this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
706 points (96.1% liked)
Political Memes
12247 readers
2083 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ok, but invading a country, or even annexing part of said country does not necessarily mean that the country doing the invading/annexing is doing settler colonialism. They have to explicitly be exterminating or otherwise forcibly removing the native population, with the goal of ethic replacement.
If you want a clear-cut example, beyond Palestine, then Morocco has been settler-colonizing Western Sahara for decades.
I get that's not as sexy as talking about China/Taiwan relations on Lemmy, but learning about something outside of the usual purview of political discussion on this website certainly wouldn't hurt.
Optimistic of you to suggest China will treat the native Taiwanese better than the current nation-state of Taiwan. Tribes (such as the Truku) are still forced out of their homes, forbidden traditional hunting rights, and losing aspects of language.
...so hey, maybe YOU learning something wouldn't hurt too (god I hate it when one person starts talking down to another). That said I'll look into Morocco.
P.S There's also such a thing as a Paper Genocide (erasure). Colonialism is not simply defined as "extermination and ethnic replacement of native people" - I think you've confused Genocide and Colonialism. Two related but different concepts... Also you can Colonise non-native people, eg. The Maori, who have only occupied NZ since the 1300s, and then later were Colonised by the British.
I'm not suggesting that one way or another, because the PRC does not currently have control over Taiwan. I do not know how they would treat the native Taiwanese population, because no such thing has happened.
You just gave me an example of the current Taiwanese government engaging in ethnic cleansing of the native population, though. Which would seem to me, to undermine the assertion that China's mere intent to invade Taiwan counts as settler-colonialism, when a much more clear-cut example is happening right now, not under PRC rule.
My point is that words mean things. Settler Colonialism isn't just "when a country I don't like does a bad thing", it's a very specific process of ethnic replacement, carried out in the US and Canada, South Africa, Palestine, Western Sahara, among other places.
But China having poor relations with Taiwan over a civil war that never ended, just isn't an example of settler colonialism.
I agree that what the PRC is doing (or threatening to do) to Taiwan isn't an example of settler-colonialism. It's aggression and infringement of sovereign borders, but not settler-colonialism.
However, there are other examples of the PRC doing settler colonialism. I pointed this out to the other commenter thinking it would help them strengthen their argument, but they doubled-down because they seem more intent on "being right" than on being correct.
Anyway, the PRC does do settler-colonialism in Tibet, in Xinjiang, in Inner Mongolia, and to a lesser extent (because of previous ~~assimilation campaigns~~ settler-colonialism) in the Cantonese-speaking regions of the south and to their various ethnic minority groups.
"when a country I don't like does a bad thing" <--- no one said that, stop being a dick.
The examples I gave were because they're current focal points of conjecture and conflicts in the world. But everyone's gotta arc up because everyone's got a fucking opinion on China.
I don't give a shit about China one way or the other. Everyone in these discussions - even when all participants are intelligent - starts pretending that they're part of some world summit deciding the fate of the galaxy over fucking words and opinions.
None of the discussion is all that important. It's not going to decide anything.
...and yeah, we've already said that you can stack Colonialism so yeah, maybe China would be just as bad as Taiwan. Just a question of how far they go with their desire for "reunification" and what that means. None of this shit is up to us.
But notably, not settler colonialism. I can't think of why you'd bring it up as an example other than to signal your opinions about China. Because as I've repeatedly explained, is not doing settler Colonialism to Taiwan.
You're the one who seems to be bringing your opinion to this discussion, not me.
That's okay, you seem to me to be very much gate keeping and protective of settler colonialism as if it's something good.
You seem particularly protective when it comes to anyone suggesting China or Russia have interests or intentions in that direction.
But we don't have to agree just because we discussed it do we? You know, the Internet is too up tight and just constantly wants to debate to the death. I can't be bothered bro.
Lmfao what??? You're doing an awful lot of putting words in my mouth over this. Look, you can just take the L. Being wrong on the internet isn't the end of the world.
Patiently explaining a definition to you doesn't mean I endorse the thing I'm defining.
One country saying another country is their domain is a Colonial outlook despite all your "Well actually - the West Sahara is a better match for what I think" gatekeeping of "pure settler colonialism" or whatever the fuck you're doing.
Great dude, you have a strict and pure definition. Like I said, you're defending your preferred version of Colonialism as of it's something good, to be guarded.
A far more prominent example would be what Russia has been doing with Crimea for decades.
I don't even think that's an especially good example.
Crimea has a predominantly ethnically Russian, and Russian speaking, population. The Russians aren't replacing Russians with Russians. Russia did annex Crimea in likely contravention of international law, which we might think is bad. But that doesn't make it settler-Colonialism.
Now, Russia has been adopting out Ukrainian babies in its occupied territories to Russian families, something Putin is wanted by the ICC for, so that would be a much closer example.
But even that, I feel, isn't as clear cut an example as Palestine or Western Sahara. Russia hasn't been putting Ukrainians onto reservations or anything like that. Doing so would compromise the national identity of the Russian Federation as a multi-ethnic state. An identity it relies on for domestic legitimacy. Russia just isn't framing its invasion of Ukraine as a war of ethnic extermination. They're explicitly framing Ukrainians as a kind of junior partner in a conception of a "greater Russia" that can stand up to The West.
....... Because of colonization....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Crimea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1783_Russian_annexation_of_Crimea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Khanate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Russian_annexation_of_Crimea
But regardless of that all, just cause they speak the same language doesn't mean fuck all? That's a very goofy and immature and frankly probably racist way to look at racial demographics
Russia has framed the invasion of Ukraine in ethnic terms, saying that the areas invaded are Russian because the Russian language is spoken there. At the same time they're phasing out the speaking of Ukrainian in occupied areas.
Belarus under went similar policies and there's a name for it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification
From that page:
In 2020, a set of amendments to the Russian constitution was approved by the State Duma[67] and later the Federation Council.[68] One of the amendments enshrined the Russian nation as the "state-forming nationality" (Russian: государствообразующий народ) and Russian the “language of the state-forming nationality”.[69] The amendment has been met with criticism from Russia's minorities[70][71] who argue that it goes against the principle that Russia is a multinational state and will only marginalize them further.[72] The amendments were welcomed by Russian nationalists, such as Konstantin Malofeev[73] and Nikolai Starikov.[74] The changes in Constitution were preceded by "Strategy of government's national policy of Russian Federation", issued in December 2018, which stated that "all-Russian civic identity is founded on Russia cultural dominant, inherent to all nations of Russian Federation".[75]
This is part of the Russian World doctrine:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
The concept of the "Russian world" is linked to Russian neo-imperialism.[8] President Vladimir Putin established the government-funded Russkiy Mir Foundation to foster the idea of the "Russian world" abroad.
Russia is not what it used to be, Dugan got to Vlad, and he's not as interested in a multicultural Russia right now. He's a Nationalist Traditionalist, no longer trying to keep up with the west. Now he's trying to re-write history.