中華民國退出聯合國 當年秘辛大公開

[ccc]

... 退出聯合國　...
TVBS╱郭展毓 2007-09-18 22:41

... 1971年10月25日，聯合國通過「容共排蔣」的第2758號決議案，讓北京政權正式成為聯合國的「中國代表」；決議案通過後，支持北京的非洲代表在會議上開心的跳舞慶祝，當時的政策是「漢賊不兩立」，中華民國忍痛宣布退出聯合國。 ...

... 美國總統尼克森在一通電話錄音中，強烈譴責聯合國，是個缺乏道德的政治主義團體。前美國總統尼克森：「表決才過半而已，就可以驅逐一個國家，下次他們還可能會驅逐葡萄牙或南非吧！」


這就是台灣退出聯合國的過程，...

退出 or 驅逐?

 

[夜色]

I am sure you know very well now why some "Taiwanese" people have advocated "independence". That is a very simple and naive reasoning, i.e., if they cannot win the "Chinese" Communists who shout "sovereignty" over the free, constitutionally democratic, and rule of law territories of the Republic of China, they flee from being Chinese at all.

Now that people understand the all along legitimacy and superiority of being Republic of Chinese, we will soon forget that there was ever such a thing as "Taiwan independence".

And for that matter, since you have brought that up, the same is true for "Tibetan independence".

It's surprising for me to see that your stand on this matter does not lean towards the separatists. Even though your non-cooperative and preoccupied opinions toward PRC and its government is also very counterproductive, I must say that my opinion of you has gone up somewhat.

 

[夜色]

是呀! 如果中國共產黨是由中國人民自由、憲政民主、法治地全民直接秘密投票把政權交付給他們的，那中國共產黨就完美了啦!

There are political reforms here and there on the mainland towards that end, whether you believe it or not. However much you despise the government, rapid changes in a society with a insanely huge population base will more likely bring chaos than anything else.

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

You have to convince people that what Chinese Communists called separatists are indeed separatists, especially when the Chinese Communists were separatists even when China was under Japanese invasion.
You also have to convince people what reasons do people have in order not to be "non-cooperative" nor "prejudiced" against a Chinese Communist front "state apparatus".

It's surprising for me to see that your stand on this matter does not lean towards the separatists. Even though your non-cooperative and preoccupied opinions toward PRC and its government is also very counterproductive, I must say that my opinion of you has gone up somewhat.

 

[cvictor]

是呀! 如果中國共產黨是由中國人民自由、憲政民主、法治地全民直接秘密投票把政權交付給他們的，那中國就完美了啦!

那就鼓励你来领导加拿大共产党吧，以后你成为执政党。

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

The Chinese Communists did put up resistance against the Japanese invaders, when the Japanese invaders were at their doors to take their lives. Surely there are "reforms here and there" on the mainland, precisely when and where they are least costly on draining Chinese Communist loot. Real changes, and true changes in Chinese society on the mainland, however slow they be, will not go unnoticed. Chaos is always an excuse too expedient. Well prepared and published plans of benevolent change, coupled with reports of well carried out previous benevolent changes shall have no problem convincing any people, having prejudice or otherwise.

There are political reforms here and there on the mainland towards that end, whether you believe it or not. However much you despise the government, rapid changes in a society with a insanely huge population base will more likely bring chaos than anything else.

 

[夜色]

The Chinese Communists did put up resistance against the Japanese invaders, when the Japanese invaders were at their doors to take their lives. Surely there are "reforms here and there" on the mainland, precisely when and where they are least costly on draining Chinese Communist loot. Real changes, and true changes in Chinese society on the mainland, however slow they be, will not go unnoticed. Chaos is always an excuse too expedient. Well prepared and published plans of benevolent change, coupled with reports of well carried out previous benevolent changes shall have no problem convincing any people, having prejudice or otherwise.

I see your point, as our main difference is I have confidence in the central government while you don't. You aren't happy with "reforms here and there" because they are not significant enough. You would rather adopt a radical approach to root the communist party out completely and hope that the succeeding government will, I assume under the help of the more developed countries, establish a system that is truly beneficial to the general populace - which is something that I find hard to believe.

Lets say I assumed correctly, and you are for Western assistance in building a democratic political system. You say that CCP lacks credibility, that no well-documented changes are noticed by the world - well, economic growth and the drastic decrease in poverty obviously don't count in your eyes; however, given how the US and other western countries have acted in Kosovo, Iraq, etc, it seems to me and a lot of others that they are simply not interested in implementing a system that would actually work. In fact, it seems that the civil war stirred up by the US occupation has claimed far more lives each year than under Saddam's rule. In this respect, the US which is hailed as the leader of Western Democracy, is not exactly credible in my eyes either. After all, they are not Chinese. In this matter, my fundamental belief is that ONLY Chinese will put Chinese interests at heart. Western interference in the construction of a country's political system will do more harm than good.

But then of course, I could always make incorrect assumptions - maybe you don't believe in the West anymore than I do. Then I have something to ask you: Where does your confidence that whoever takes over will be better than the CCP, which, even though made atrocious mistakes, has successfully achieved international recognition, come from? "Anything is better than those looting and corrupted communists" is simply not a good enough argument to convince anyone.

Yes, Taiwan Democracy seems to have claimed a victory, back from the laughable circus it once was. I applaud that, as well as Ma's more open and communicative approach with the mainland. It is a pleasant occasion, when Taiwan Chinese could gradually bring their political ideas over and influence the general Chinese populace, which would in turn accelerate political reforms. Nanjing has had its first televised election of officials - not the sign that democracy is fully embraced, but definitely a step in the right direction. Under any context, keeping a hostile attitude towards a government that had successfully garnered respect from a majority of its citizens, is simply not a wise thing to do.

 

[夜色]

You have to convince people that what Chinese Communists called separatists are indeed separatists, especially when the Chinese Communists were separatists even when China was under Japanese invasion.
You also have to convince people what reasons do people have in order not to be "non-cooperative" nor "prejudiced" against a Chinese Communist front "state apparatus".

There is a simple reason: CCP has full control over all of China, save Taiwan. Being cooperative and fair does not equate to being obedient, you are welcome to voice your criticisms, but do not forget to shed some positive light when you see changes in the right direction (it seems to me that all the article I've read here about China, even about the economical developments, were sour and bitter to a certain degree). Of course, you can always argue that alienation and shut-out will be more effective - that doesn't convince me though.

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

這還是讓我追隨你就好了。
雖然我還沒聽說過哪國的共產黨是讓人民直接秘密民主投票而執政的。

那就鼓励你来领导加拿大共产党吧，以后你成为执政党。

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

The notion that a substitute for the Chinese Communists would be a comprador regime is clearly a thought in the Chinese Communist xenophobic indoctrination. The Chinese Communists adopted a western idea in naming themselves. And the Chinese Communists had their chance of seeking to share or even assume full state power irradically through existing nonviolent political procedures. Dr. Sun Yat Sen integrated traditional Chinese political experience and western representative government experience. I am quite sure you will not suspect him as being a comprador politician. I also sense that being highly critical of the Chinese Communist oligarchic authoritarians is still easily taken as hostility. I do understand very well it is very unwise to be critical of a highly paranoic Chinese Communist state apparatus. We still get to read reports of what paranoic oligarchic authoritarians do in the biased unofficial presses we get.

I see your point, as our main difference is I have confidence in the central government while you don't. You aren't happy with "reforms here and there" because they are not significant enough. You would rather adopt a radical approach to root the communist party out completely and hope that the succeeding government will, I assume under the help of the more developed countries, establish a system that is truly beneficial to the general populace - which is something that I find hard to believe.

Lets say I assumed correctly, and you are for Western assistance in building a democratic political system. You say that CCP lacks credibility, that no well-documented changes are noticed by the world - well, economic growth and the drastic decrease in poverty obviously don't count in your eyes; however, given how the US and other western countries have acted in Kosovo, Iraq, etc, it seems to me and a lot of others that they are simply not interested in implementing a system that would actually work. In fact, it seems that the civil war stirred up by the US occupation has claimed far more lives each year than under Saddam's rule. In this respect, the US which is hailed as the leader of Western Democracy, is not exactly credible in my eyes either. After all, they are not Chinese. In this matter, my fundamental belief is that ONLY Chinese will put Chinese interests at heart. Western interference in the construction of a country's political system will do more harm than good.

But then of course, I could always make incorrect assumptions - maybe you don't believe in the West anymore than I do. Then I have something to ask you: Where does your confidence that whoever takes over will be better than the CCP, which, even though made atrocious mistakes, has successfully achieved international recognition, come from? "Anything is better than those looting and corrupted communists" is simply not a good enough argument to convince anyone.

Yes, Taiwan Democracy seems to have claimed a victory, back from the laughable circus it once was. I applaud that, as well as Ma's more open and communicative approach with the mainland. It is a pleasant occasion, when Taiwan Chinese could gradually bring their political ideas over and influence the general Chinese populace, which would in turn accelerate political reforms. Nanjing has had its first televised election of officials - not the sign that democracy is fully embraced, but definitely a step in the right direction. Under any context, keeping a hostile attitude towards a government that had successfully garnered respect from a majority of its citizens, is simply not a wise thing to do.

 

[ROChineseCanuck]

Interesting that you raised alienation and shut-out. I'd be greatly enlightened if you could tell who you had in mind alienated and shut-out whom when you raised them. Try convincing me. That could be very easy. Now, there seems to be a very peculiar mix of xenophobia and claustophobia, as well as the xenophobia mentioned in the previous post.

There is a simple reason: CCP has full control over all of China, save Taiwan. Being cooperative and fair does not equate to being obedient, you are welcome to voice your criticisms, but do not forget to shed some positive light when you see changes in the right direction (it seems to me that all the article I've read here about China, even about the economical developments, were sour and bitter to a certain degree). Of course, you can always argue that alienation and shut-out will be more effective - that doesn't convince me though.

 

[夜色]

The notion that a substitute for the Chinese Communists would be a comprador regime is clearly a thought in the Chinese Communist xenophobic indoctrination. The Chinese Communists adopted a western idea in naming themselves. And the Chinese Communists had their chance of seeking to share or even assume full state power irradically through existing nonviolent political procedures. Dr. Sun Yat Sen integrated traditional Chinese political experience and western representative government experience. I am quite sure you will not suspect him as being a comprador politician. I also sense that being highly critical of the Chinese Communist oligarchic authoritarians is still easily taken as hostility. I do understand very well it is very unwise to be critical of a highly paranoic Chinese Communist state apparatus. We still get to read reports of what paranoic oligarchic authoritarians do in the biased unofficial presses we get.

I suppose we have a deadlock here: I say being "highly critical" as you call it is counterproductive, and will only cause backward changes; you say that before China comes out with some significant forwards you will not cease to be highly critical.

I respect Dr. Sun Yat Sen, however his political ideals failed during his time - he did not seek power for himself, and power was taken - not by the people that he hoped, but by other power hungry individuals. This is what I meant by not trusting a substitute government who will claim to be democratic. There simply exists no guarantee that the replacement will be better than the original, and considering the benefits the current government has brought about, the people (yes, the people) will reject any radical changes that are forced by powers that are not indigenous and therefore suspicious.

Is CCP paranoid? Is the nationalistic Chinese population paranoid? I think sensitive would be a better word here, but we are looking at it from different perspectives. It's just like how you think you are just being "highly critical" and I think your attitude is simply negative.

I find it pointless to argue any further. We are at a point where neither could persuade the other, so I'll cease my attempt to pass on my ideas to you. I have to say though, that things right now are going my way rather than yours, so please let me enjoy this little devious delight of mine.

Night.

 

[夜色]

Interesting that you raised alienation and shut-out. I'd be greatly enlightened if you could tell who you had in mind alienated and shut-out whom when you raised them. Try convincing me. That could be very easy. Now, there seems to be a very peculiar mix of xenophobia and claustophobia, as well as the xenophobia mentioned in the previous post.

Alienation and shut-out by the West by using Mass Media to feed negative and only negative information on China to the public.

Your use of the word "xenophobia" raises my curiosity here - Who do you think is having xenophobia? Who do you think is having claustrophobia?

Here I'll make the assumption (well not really an assumption since you explicitly stated in the other post) that you think I'm being xenophobic and rejecting positive outside influence. Like I said, we are looking at things from a different perspective: you do not live in China, I used to, and my family still does, so yes, I tend to be rather "cowardly" when it comes to changes, which I think is a prudent measure. Xenophobic? Perhaps - the leader of true democracy didn't really show us a shining example with Iraq there. I think there's a pretty solid reason for modern Chinese to be suspicious of West's intentions.

To be honest with you, I think it's safe to say that the West is also xenophobic towards China, a China that could stand vis-a-vis with them and yet is different from them. They are instinctively rejecting such a possibility, hoping that a rising China would fit into their mold of success. When China is taking its own approach, everyone freaks out.

As for claustrophobia, you are right: Chinese are indeed getting a bit claustrophobic - the Olympics is an attempt at breaking such claustrophobia, to emerge onto a greater platform. China wants its voice heard, and this is not only the government's wish, but also mine, and the wish of I believe a majority of the Chinese people who think they had been shunned by the West, haunted by stereotypes of uniform-clad faceless that is no longer true. As much as you could criticize the political system, you cannot deny what the people think.

 

[raymondxiwei]

既然是重返，當然是聯合國組織的創始會員國，中華民國返回到聯合國組織去恢復聯合國組織的創始原貌。
你的「我國」是指中國共產黨的外圍組織「中華人民共和國」。那只是中國共產黨的「國家機器」。

真是好久沒回的帖子了.我在Google搜我自己的用戶名才發現的。
那我就繼續回復一下。

我想目前重返是不可能了，第一就是已經被討論爛了的臺灣主權問題，目前沒辦法。第二就是爲什麽要把聯合國恢復到創始原貌?要知道聯合國目前的運作已經和創始時期大不相同，效率和國際作用有了大幅提升。我個人支持臺灣能以某种形式進入和參與聯合國，只是恢復到落後的創始原貌做什麽？緬懷嗎？

我說的我國是指中國，但是我的祖國不是中國共産黨的外圍組織，而是一個民族的領土。你可以說"國家"是政府控制居民的工具，不只是中國共產黨，任何國家和地區都是，無論是否民主。

其他論點我沒時間細讀和討論，不過我看了一些樓主引證的資料。來源的可靠性不說，裏面充滿偏見和編造成分。建議樓主不要只參考網路的資料，網路是不真實的，許多資料無法確信真假，連wikipedia也一樣。多讀讀兩岸四地的無黨派學者專家的著作，有助你理性獨立的思考。

 

[古兆维]

台湾省领导的脸皮太厚了

熟读历史，或经历过解放战争的人们都知道，老蒋政权是怎么的不得人心。要不然，如何会被在当时相对弱小的中共赶到台湾省？

台湾省政权，靠的是美国战舰和150公里宽的海峡，才能够生存。这种政权有资格说代表全中国吗？有如一个公司，董事长和总经理是只有代表1％的股东才可决定，合理吗？霸着中国在联合国二十几年席位，合理吗？联合国是一个国家组织，台湾省不是国家，要参加联合国说得过去吗？

如果台湾省是获得中国人民（包括台湾省人民）的支持，小马大可派兵进攻大陆，“救大陆人民于水深火热之中”，如果能够成功，到时，小马政权自然可以取代中华人民共和国在联合国的席位。

再次提及台湾省要参加联合国是没有意义的。在这一点，小马的能力、知识表现出他是没有资格成为国家领导的。有如在井冈山时期，如果当时苏维埃政权说，他们代表中国在联合国的席位（这只是一个比喻），或，他也要成为联合国会员，因为他有土地、人民、政权，联合国是不会理他的。台湾省现在最好的出路是学香港。

小马，猪头扁口口声声说大陆发展武器，所以他要买大量武器。其实，他们太自我感觉良好！中国扩展军力不是面对台湾，而是面对世界邪恶政权比如布什政权和日本政权！中国如果没有强大的武器，强大到可以把世界溃灭几十次，早都给美国消灭、改朝换代了。

古兆维