Hacker News Reader

China doesn't mind the US having relations, even friendship, with Taiwan - through private channels. Public recognition of the Taiwanese government as a sovereign entity by the US is insulting though - much as if Premier Xi in China started having friendly chats with the governor of Hawai'i or Alaska while publicly pouring scorn on DC.

Except that is not analogous at all.

Taiwan is de facto Independent. It has its own currency, internationally recognised passports, military, airspace and democratically elects its own representatives. It has been de facto independent from China for almost 70 years. It never fell to maoism and as a result was spared the both the great famine (Which killed more people than the Chinese civil war and Japanese invasion combined) and the cultural revolution. It peacefully transitioned to democracy over 20 years ago, around the time Chinese troops were killing hundreds of civillians in Tian Nan Men square.

It is independent for all intents and purposes. Even PRC nationalists know this, but they need to keep face by not admitting the truth.

I have several close friends from Taiwan, and visit Taipei every couple years. When I go, just for kicks I always ask people how they feel about being part of China. The answer has, invariably, been not just No, but an irritated hell no. As you say, for all practical purposes Taiwan is independent- not just in their government institutions but in the psychology of the populace: they feel like a separate country, and nothing the PRC does can change that any more than Americans could be convinced to "reunify" with the United Kingdom.

China is kidding themselves if they think reunification is going to happen. It's certainly not going to happen voluntarily. And yeah, maybe they could take the island by force, but even if they managed it and it didn't trigger an international conflict, they'd just end up being another US-in-Vietnam/Soviets-in-Afghanistan situation: a forced occupation of an angry, resentful local population, which has no possible outcome other than eventual costly withdrawal.

That hasn't stopped them in Tibet. The fact that Taiwan is a smallish island simplifies matters considerably, since China can easily impose a naval blockade and wait for rebels to run out of munitions. Agreed it would work out badly over the long term but strategically it's not hard.

I'm not arguing that Hawai'i is similar to Taiwan. I'm saying that China holding friendly top-level conversations with the governor of a state while simultaneously refusing dialogue with the federal government is the only thing I can think of that would result in a similar loss of face (degree of political embarrassment) for the USA.

> is insulting much as if Premier Xi in China started having friendly chats with the governor of Hawai'i or Alaska while publicly pouring scorn on DC

speaking somewhat loosely, actually there is no "much as if" in this sense. The Chinese have a "face saving is the most important thing" culture, and the US does not. Think of it more like the tribal regions of the -stans: China is metaphorically ready to do some honor killing over this in a way we can't grok. Doesn't mean we should acquiesce of course. I'd perhaps make the analogy that everybody in the Chinese government is as thin skinned as Trump. (I'm exaggerating to make analogies here, no need to jump all over me, of course it's more nuanced.) Meanwhile, our neighboring Mexican politicians publically pour scorn on the US all the time and it doesn't particularly affect our relations (not sure if Trump can take it tho)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept)

In any case, it would not actually bother the US all that much if China talked to Hawaii, nor does it bother US that China talks to the Philippines; it would be to our benefit if China and the Philippines resolved their differences mutually, and the same with Taiwan; it does bother US that the Philippines would make short-sighted unwise bargains inasmuch as we get the sense that we will be involved in cleaning up the mess later, and inasmuch as it reinforces China's belief that they should throw their weight around more WRT the Biển Đông (the East Sea, off the coast of Vietnam;)

My in-laws are Vietnamese-Chinese so I'm painfully aware of how upsetting a perceived loss of face can be.

I would say, though, that there's a big difference between Hawai'i and the Phillipines. The latter is a treaty partner of the US but that's still something less than being territory. (Of course many Hawai'ian people would rather go back to being a sovereign nation but I don't want to veer far off topic.)

> The Chinese have a "face saving is the most important thing" culture, and the US does not. Think of it more like the tribal regions of the -stans: China is metaphorically ready to do some honor killing over this in a way we can't grok.

Please, can we ditch the outdated stereotypes? The Chinese govt uses the parallel tropes to the US ("we've suffered under years of foreign domination" "Here we're on an anti-corruption campaign so you don't have to suffer under unnecessary taxes" etc. And funding local SoEs to keep the jobs flowing).

Is make America Great Again any different? "Other countries are laughing at us." "We never win any more""We're going to bring back coal"

I just picked MAGA because it was a recent successful platform. But consider dispassionately: 15 years ago a small bunch of bandits killed 3000 people and cause a few billion in property damage. IN return the US has spent trillions killing people who had nothing to do with it in order to to restore its honor. Movies from Rambo to Shooter to anything by Chuck Norris are simply ways to pander to loss of face.

Of course there are differences between the two but let's stick to facts.

It's not an outdated stereotype. There are fundamental differences between eastern and western cultures. Individualistic vs collectivist, guilt based vs shame based.

The very fact that English has the expression "Lose Face" is because it was translated from Chinese and imported into the language in the 19th century[0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept)#En...

You should look up what the movie Rambo is actually about. It's an interesting and important story.

That's really my point in those examples: Rambo and Shooter have an explicit story that ties to a particular individualistic-in-group-context narrative, but they also rest upon an underlying group identification and sense of group shame. Shooter is interesting in that I don't feel race plays any role in the group, except through the use of an "outside mercenary"

i doubt very much that this has never happened before. but the Pentagon just write it off. like it did when losing planes over usrr.

the political statement is that this time they issued a press release to let everyone know about it.

China haven't changed how they react to the usa, regardless of adminstration. How the Pentagon behave, have changed.

now the million dollar question is why.