Taiwanese and Indian society are alike in that their people only unite when faced with major disaster. After memories of the disaster fade, their peoples soon resume their old habits of acting selfishly and only looking after their own interests.
A profound question about the two societies is: What has led them, despite their very different cultures, to the same mode of social interaction today?
One significant historical fact about India is that it is one of the few nations that enjoyed democracy before industrialization. India practices democratic politics, influenced as it has been by British colonialism. Most of the early Hindu elite, including Mahatma Gandhi, received their higher education in Great Britain and were very familiar with the way democratic politics operate. When India became an independent democratic republic, all its modes of political operation were copied from the British.
The establishment of democratic politics, however, has only helped the Indian government to partially achieve industrialization. The success of its heavy industries and aerospace technology has been of little benefit to the people's livelihood. Meanwhile, under democratic politics, government has been weak and incapable, bringing the nation greater inefficiency, corruption and a privileged class. It also failed to eradicate domestic violence caused by religious fanaticism. Most citizens still live in extreme poverty, as the disparity between the rich and the poor persists.
Taiwan chose another road, that of promoting industrialization first while gradually carrying out democratic politics. The over-emphasis on industrialization, however, cost us dearly -- both politically and socially. Taiwan experienced suppression of human rights and restrictions on the freedom of speech, as well as insufficient channels for participation in politics. The worst problem is that the "civil power" (
Meanwhile, the power of "black gold" politics (
All these problems are the result of the vertically-connected social structures of family and ethnicity, as well as the lack of a horizontally connected civil power. Taiwan has become an empty body without a soul. Although we sport the fancy clothes of freedom and democracy, underneath we are stark naked.
Although Taiwan and India have followed different development processes, the prices both have to pay today are huge due to the lack of an effective civil power within their social systems. Fortunately, historical development is not always linear and Taiwan still has a chance to right its wrongs. The only question is whether time is on our side. Do we still have time to hesitate about what moves to make?
Kuo Sheng-che is an assistant professor of social studies at Fu Hsing Kang College.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations