shawn_c wrote:- China stopped allowing tourists to come to Taiwan in the weeks up to the election, probably for two reasons. The first reason is so that "Taishang" (Taiwanese businessmen conducting business in China) would have flights to get back and vote Blue. The other reason being that they didn't want their people to see democracy in action... although, that's blatant, it's no conspiracy.
Sorry, but calling flat out BS on that one, on election day I was taking a visiting friend from London around the Palace Museum. It was crawling, literally crawling, with Chinese tour groups, sadly the same was true for Confucious Temple, Taipei 101 and other tourist sites we visited over election weekend, so I doubt very much that anything in the way of restrictions on commie tourists were really implemented by Beijing or anyone else.
Well, I'm glad it was flat out BS! I wouldn't want this to actually be true.
But... you sure they were actual Mainland tourists? Like, how sure? Categorically sure?
shawn_c wrote:And the most sinister conspiracy: Hu Jintao was given a mandate and a team to reunify Taiwan by peaceful and economic means by the end of Ma's second term. Barring that, they would result to force. Ma is playing right into their hands, as are the Taiwanese business leaders - such as HTC's Sherry Wang or Foxconn's Terry Gou - who publicly declared their support of the KMT. Why would business leaders do such an un-businesslike thing? Pressure from China. Threats from China.
This is just fear mongering from the green camp, pure and simple. Fact is China is fine with the status quo and using economic and soft power to bring Taiwan in and will remain so at the end of Ma's second term. There's nothing special about the end of Ma's second term that'll make China want to say "ok, reunify now or else." Of course when 2016 comes and go and nothing happens, the greenies will probably just come up with a new date, kind of like those people who are predicting apocalypse.
Wait, that is exactly it... they are using economic and soft power (e.g. pandas) to bring Taiwan in. And it's working...
Muzha Man wrote:I have already stated I think the implications for this election were minor, though certainly real. And I never once said anything about being bad for the DPP.
I think this is a issue more for city and legislative elections as you have people living in the city and not having their interests being represented. Yet as I stated they are often paying more taxes than the property owners. Talk about a skewed system.
The system really is skewed... and in many countries, it's skewed towards home ownership, landlords, property owners, and the merchant class.
What a lot of people don't understand is that business people tend to favour the status quo, because it is in the status quo that they are making money. They also tend to favour changes which they perceive will allow them to make even more money... and in Taiwan's case, that is the KMT option.
In Hong Kong, for example, most, if not all, of the former colony's major business leaders supported reunification with China. And they were against turning Hong Kong into a more socialist place, because of the possible tax implications. In America, big business is more often than not pro-Republican (i.e. right-wing) - are they not?
Speaking of business leaders and monied persons, I also question the reasons for keeping this ridiculous method of voting. Where I'm from, we can vote online (or by proxy) already... which means that, yes, voting in Canadian elections is no more inconvenient than logging into Facebook. "But, if rich tycoons can afford to fly back, why can't you?" Well, I don't currently make as much as a rich tycoon, you see...
Does not this voting system whereby only overseas rich tycoons (and not overseas regular persons) can afford to vote, mean that those who support the status quo would be more likely to come back to cast their ballot? The rich tycoon has benefited from the status quo in the past (obviously), and have a great interest in seeing it continued.
If you believe in Democracy, then it should be one vote for one person, regardless of that person's social status, background, or ability to pay NT$1,500 to take the high-speed rail back down South, when for them a $100 meal is a luxury.In closing, I don't mind the status quo - it's certainly more welcome than the unification option - but I still say, Japanese tourists are a tad more charming than Chinese tourists.