What I am saying is China will effectively take over Taiwan's economy first (by being a good trading partner), and that's pretty much all they need to do. It's easier than invasion, of course we don't know the future, maybe China will do something irrational but why assume that? What would be foolish for Taiwanese to try to block China out economically at the behest of US. (That might actually trigger a military invasion from China, it's actually what Ukraine did before the Russian invasion in 2014.)

In response to anonylizard: "TSMC is banned from exporting high-end chips to China."

It's amusing that it's US, defender of trade freedom, who gives orders to Taiwan, with who to trade?

"The Taiwanese want to be an US ally, and not end up destroyed like Hong-Kong, hence they'll comply with US sanctions."

Why would they want that, if they have 60% or more of their trade with China, share culture, and are closer to them? I think it's also a misconception that Hong-Kong got destroyed, but I am not sure. Obviously it has not the same economic weight in the West as it used to, but that is true for all former colonies.

Look, I agree that it would be better if China was a liberal democracy (although I also believe that liberal democracy has only limited effect on limiting imperialism, as is obvious from the British and US example). But if the Taiwanese people will be forced to choose between economic depression (due to some more sanctions on trade with China) or losing democracy, I sure hope, for the sake of their future, they will choose the latter. And I am worried US will force them to make this decision, exactly for the reason of "national pride, prestige, and face".

So you're saying that "China will effectively take over Taiwan's economy", but it "would be foolish for Taiwanese to try to block China out economically".

If you're using the economy as a weapon it makes complete sense for Taiwan to block those ties.

> maybe China will do something irrational but why assume that

1. Because they say they will.

2. Their military spending backs up what they're saying. It's not just hot air from politicians, they really are committed to building the ability to take Taiwan by force.

> I think it's also a misconception that Hong-Kong got destroyed, but I am not sure.

It depends on who you ask.

Foreign entities who used to operate politically in Hong Kong got obliterated due to the national security law. (Yes, it used to be "legal" for foreign entities to do funny things with the intention of subverting Chinese interests in PRC soil. Imagine that!)

Hong-Kongers who refused to believe the PRC (and CCP) were ultimately in power after 1997 had their dreams and illusions "destroyed". Many migrated elsewhere.

(And then there's aftershocks due to COVID policies having to align with mainland China's, and financial/property markets being tied to China which is currently kind of struggling, but the causation with post-2019 politics is not very clear.)

Personally, I think the doomer narrative w.r.t. Hong Kong is overblown, unless you fall into the two categories above.

I think the CCPs legitimacy has much more to do with ensuring the continuous growth of living standards and wealth of the Chinese people.

Your opinion, not theirs. The CCP has repeatedly promised to "reunify" China. If they can't do that, then they fail the bar they've set for themselves. And they wouldn't be making, and repeatedly reiterating, this promise if it wasn't taken seriously by the Chinese people.

Xi's personal leadership lies on a promise of taking Taiwan in the forseeable future as part of the "restoration" of Chinese power. Anyone who disagrees honestly has no idea about Chinese political circles.