What do I mean by invade? Simply ask anyone in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, or Taiwan, if they want mainland Chinese there, or if they want to be governed by the CCP. I accept that territory is won or lost, and the Tibetans and Uyghurs lost their territory, but they were definitely invaded and conquered.
I have asked many people in those regions excluding Xinjiang, and the answers are never as black and white as the narratives you read online.
In Tibet, people were not too happy about the military presence on the streets, the cultural assimilation or the mao statue in the shadow of Potala palace, but on balance are were happy to be part of China due to the economic development. People felt they would be unemployed without han presence.
In Hong Kong, the most common thing I heard was vaguely racist grumblings about mainlanders. People were unhappy with mainlanders behaving in an "uncivil" manner. There was a majority acknowledgement of China's sovereignty over Hong Kong, and a strong "Chinese" identity.
In Taiwan, things did fit your narrative pretty closely. People want nothing to do with the CCP, and many even wanting nothing to do with the mainland at all.
> In Hong Kong, the most common thing I heard was vaguely racist grumblings about mainlanders. People were unhappy with mainlanders behaving in an "uncivil" manner. There was a majority acknowledgement of China's sovereignty over Hong Kong, and a strong "Chinese" identity.
Really interested to know when did you talk to the people in Hong Kong. What you described might have been the views of some Hong Kong people 10 years ago, but it's definitely not the mainstream view nowadays.
Well, if you are correct, the CCP could/would organize a public vote in Tibet and Hongkong, just like France did in New Caledonia. That is how you handle such a question.
I'm just reporting some anecdotes from my personal experience that I thought were relevant to the discussion. I don't see how that can be "correct" or not.
I agree with you on the principle of the right to self-determination, but it's not so clearly defined. I.e. how do you define "peoples'? I can't succeed from my nation just because me and my family would like to start a principality. At what point does a group become a 'people' deserving of the right to self-determination?
Historically that is done when you either known the result will fall your way or you don't really care.
If California might have a small risk of voting to leave the US do you think the government would hurry and let them vote or try to block it?
I cannot think of a single example where there was a vote of independence where it wasn't either forced (by unrest, war, etc.) or the result was know or didn't matter much. Votes of independence are rarely happening under nice circumstances.
Have you read any well done and independent surveys that support your claim ? Majority does not support the take over like this and chinese identity is much less than hker identity.
