Talk:Government in exile

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I need to find the decision of the international court of justice about the government in exile

Contents

[edit] Purposes

What are the purposes of a government in exile? What functions do they carry on while in exile? 24.54.208.177 17:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Actions

I have added a section regarding Actions which a government in exile may undertake. Hopefully other persons can add to this listing. Hmortar 14:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Republic of China

The Republic of China on Taiwan is a government in exile and should be added to this listing. Hmortar 15:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

As I have noted, the claim is a fringe one. Now, how do we determine whether a claim is fringe or not? Per WP:FRINGE, a reasonable method of separating fringe from non-fringe theories is to see whether the theory has any prominent adherents. Your turn please. BTW, I don't know if you're personally involved in the Taiwan Nation Party and their lawsuit vs the US Government, but if you are, please consider the possible conflict of interest. Thanks.Ngchen 15:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Based on this criteria, it is clear that Ngchen regards Copernicus' views on the earth revolving the sun as a fringe theory. Certainly, the only person advocating the Copernican doctrine in 1514 and thereafter was Copernicus himself. Obviously, no one in the government, or in the church, agreed with Copernicus' "unsupported" theories.
But, moving along to a more constructive argument, a much more reasonable method of separating fringe from non-fringe theories is to see what the theory can explain. For example, no one can explain the contradiction that "If Taiwan is a sovereign nation, when what is the purpose of the Shanghai Communique" ?? Or "Why does the PRC refuse to allow the usage of the terminology of REPUBLIC OF CHINA in the international community, but at the same time when the government in Taiwan expresses the desire to change this name, the PRC expresses very vocal opposition" ?? Or even better, "Why is it that despite all the democratic changes which have taken place in Taiwan in the last 15 or 20 years, the island is still treated as the orphan of the international community and ignored by the United Nations" ?
The answer would appear to be that this (which Ngchen calls a "fringe theory") is actually 100% correct, in other words, the legal position of the ROC on Taiwan is (1) a subordinate occupying power, beginning Oct. 25, 1945, and (2) a government in exile, beginning mid-December 1949. Today, Taiwan remains as occupied territory, and the principal occupying power is the United States of America. THESE FACTS (which Ngchen chooses to ignore) are in full conformity to the post-war San Francisco Peace Treaty, which is the highest ranking document of international law regarding the legal status of Taiwan in the post-WWII era. By the way, I don't know if Ngchen is personally involved in the Taiwan independence movement, and their application to join various international bodies under the name of "Taiwan," but if he is, please consider the possible conflict of interest.
Please sign your posts. Anyway, in terms of politics, there is no objective way to prove something right or wrong, and even if there were, it would be original research. See WP:OR, as another editor had noted. W/r/t the whole "sovereign nation" mess, well if one believes in the validity of the Taiwan retrocession back in 1945 (I know most TI supporters do not) then everything makes sense. Also see WP:WEIGHT and WP:SOAP. Thanks. I stand by my claim that the proposal is fringe, due to the lack of prominent adherents. And yes, you're correct that the heliocentric theory was fringe in its day; the proper course of action then is not to promote it in Wikipedia, but rather to publish it in peer-reviewed journals where OR is welcomed. Once it gets prominent adherents, it would then merit being included here. Ngchen 14:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

ROC's government is not in excile: it operates from within its claimed territory (Taipei). The fact that Taipei only is a provisional capital (the official capital, Nanking, being occupied by Mao Tse-Tungs followers) is irrelevant here. (130.237.227.200 (talk) 14:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Estonia

should the estonian one be in this list? the current government is widely recognized as legimate. besides the government in exile is far from exile. it is made up of a bunch of old man (not an insult) living in estonia who try to promote their idea of history. as they hold no popular support nor are they inexile and even more, the current government is fully recognized as they are not, do they really belong here with other respectable governments in exile? 82.131.52.61 19:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

You must be referring to the pre-World War 2 one it seems. You may be right in that aspect, even though it does still exist. Not sure if it should be taken out altogether or placed somewhere else. That-Vela-Fella 14:18, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

i am referring to the one mentioned in the article as the current government in exile. though there still appears to be some oragnisation, officialy the power was handed over by heinrich mark in 1992. as there already is an article about the government in exile in the past governments section, i doubt the neccessity or actually even the relevancy of the entry. there is no actual artcile about it and the legitimacy and relevancy issue is handled on the kalev ots page although with a POV. i propose deleting the mention from this entry as it is confusing and almost irrelevant. 82.131.28.151 15:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vietnam

The GFV seems like a legitimate G-I-E. If nobody objects I'll put this back:

In what way is it legit? It was formed in 1995 (not a true successor state) & isn't recognized by any nation. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 04:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biafra

Biafra, which had separated from Nigeria in the 1970s and then reunited after a destructive civil war, has indicated that it will support a government in exile in the United States. The announcement was made at some time last year, 2007, and there are founding documents at http://www.biafraland.com. LAWinans (talk) 23:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sealand

Principality_of_Sealand Currently has a government in exile if I am correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.130.92 (talk) 21:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)