• Ooops@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Same reason Russia did it. The allmighty leader gets older and wants to see it happen before he dies as some stupid form of legacy.

    • zephyreksOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fine, let’s play this game. What does China gain from capturing Taiwan? How does China rev up their population to invade Taiwan?

      Remember, Taiwan’s economy is mostly derived from complex high-value-add industries, Taiwan and China share one of the largest bilateral trade relationships in the world, Taiwan and China are tightly integrated in terms of culture (the best selling artist in China is Taiwanese, for example), and bilateral migration between China and Taiwan is extremely high. Meanwhile, Taiwan is literally a fortress with a massive force of military-trained personnel.

      China’s key policy goals are twofold: 1. Economic integration of Taiwan into the greater Chinese economy and 2. Taiwanese neutrality (or at least, no Taiwanese alignment with the West). Essentially, Taiwan is China’s Cuba (but if Cuba was populated by people who look the same, speak the same language, have similar culture, and didn’t have nuclear missiles).

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        China wants direct control over the chip fabrication capabilities of TSMC, which produces ~90% of microchip fabrication in the 5-10nm range and ~60% of all microchip fabrication. Exerting control over the rest of the world’s access to advanced microchip fabrication is the primary goal. Don’t pretend China’s aggressive behavior is about anything else.

        Taiwan and China are tightly integrated in terms of culture (the best selling artist in China is Taiwanese, for example), and bilateral migration between China and Taiwan is extremely high.

        Less than 12% of Taiwanese citizens support unification with the PRC, while 50% support Taiwanese independence and 25% support maintaining the status quo (see section 10). Additionally, 62% support Taiwan seeking international recognition as a sovereign nation (section 6).

        Meanwhile, Taiwan is literally a fortress with a massive force of military-trained personnel.

        Of course it is, they are being threatened by an aggressive authoritarian nation with a vastly larger military.

        • zephyreksOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nobody can control TSMC except TSMC lol. The equipment is incredibly delicate and incredibly precise. If TSMC decided to wake up one day and destroy their entire business, they could be done before lunch. Anyway, TSMC is only really relevant because government subsidies allowed it to outlast American and Korean fabs. Whereas GloFo had to pull out and Intel burned almost a decade on delays, TSMC was able to make progress. That’s not a long-term objective worth invading over.

          Moreover, note how I talked about integration. Recent calls for independence have mostly been driven by DPP politicking. Oddly enough, the DPP is funded rather heavily by US interests, which I’m sure is a complete coincidence.

          An invasion isn’t happening and pretending that one is is harmful to stability in the region.

    • OurToothbrushM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Except China has a vibrant democracy with a 95 percent approval rating, Xi isn’t that old, and Russia is a nakedly corrupt bourgeois “democracy”, sure

      Or literally any historical analysis as opposed to marvel movie understandings of politics

      • zephyreksOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Approval ratings” are rather nebulous. By the divisive and partisan nature of American politics, approval ratings in America are naturally going to be low because both parties exist solely to shit on each other. In China, “approval ratings” get measured from the perspective of “is my life improving?” rather than “would my life be improving more under someone else?”

        Honestly? I think asking if someone’s life has improved is a more fair polling question to ask, but it’s one that’s difficult to differentiate in the US because of how radicalized everyone is.

        Basically, what I’m saying is that the US would have a higher effective approval rating in the Chinese context than it does today, because many American lives ARE improving under the American government. People just think (often incorrectly) that it would improve more if the other party had power.

        • OurToothbrushM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          In China, “approval ratings” get measured from the perspective of “is my life improving?” rather than “would my life be improving more under someone else?”

          Wow, an actual useful metric for whether the government is responsive to the populations needs.

          Basically, what I’m saying is that the US would have a higher effective approval rating in the Chinese context than it does today, because many American lives ARE improving under the American government.

          Except for life expectancy reductions, child malnutrition, literacy rate reductions, etc

          • zephyreksOPM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, I agree. The US is basically adopting Deng Xiaoping’s policies on common prosperity: to develop some regions and pray that it drives less-developed regions.

            Of course, that doesn’t really work in a capitalist structure.