Brain Fertilizer

I've already established I don't agree with Michael Turton's politics.

Fine. We can disagree and not hate each other.

But he objected previously to my assertion that pro-Green pundits conflate independence, DPP interests, and democracy. Well, here is a good example. You'll have to scroll down to see what I mean, so here is a blockquote:

Finally, State thinks that Taiwan will be "emboldened" by military sales. To do what? Have more democracy? Note that we have a coalition of more than 20 pro-Taiwan groups pushing the referendums and wanting to overturn the referendum law, and that this referendum move is taking place without any reference to the military situation. The public wants to enter the UN. If State really thinks that the referendum is going to cause a problem, it needs to pull its head out and make sure that Taipei is adequately armed to protect itself -- because the referendum isn't going to be stopped. The DPP can't call it off now, not without taking a hit in the polls. I know its insane to call for diplomats to recognize reality, especially in the Taiwan case, but perhaps State needs to adjust its thinking to the situation on the ground....and, as always, observe the unbalanced State Department view: arms sales embolden Taipei -- but failure to sell arms doesn't embolden Beijing. Once again, we have that lurking Beijing-think, where democracy is a problem, but weapons buildups in China are a force for stability.

Let me take those point-by-point:
1) "Finally, State thinks that Taiwan will be "emboldened" by military sales. To do what? Have more democracy?"

Well, there it is, a perfect example. I don't want to lapse into insults, but I'm tempted here. Democracy is not the problem, was never the problem, and it is disingenuous or perhaps even invidious to imply so. No, the problem is declaring independence. In other words, the problem is Taiwan sticking a thumb in the PRC's eye to no real benefit. No one stops Taiwan from writing its own laws, voting for its leaders, throwing said leaders in jail for corruption, etc. Taiwan abrogated its responsibility in defending itself a long time ago, choosing (although with little other choice) to depend on the U.S. for its defense. Thus, if Taiwan provokes the PRC into an invasion, Taiwan will do so depending on the U.S. to come and defend it. Got that? U.S. lives will be lost to defend Taiwan, which elected a President who appeared to not care about defending the country for the first 7 years of Chen Shui-bian's presidency. Don't try to shift the argument to "defending democracy", because the fact that Taiwan has already had free elections proves that the U.S. has already successfully defended democracy in Taiwan. If the U.S. has to fight to preserve that democracy, it is simply because Chen Shui-bian and/or the DPP decided to risk that democratic freedom by provoking China for its own domestic political purposes. I don't blame Chen for attempting to use an advantage...but to claim that risking U.S. lives to establish Chen's legacy of the Father of Independence and/or help him avoid jail is "more democracy" is just ridiculous.

2) "Note that we have a coalition of more than 20 pro-Taiwan groups pushing the referendums and wanting to overturn the referendum law, and that this referendum move is taking place without any reference to the military situation. The public wants to enter the UN."

There was a coalition that pushed for Chen Shui-bian to step down, too. The "public" that wants to enter the UN (as evidenced by the referendum petition) was approximately the same number as the "public" that wanted Chen to step down (more than 1 million). Why is one group "democracy", but the other group just "thugs"? If Chen listens to the voices of the people, why does he only listen to the ones that tell him to do what he already wants to do? Whither democracy when it is anti-Chen?

3) "The DPP can't call it off now, not without taking a hit in the polls."

And there is my second point, in black and white. Even if the referendum might spark a war, even though Chen Shui-bian can't back up his bravado because he let the arms procurement bill languish throughout his entire first term, the DPP can't do what's right for the country because they are too busy doing what is right for themselves. And before anyone tries to move the goalposts again: no, a DPP victory isn't automatically "right for the country". "Right for the country" is preserving peace and democracy. Both of which Taiwan has right now as a direct extension of the Peace and Democracy they had before Chen was elected. He hasn't done a single thing to expand those two blessings, but he has done plenty to threaten them.

Chen doesn't know what side of his bread is buttered. He causes significant problems for the U.S. for his own political purposes, and then has Pan-Green adherents confusing independence and democracy and DPP electoral advantage to help obfuscate the fact that Chen has no right to drag his nation or the U.S. into a war simply for his own political benefit.

No, Taiwan doesn't deserve to be invaded and forced to be part of the PRC. But they aren't part of the PRC now, and they have full democracy. What, exactly, is Chen Shui-bian trying to change? When you already have what you want, any change just makes things worse. Thus, independence and full democracy are not what Chen truly wants. He wants the legacy of being the Father of Taiwan Independence, the primacy of the Min-Nan ethnic group over all others, and to avoid jail for his illegal enriching of all his associates.