World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
From the article:
Surely Trump is just being a good guy selling weapons to heckin wholesome Republic of China (which not only claims officially the entirety of the Mainland, but also the entire country of Mongolia and many lands in Bhutan, Pakistan, India or even Japan). Come on, surely this US involvement in war is the correct one!
collapsed inline media
I feel like anyone who says "Republic of China" is a CCP troll. The comment itself is unhinged. No, Taiwan does not want to conquer most of the Asia, this is simply about stopping another invasion. You're the baddies, leave others alone, no one wants to invade you.
Taiwan keeps those claims and this official name because otherwise it would be perceived as declaring Taiwan as a sovereign state, and that would anger China. Such symbolic moves are not seen as worth the risk of Chinese agression by most, or a large part of the Taiwanese population.
Is the government of Taiwan a CCP troll? That's the official name of Taiwan - The Republic of CHINA.
I just don't get why America obsesses over this little Island, over say Madagascar.
Madagascar got the same kind of attention from Europe during the colonial era. As a result the people there speak French, and Americans absolutely can’t deal with that.
The picture is from Wikipedia, famous CCP troll organization?
It's from a constitution written by a warmonger that called himself Generalissimo, in 1947, and imposed the longest (at the time) martial law. Since Taiwan's democratisation, any move to change even minor parts of the constitution are seen by China as reason for military intervention. The only way the PRC has claim to Taiwan is through a "succession of states", and that's why preventing Taiwan from rewriting a constitution written by a coloniser (the Republic of China) is important to them
I agree with everything you said, I just tend not to support the continued states that stem from fascism and don't have institutional purges in the state apparatus and in the economic powers.
What?
If we're talking fascism in terms of: belief in the need for a national rebirth (振興中華明民族), militarism, authoritarianism, political purges, the PRC scores much closer to a inter-war fascist European state. Talk to any Chinese and ask them what they think the state's view on "class struggle" is today.
From your link:
Nothing about removing the people in power from the institutions or the economic powers. It's about redeeming the victims, but not about transforming the system and putting new people in power.
What you're looking for was tried by the progressive administrations following democratisation, but faced opposition in the Legislative Yuan, mainly from the opposition KMT party, including rewording of "paying reparations" to "paying compensations" to the victims
It's absurd to claim Taiwan today is moulded by the White Terror era, or that the administration or political entities have fascist policies.
Again, if we look at the framework of fascism, the PRC is much closer to a fascist definition than Taiwan
My original claim:
Your last comment:
So you agree with my point that public institutions and economic power are tainted with non-purged members of the fascist state? I'm very insistent about this because I happen to be a Spaniard, and I have equal criticism towards my own government, which never purged the political or economical powers after the 1975-1980 transition to bourgeois democracy.
Absolutely ridiculous. Communism is literally the polar opposite of Fascism and has shown this time and time again. All of the land of China, for starters, belongs to the people collectively through the state, and is only leased through 80-year periods to homeowners, directly making impossible the accumulation of wealth through real state. This by itself is more communist than any policy in Taiwan.
Taiwan does not claim Mainland China (source: Executive Yuan - Territory)
I can't read Chinese, care to provide information on your source?
Because, per the Wikipedia article on territorial disputes:
collapsed inline media
If I state a nation claims territories, I tend to prioritise first hand sources from the nation in question, rather than second-hand, crowdsourced statements. After a quick translation:
Your source is talking about de-facto control, not de-jure claims, and doesn't contradict my previous comment on territorial claims at all. It specifically says "under its effective jurisdiction", i.e. de-facto control.
This de-jure claim is based on a constitution written in 1947 by an irredentist fascist that occupied Taiwan and placed it under martial law, against the will of it's people. As I said in other comments, any attempts made by Taiwan since democratisation to move away from that constitution are seen as seditious, and, by PRC law, must be intervened with militarily.
You're conflating an attempt with changing the constitutional claim of continuity over the Chinese empire, with territorial claims over lands outside de-facto PRC. Taiwan could easily simply give up claims over those lands, but it doesn't
The main argument of the PRC is there is one China, the ROC was the government of that China, the PRC succeeded the ROC as the sole legitimate government of all Chinese territory in 1949. Taiwan was part of the Japanese empire (sovereignty given to Japan by Qing China) for the entirety of the ROC's lifetime in China, the ROC given administrative rights to Taiwan at the Treaty of San Francisco.
Taiwan giving up those de-jure territorial claims implies Taiwan is a separate entity, the civil war framework dissolves, since there's no longer a competing government claiming to represent China, just two separate countries, and the succession of states logic breaks.
The moment Taiwan says "we don't claim the mainland anymore, we just claim Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, ...," it's a de facto independence declaration.
This is seen by the PRC as sedition and, again, by law, the PRC must intervene militarily to prevent that.
Again, I specifically mentioned: "territorial claims over lands outside de-facto PRC". Taiwan could maintain its claims over the mainland but give up those over the "Greater China" without implying it's a separate entity. It's not the PRC's business whether Taiwan claims Mongolia.
The current status quo framework is based on the civil war claims, even the slightest deviation from this framework is seen as a red line by the PRC, to the degree that Chen Shui-bian was seen as a diehard independence figure for simply using Taiwan instead of ROC in national day addresses.
Looking at practical implications, where Taiwan hopes to maintain a status quo until the PRC's window of opportunity for annexation fades away, why would Taiwan say "yeah we don't claim the ROC territory, we claim exactly the territories of today's PRC", thereby strengthening the PRCs argument for annexing Taiwan?
They could reduce their claims of "Greater China", for example, to gain international recognition. Quite sure Mongolia and Pakistan would be happy to hear such news. But yeah, I guess to you, China, the country that hasn't carried out any military invasion in 40+ years, has a hair trigger when it comes the invasion of Taiwan somehow?