https://mander.xyz/post/42872387
I received insults
Someone even posted photos of dead bodies
These comments weren’t reviewed, but I was permanently blocked because my political stance is to hope for the reunification of my country. They said I have nothing to offer, just spreading propaganda and negativity.
How convenient: any time you don’t like the result of a referendum, just declare that it can’t be trusted.
Yes: unlike you I wouldn’t just declare “well clearly the RoC government just rigged the vote.”
Would you accept if they did choose to be part of the PRC?
Not what I asked you: Are you going to unironically claim that referendums conducted under military occupation by a well known autocratic regime are going to be genuine?
The referendums in the Russian occupied regions were not conducted by Ukraine under any kind of neutral parties observation. Many Ukrainians who lived there had outright fled the regions due to the war, and could not vote - moreover, Russia didn’t even occupy all of the regions they held these referendums in. Moreover, are you normalising and justifying the idea of a state just invading chunks of land and them legitimising their conquest via dodgy referendums?
Yes.
Damn, crazy how there aren’t any referendums from before the Russian invasion. I wonder why not…
Has Taiwan had any referendums conducted by the PRC? Presumably those are the only ones you’d respect.
As opposed to just refusing to hold referendums in the first place?
There also haven’t been any referendums in Wallonia to join France. Or Flanders to join the Netherlands. Or Austria to join Germany. What’s your point?
No, they haven’t. Why would they? The PRC don’t control Taiwan. I fail to see how this comparison makes any sense.
Also, is there a particular reason I should have to respect any referendums organised by Russia?
When did the Zap oblast or Kherson demand referendums?
Is Wallonia obliged to hold a referendum to see if they want to join France? Is Russia “refusing” to hold referendums in Dagestan, Bashkortostan?
Ah, I see you’ve reached the “deliberately playing dumb” stage of bad faith argument.
And Ukraine doesn’t control Donbas, yet you said any referendums have to be overseen by them to be legitimate. But again, you’re playing dumb here.
Damn, really picking and choosing when it comes to “recognizing the right to self determination”
Whataboutism. We are talking about Donbas, which tried to have referendums, only for Ukraine to declare them illegal.
Ah ok, so you support the right to self determination, unless the ruling power says no, then it’s tough luck.
And how is that playing dumb? What’s the difference? Would it be justiified for France to notice that Wallonia hasn’t held a referendum on joining them, invade and then hold their own referendum there?
But they did (and we are not even just talking about the Donbas here but also Russia controls Kherson and Zap oblast (partially). This would be like if the PRC invaded and occupied Taiwan and then held a referendum. I would also not accept that outcome as valid either.
That’s not what I asked you. Is there a reason Russia should be seen as trustworthy when it comes to election outcomes? Would you trust any referendum held by any state on earth yourself?
We are not just talking about the Donbass, as Russia also held referendums in those regions I mentioned. And for that matter though, when did the Donbass-at-large demand referendums prior to Russia invading? The Donetsk/Luhansk Republics only at maximum managed to occupy about 1/4 of the entire region.
Does this surprise you? Would you expect any country to recognise as legal and legitimate referendums to secede conducted by an an invading country on their territory?
How a referendum begins does matter. I obviously don’t respect the legitimacy of the 1938 Austrian plebiscite, and I assume neither do you. A referendum held by a revanchist state occupying a region militarily after invading it, driving the old local government out and driving hundreds of thousands of people from their homes is going to be pretty lown down on the list of “valid and fair” referendums that could happen.
That’s not an answer to my question. Is Wallonia obliged to hold a referendum to see if they want to join France? Is Russia “refusing” to hold referendums in Dagestan, Bashkortostan?
Is it “tough luck” for Tatarstan by your logic then? Is it “tough luck” for Tibet too?
Because obviously you do actually know what the difference is, and are just trying to waste time.
And now they don’t. So why should they still have to be the one overseeing the referendum?
Of course, we’ve already gathered you pick and choose on this matter.
No, it doesn’t surprise me at all. Whether it is “surprising” has zero bearing on the point at hand and you’re only bringing it up to waste time and dodge the point.
This is all completely irrelevant nitpicking, and you know it.
Sounds like you don’t actually believe in people’s right to self determination at all. Here’s a question for you: why should the PRC trust any referendum that the RoC does that suggests the people of Taiwan don’t want reunification?
Sounds like you only support referendums you agree with the outcomes of. Not to mention you’re ignoring the referendums that took place before the Russian invasion.
That was your logic, dumbass. You can’t even remember your own claimed position anymore
No, I do not. There’s no difference here. The question remains unanswered: What’s the difference? Would it be justiified for France to notice that Wallonia hasn’t held a referendum on joining them, invade and then hold their own referendum there?
Why should a referendum take place at all? Should military conquest be legitimised by sham elections? Why should I trust that Russia would hold a free and fair referendum here?
So all proposed referendums are equal, in your mind? The 1938 Anschluss was completely fair, was it?
You know, you can support the principles of self-determination (and the referendums that usually accompany that) whilst also acknowledging that referendums can also be used by revanchist or expansionist state actors as a tool to legitimise their conquest.
Is it not a reasonable response? Would you not expect a state to reject another country invading and occupying their territory and then trying to legitimise it through a referendum?
And what point am I dodging?
How is this irrelevant, and nitpicking?
How do you determine whether or not an election is rigged or held with severe conduct issues, from your perspective?
Seems to me that given hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, most of them likely pro-Ukraine had fled Kherson, the Zap Oblast and portions of the Donbass - that any election there would be illegitimate on those grounds. But what about the timescale? Were people openly permitted in those regions to publicly campaign in favour of remaining in Ukraine? Were there any debates?
There’s election results and opinion polls over decades in Taiwan that consistently show the people there do not want to “reunify” with the PRC. But above all else, you present your position as unfalsifiable. How do you determine how a people’s will should be shown?
You mean the referendums that only took place in 1/4 of the Donbass?
Moreover, when did I say that? I already told you that it’s likely that given the demography of Crimea, that they would vote to rejoin Russia. It’s less clear in the donbass and given that Russia is hardly a nation that does honest electioneering, I don’t really trust the validity of their referendums (nevermind the issues too with an invading power organising the referendum that would legalise their takeover).
So when do you respect self-determination then?
My logic is that a region should decide if it wants to join another country or not, or become independent, and not a neighbouring country that historical grievances over it breaking off. There’s an immediate and obvious conflict of interest when a larger neighbour invades and occupies a portion of another country and then immediately holds a hastily designed referendum. Are you implying that every single referendum, no matter how it emerges - the result is automatically above board and should always be respected?
Look, obviously I’m not going to humour this deliberately playing dumb. You know what the difference is.
So, in short, you do not support the right of self determination for the people of Donbas.
Better system than your “referendums are only legitimate if they agree with what I want” perspective.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
For the obvious reasons you’re well aware of. If you keep doing this, I’m going to start doing it too, so don’t complain about it when I do.
I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
Ironically though, that means all of your arguments now apply to Ukraine. Hmm, yes, were people permitted to publicly campaign for leaving Ukraine? Oh wait, never mind; Ukraine just declared the whole referendum illegal. Oops
No. That was not your logic. Once again, you can’t even remember your own position.
What about the immediate and obvious conflict of interest from the country that controls the region refusing to recognize their desire to leave?
Also, I have repeatedly told you that the referendum was before the invasion. I can only assume that you pretending otherwise is just another instance of you deliberately wasting time.
Better system than your “referendums are only legitimate if they agree with what I want” perspective.