a decade or so.

[Brian]

Curious, I think, that no one is really talking here about why Jimmy Carter worked to get Beijing formally recognized as he did.

[Taomeow]

Curious, I think, that no one is really talking here about why Jimmy Carter worked to get Beijing formally recognized as he did.

 

Do tell. Carter was president when historical materialism ruled China...  Did he figure out that socialism in China is like democracy in America -- a theoretical guiding principle, i.e. something that does not necessarily have to have many (or any) real-life consequences, depending on how the rulers interpret it?

[ralis]

Curious, I think, that no one is really talking here about why Jimmy Carter worked to get Beijing formally recognized as he did.

We are discussing Trump, not Carter.

[Aetherous]

Diplomacy is a subtle art.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taiwan-arms-idUSKBN0TZ2C520151217

[Brian]

We are discussing Trump, not Carter.

Ah, yes. The history of now.

 

Personally, I think there are two sides to Chesterton's fence and both merit inspection. In fact, I tend to look askance at those who discourage doing so, just as I would question the motives of a salesman who didn't want me to crawl under a used car before I bought it.

[ralis]

Ah, yes. The history of now.

 

Personally, I think there are two sides to Chesterton's fence and both merit inspection. In fact, I tend to look askance at those who discourage doing so, just as I would question the motives of a salesman who didn't want me to crawl under a used car before I bought it.

 

I don't deny historical fact in this case, but Trump is stepping out of line and is not the president yet. 

[Brian]

Do tell. Carter was president when historical materialism ruled China... Did he figure out that socialism in China is like democracy in America -- a theoretical guiding principle, i.e. something that does not necessarily have to have many (or any) real-life consequences, depending on how the rulers interpret it?

Here's a detail worth factoring in -- the Carter Administration passed out Alinksky's Rules for Radicals as a handbook. The incoming Reagan Administration found pallets of the book when they took over shortly after that deal with Beijing was completed. There was tension between ”Red China" and the Soviet Union because Beijing thought Moscow had sold out on the Marxist dream. Whether he truly appreciated his own action, Carter simultaneously stuck his finger in the eye of the Republic of China and aligned himself with the keepers of the faith.

[TheWhiteRabbit]

 

I'm very tired of the lies.  Tell me the truth even if I might not like it.

 

I saw this and I liked it so much.  I had an old friend talk to me earlier and wanted to know what I had done years ago or what I learned that was so powerful.  I said "telling the truth" and I even posted about it.  Then I saw this and I just liked it so much.  It really is true you can learn all of whatever... Nothing is more powerful than the truth.

Edited December 5, 2016 by TheWhiteRabbit

[Taomeow]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlzrNKN3rZI

[ralis]

Here's a detail worth factoring in -- the Carter Administration passed out Alinksky's Rules for Radicals as a handbook. The incoming Reagan Administration found pallets of the book when they took over shortly after that deal with Beijing was completed. There was tension between ”Red China" and the Soviet Union because Beijing thought Moscow had sold out on the Marxist dream. Whether he truly appreciated his own action, Carter simultaneously stuck his finger in the eye of the Republic of China and aligned himself with the keepers of the faith.

 

You seem to have an Alinsky fetish.

[Brian]

You seem to have an Alinsky fetish.

Have you read his books yet?

 

 

Lots of people in positions of power have and you seem to have a problem with me pointing out that so-called "Progressive" leadership literally has been using it as an operating manual and indoctrination textbook for the last 40 years. Why is that???

 

EDIT: Perhaps you feel it is rude and politically incorrect to "out" closeted Marxist revolutionaries at or striving for the levers of power in the US?

Edited December 5, 2016 by Brian

[CloudHands]

You seem to have an Alinsky fetish.

 

Ahahah indeed...