From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: We support Taiwan Independence
Date: 22 Jul 92 04:57:18 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <20JUL199217354053@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu> laiichung@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (L. D. ROPER) writes:
>= Yes , I have already claimed myself as an TI supportor .
>  I think your unification means to unify with CCP , is that right ?

Nope.  I don't like the CCP, and I think it would be foolish to talk
about political unification as long as the current version of the CCP
is in charge.

The one big condition in any political unification agreement is that
all parties must be able in compete in free and fair elections.  This
means that the CCP must be allowed to run in Taiwan elections, and the
KMT and DDP must be allowed to run in Mainland elections.  Right now,
the CCP would not agree to such a condition, and until the CCP does,
there's no chance for political unification.  (And if the KMT and DPP
can participate in Mainland elections, there's no point in keeping out
anyone else.)

>  Well look at the trade between Straits . Would you please how much
>  amount of money Taiwan gained from China no matter it's direct or
>  indirect trade ? How much percentage is that in Taiwan's total gain ?
>  As far as I know , it's less than 15% maybe even less , I can't remember
>  the exact number ( from CDN ) .

15% sounds right.  Let me point three things.....

1. Seven years ago it was 0%

2. It's 15% even though most direct trade is banned, it's between two
governments that don't recognize each other and no system for
resolving trade disputes, there is no direct airline flights, ship
travel, or communication lines, and the political and economic climate
on the Mainland is still a bit risky.

My guess is that if you fix the things in #2, the amount of trade
betwen Taiwan and the Mainland would be as much as the amount of trade
between Guangdong or Fujian and other provinces.

3. That 15% is part of what is keeping Taiwan from experience the
world recession that exists right now in the United States, Europe,
and Japan.

> TI doesn't mean only ROT , if it's two China , as long as Taiwan is indept
> diplomatically in the world, it's still TI.  TI means the political 
> status of Taiwan.

I have absolutely no objection to a "two China" policy for the near
future.  There are after all "two Koreas."  Your "class B" TI is very
similar to my "class B" unification.

I do object to the part of TI thought that says Chinese are BAD
people.  As long as the Mainland and Taiwan have a unified economy and
unified culture, and divided political system isn't too important.

>  You always messed up with culture and politics . How can't Chinese form two
>  countries ?

The problem is that each time I say

1. West Germany and East Germany

a TIer will say

2. Germany and Austria.

I have absolutely no objection to (1.)  I do object to (2.)

> If it is strong, China starts to attack his neighbor. 
> If China is weak, Chinese kills Chinese.

The interesting thing is that the only times in history China has been
expansionist (Yuan and Qing), it was ruled by non-Han.  During the
Later Han, Sui, Tang, Sung, and Ming dynasties, China wasn't very
expansionist.  China's borders at the end of the Tang dynasty were
roughly where they were at the beginning of the Tang dynasty.  (It did
establish a "protectorate" over what is now Xinjiang in the mean time 
however.)

You do know that the founder of the Ming dynasty issued an order,
listing neighboring states which were never to be attacked, don't you?