this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
28 points (91.2% liked)

politics

25216 readers
2138 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(Washington Post gift article)

Selected quotations:

Many Western democracies lining up to recognize a Palestinian state are in the process of conferring legitimacy on something that, legally speaking, doesn’t yet exist. Meanwhile, an economically crucial and politically functional democratic state that Western leaders have vowed to aid in case of outside aggression — Taiwan — remains unrecognized. This kind of hypocrisy invites trouble.

Note: The context of the writer's opinion that Palestine is "unqualified" for recognition stems from the fact that their government is only partially-functional, divided, with borders nobody seems to respect, and ultimately just gets bullied around by Israelis and doesn't seem to be able to exercise sovereignty in any way other than what the Israelis allow them to. The article's author seems to understand that recognitions of Palestinian sovereignty are more to do with being lip service expressing sympathy for the Palestinian suffering perpetrated by Israel rather than real, tangible attempts to establish relationships with a functioning state that exercises sovereignty.

This year, Taiwan’s gross domestic product is set to surpass $800 billion. Freedom House scores its democracy at 94/100 — more free than Britain and nearly on par with Germany. The Economist Intelligence Unit ranks it 12th in the world for democratic governance, the highest in Asia. Taiwanese passports grant visa-free travel to almost 140 countries.

This stark contrast reflects a failure of political courage. Western democracies’ refusal to recognize Taiwan stems not from doubts over qualifications, but rather from fear of economic retaliation from China. Yet this diplomatic self-censorship undermines the very rules-based international order the West purports to defend. If and when China launches an invasion and calls it an “internal matter,” any legal and political legitimacy the West would hope to muster in opposing such a move would be hobbled.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Why doesn't Taiwan call a ceasefire to their war? Or declare I dependence. Unless something has changed they haven't.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

They are trying not to remind China of their continued existence

[–] Sagan_Wept@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

What about Tibet? Pepermit Farms remembers

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

The thing that nobody wants to admit with Tibet is that China won. They moved a bunch of Han people into the region and it's now so interconnected with the rest of China that even if a completely free and fair referendum were held on independence, it'd probably be defeated 2 to 1. Call me a bot or a doomer, but if you ever go to Tibet, you'll realise the old Tibet is pretty much gone. All that's left is just another Chinese province with Tibet-themed attractions. They did it with Tibet and Inner Mongolia, they are doing it to Hong Kong, and if given the chance, they'd do it to Taiwan too.

[–] Sagan_Wept@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 22 minutes ago

You're 100% right. Yay colonialism for soft genocide

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 hours ago

"We can't do anything good unless we do everything good!"

What a miserably lazy line of reasoning.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 6 points 23 hours ago

Reminder the Washington Post is Jeff Bezos' propaganda house.

Both should be recognised, sure, pretty uncontroversial to me, but I'm not reading a word from this shite rag.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 6 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

De-legitimizing Palestine to save Taiwan is incoherent. Shows no love for the latter, just contempt for the former. Countries can do two things.

Besides, the deciding factor here is not the territories themselves, but the political muscle of the nations who would annex them.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

I think that's not what the author was trying to say here. He's saying that recognition should be granted on an objective basis based on whether an organisation claiming to be a state is able to exercise the powers of sovereignty, without respect for the political implications, and that if Palestine meets the requirements, then Taiwan definitely does as well, so it's unfair to not also recognise Taiwan.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 2 points 15 hours ago

Maybe it works according to fairness in Candyland, but in the real world the possibility of confrontation between nuclear powers is one that every world power wants to avoid (even Russia, I believe). That means avoiding provocations where possible.

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 3 points 21 hours ago

Kurdistan is the skeleton under the water

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Isn't the reason that just about nobody officially recognizes Taiwan as an independent county is that Taiwan themselves don't recognize themselves as independent? Last I heard both mainland China and Taiwan officially consider there to be just one country, with there simply being a dispute over which government is the rightful one.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

While that's how it started, most Taiwanese people don't think of themselves as Chinese any more.

The people who consider themselves as solely Taiwanese people outnumber those who consider themselves Chinese by 2 to 1. The Taiwanese government can't do something like change its name to the "Republic of Taiwan" without starting shit with the People's Republic of China. So they figure sticking with the old name of the "Republic of China" is less llikely to cause problems.

A lot of geopolitics in general revolves around people trying not to start a conflict over something dumb rather than accepting obvious truths.

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

Oh I totally get it, but that doesn't change the fact that it is currently the official stance of the Taiwanese government that they are not a distinct nation from the rest of China. Who knows though, that might change in five to ten years.

[–] Rooskie91@discuss.online 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yupp, that's it. Way back when communist revolutions were cool, they drove out the ruling class who took shelter in Taiwan.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

'Took shelter' being shorthand to military occupation and martial law that lasted until the 80s and 90s.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

And let's not pretend the KMT were in any way morally superior to the CCP. They were just reactionary bandits driven out by brainwashed Maoist personality cult members.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago

The White Terror period isn't exactly a morally superior anything.

[–] Kraiden@kbin.earth 0 points 22 hours ago

¿Por qué no los dos?