What is the One China Policy, and why does π¨π³ always like to bring it up?
A thread: π§΅
A thread: π§΅
You know how when someone feels really insecure about something, so they keep talking about it, repeating it, trying to reinforce it into people's minds so they feel more secure about it? That's what that is.
How do we know it's like that?
How do we know it's like that?
Have you ever heard of a One USA policy? Or a One Canada policy? No, because nobody needs to be told that there is only One USA, and One Canada.
It'd be like if I was insecure about the size of my yellow penis.
It'd be like if I was insecure about the size of my yellow penis.
But I was that annoying, rude, disrespectful, and juvenile rich kid we all knew in class that everyone wanted to be "friends" with simply to enjoy and benefit from their riches.
But again, I was insecure about the size of my yellow penis. So what do I do?
But again, I was insecure about the size of my yellow penis. So what do I do?
I say, "If you want to be friends (aka have official diplomatic relations) with me, you have to sign on the dotted line that I have the biggest penis on Earth, (that our China, the PRC, π¨π³, is the "One" and only China on Earth.)
But if I did in fact have the biggest penis on Earth, would I need to do that in the first place?
No.
People would just know.
It's why the USA doesn't feel the need to enforce a One USA policy, because everybody knows there's actually only one USA.
No.
People would just know.
It's why the USA doesn't feel the need to enforce a One USA policy, because everybody knows there's actually only one USA.
It's *precisely because* there are in fact Two Chinas, the ROC πΉπΌ, and the PRC π¨π³, that they feel compelled to try to use all the leverage they have to create a piece of fiction that they can manipulate and enforce into a "reality" that they enjoy. 
The solution?
The truth is, there could be a peace treaty TODAY.
The problem is, ONLY ONE SIDE, one of the "Chinas" isn't interested in peace, and what's worse, ONLY ONE SIDE is threatening the other, and wants to annex the other, either through violence, or coercion.
The truth is, there could be a peace treaty TODAY.
The problem is, ONLY ONE SIDE, one of the "Chinas" isn't interested in peace, and what's worse, ONLY ONE SIDE is threatening the other, and wants to annex the other, either through violence, or coercion.
It's not a mystery why the Taiwanese don't want to be invaded and/or annexed by the PRC π¨π³ .
https://x.com/danzwku/status/1553804642508648448?s=20&t=AMC7fDi2S4ITPcZ0Uhyyjg
The Peace Treaty could essentially say, the PRC π¨π³ gets the land that they got from the civil war and currently govern, and the ROC πΉπΌ gets the land that they got and currently govern. Cease-fire. No more "Chinese people killing other Chinese people."
Peaceful coexistence. No invasion from either side (even though ONLY ONE SIDE is doing that today.) There are 2 Koreas, 2 Congos, 2 Sudans, and hell, 4 Guineas. There's no reason why there can't be to Chinas, unless somebody wants to suggest we're an inferior people that can't?
You'd think that π¨π³ would be happy that they got the overwhelming majority of the land, but no, being their usually greedy selves they want as much as they can get away with.
And they get away with plenty, having gotten away with all their intimidation, coercion, blackmail, and escalation without facing any consequences, as usual. Due to being afraid of facing any kind of backlash from π¨π³ the international community always turns a blind eye for them.
The other solution comes from the grassroots "independence" movement. I put independence in " "s because Taiwan/ROCπΉπΌ is *already* independent.
Independence in this case would mean separating Taiwan from any idea of *any* China, whether it's the PRC π¨π³ or the ROC πΉπΌ .
Independence in this case would mean separating Taiwan from any idea of *any* China, whether it's the PRC π¨π³ or the ROC πΉπΌ .
This may or may not be harder or take more time and steps, given that the people may want to come up with a new flag, new constitution, perhaps a new anthem, all of which the 24 million people would have to agree on and pass through the legislature, but it's not impossible.
Essentially it's saying, "Fine, PRC π¨π³, you want to be the one and only China? Fine, we don't care to fight you to be the only China, you go ahead, we'll just be Taiwan."
You'd think that they'd go for this concession, but you'd be giving them too much benefit of the doubt.
You'd think that they'd go for this concession, but you'd be giving them too much benefit of the doubt.
Like I said, being their usually greedy selves, they want as much as they can get away with. They want it all, despite not having the consent of the people living in Taiwan. Their male dominated single party dictatorship has no respect for "consent".
To those who say who governs Taiwan is a matter of an unfinished civil war, and therefore the PRC and ROC should just duke it out without anyone else involved...if you want to think and conduct yourself like an unevolved, underdeveloped, uncivilized, barbaric animal, go ahead.
What I and many others would suggest is to resolve issues as evolved, developed, civilized homo sapiens of the 21st century, with the pen rather than the sword.
To wrap up, again, we could have a Peace Treaty TODAY. BEFORE, an invasion even breaks out.
All we have to do, is get the PRC π¨π³ to agree not to start, instigate, and launch an invasion. To convince them that peace, is better than war. There IS NO justification.
All we have to do, is get the PRC π¨π³ to agree not to start, instigate, and launch an invasion. To convince them that peace, is better than war. There IS NO justification.
The ROC/Taiwan πΉπΌ and PRC π¨π³ *can* peacefully coexist. All we have to do is convince the PRC π¨π³ to stop being the bully and respect our boundaries. As I'm sure we've all heard ad nauseum from contemporary relationship advice, healthy relationships have healthy boundaries.
I translated this video myself (so there may be a couple errors here and there, of which I can go back and edit if anyone points them out,) that may provide some more context between why millions of Chinese do not support the CPC, Communist Party of China
Did a couple reaction videos on this subject as well:
@KyleKulinski @krystalball @AbbyMartin @EmpireFiles @dpakman @shoe0nhead @DylanBurns1776 @TheOmniLiberal @AndrewYang @marwilliamson @BernieSanders @esaagar @SamHarrisOrg @joerogan @TheYoungTurks @TRNshow @AnaKasparian @MsMelChen @cenkuygur @SamSeder Feel free to share my threadπ
I reacted to @johnnywharris ' "Here's What Happens If China Invade Taiwan" video
I reacted to "What the Taiwanese Think of the U.S. in 2022"
I reacted to "What Do Mainland Chinese Think About Taiwan?"
One out of a million examples:
https://x.com/NewBambooCity/status/1573516834036363264?s=20&t=2vrNNggh5l3Il7GM9clbyw
"Could Taiwan get a new constitution?" by
@donovan_smith in @TaiwanNews886 taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4666681
@donovan_smith in @TaiwanNews886 taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4666681
And another example
https://x.com/bikhim/status/1572628991256809474?t=7IfJ57shHs8P3r1-aFgMDg&s=19
Hours after finishing this thread I regretted forgetting another point, although I have talked about it in my videos linked above. Most Taiwanese people don't really identify as Chinese anymore. The political spectrum in Taiwan is less about left vs right, so much as do you ...
identify as Taiwanese, Taiwanese and Chinese, or Chinese.
If you asked an American today if they identified as English or British, what do you think they would say?
Just because you have the same or similar race, doesn't mean that you have to be governed by the same regime.
If you asked an American today if they identified as English or British, what do you think they would say?
Just because you have the same or similar race, doesn't mean that you have to be governed by the same regime.
π¨π³ on πΊπΈ's One China Policy: π§΅
https://x.com/danzwku/status/1588741421666033665?s=20&t=h7HEwFi2MTwbfoGF9C4ZDQ
* in this case it would be separating from the government that currently governs Taiwan, the ROC πΉπΌ, as the PRC π¨π³ has *NEVER* governed Taiwan in any century, decade, year, month, week, day, hour, minute, or second before, and more importantly does not have the consent of the ppl
(b)(3) of the Taiwan Relations Act. It reads, "the United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means;"
@UnrollHelper unroll please
This thread has since been censored for an unknown amount of time by @elonmusk and @lindayacc 's @Twitter .
https://x.com/danzwku/status/1663484478642348034?t=Wt2G5-zzBEKpxoTU6tf-jg&s=19
had to remove the video off my main channel, so here it is: "Chinese Historian EDUCATES Communist Apologist ENGLISH SUBTITLES [ CC ]/θΎηεΉ΄ε¦ηζιζε : ζζδΈε δ½ ζδΈε
± / θ±ζεεΉ"
No I didn't mean this literally.
https://x.com/danzwku/status/1722809006862004449?s=20
@threadreaderapp unroll
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
γ
