(Believe it or not, arguing that they like being conquered and colonized doesn't mean they weren't conquered and colonized.)
"The right of self-determination is only relevant when it's bad for China :("
Tibet was a literal feudal state with absolutist power, where Tibetans worked the land as serfs for their feudal lords as they were legally tied to it. The liberation army liberated the Tibetans from their feudal yoke in a non-colonial way (we can get into the details if you want to).
None of those places were conquered within living memory, the thing you said China doesn't do.
Ok, hopefully we'll stop hearing the imperialists cry about how much better Tibet was under feudalism in 20 years, when it's no longer living memory.
Again- this was about you claiming China is not expansionist.
You can claim the expansionism was justified, you can claim that the people wanted it, you can claim it's unfair because of "the imperialists," you can claim any of those things or other things.
What you cannot truthfully claim is that a country which literally expanded its borders by a massive amount in living memory by the same government that is currently in power is not expansionist.
A people's liberation event in 50 years is really all you pro-US-imperialists have to point to as for how evil and militaristic china is. You guys are laughable.
Please do not make personal attacks like that. They violate community rules (rule 5) and you have no idea what my politics are. I am just challenging your claim that China is not expansionist by showing that they literally expanded their borders by a massive amount within living memory.
I'm sorry facts anger you, but they're still facts even if they disagree with your political worldview.
Anger me? Facts? Again, you're making me laugh
Was China bigger or smaller after taking over Tibet? I think you know the answer is bigger.
Making your country bigger would be doing what with it? I think you know the answer is expanding it.
And I doubt I'm making you laugh or you wouldn't be making personal attacks.
You're just showing you don't understand basic concepts. You called China's liberation of Tibet "colonialism", proving you don't know the meaning of it. Expansionism isn't "when borders grow at any time in history", it's a tendency of a nation to view its territorial expansion as a desirable goal for the sake of it or for access to resource for example. Austria building an embassy in Tibet would grow Austria's borders, technically counting as expansionism according to you. You have lib level of politics knowledge and analysis, and it's hysterical how you try to bend definitions to make things look good for US imperialism
So Tibet wasn't a desirable goal and didn't give China access to resources? They just did it out of pure altruism?
If it was "expansionism" that China sought, why stop at Tibet?
The U.S. stopped expanding its borders with various Pacific islands in the 1940s. I assume you still consider them expansionist.
"The right of self-determination is only relevant when it's bad for China :("
Tibet was a literal feudal state with absolutist power, where Tibetans worked the land as serfs for their feudal lords as they were legally tied to it. The liberation army liberated the Tibetans from their feudal yoke in a non-colonial way (we can get into the details if you want to).
Ok, hopefully we'll stop hearing the imperialists cry about how much better Tibet was under feudalism in 20 years, when it's no longer living memory.
Again- this was about you claiming China is not expansionist.
You can claim the expansionism was justified, you can claim that the people wanted it, you can claim it's unfair because of "the imperialists," you can claim any of those things or other things.
What you cannot truthfully claim is that a country which literally expanded its borders by a massive amount in living memory by the same government that is currently in power is not expansionist.
A people's liberation event in 50 years is really all you pro-US-imperialists have to point to as for how evil and militaristic china is. You guys are laughable.
Please do not make personal attacks like that. They violate community rules (rule 5) and you have no idea what my politics are. I am just challenging your claim that China is not expansionist by showing that they literally expanded their borders by a massive amount within living memory.
I'm sorry facts anger you, but they're still facts even if they disagree with your political worldview.
Anger me? Facts? Again, you're making me laugh
Was China bigger or smaller after taking over Tibet? I think you know the answer is bigger.
Making your country bigger would be doing what with it? I think you know the answer is expanding it.
And I doubt I'm making you laugh or you wouldn't be making personal attacks.
You're just showing you don't understand basic concepts. You called China's liberation of Tibet "colonialism", proving you don't know the meaning of it. Expansionism isn't "when borders grow at any time in history", it's a tendency of a nation to view its territorial expansion as a desirable goal for the sake of it or for access to resource for example. Austria building an embassy in Tibet would grow Austria's borders, technically counting as expansionism according to you. You have lib level of politics knowledge and analysis, and it's hysterical how you try to bend definitions to make things look good for US imperialism
So Tibet wasn't a desirable goal and didn't give China access to resources? They just did it out of pure altruism?
If it was "expansionism" that China sought, why stop at Tibet?
The U.S. stopped expanding its borders with various Pacific islands in the 1940s. I assume you still consider them expansionist.