Taipei's Huashan Culture and Art Center on Saturday hosted an event in honor of Black History Month, which was certainly an eyeopener to those who only know about this activity from reading the Boondocks comic strip. One Web site which narrates the history of Black History Month points out that when the event was first created in the 1920s as Negro History Week, black history as such was barely recognized as a subject of study. There is no doubt that the lack of interest in the academic community at that time in black history in the US -- the history of a large community that had been present since colonial times -- was simply a result of exclusionary attitudes towards black people. Since they were seen as inferior and their society marginal, what history of significance, scholars asked, could they possibly have?
Such attitudes are long dismissed from campuses in the US today, and the struggle to raise the consciousness of black communities and, once raised, to step forth and demand civil rights scandalously denied in a modern democracy, is a historical story of not just American but international significance, being hugely influential in the wholesale reevaluation of attitudes towards minorities that has been a feature of late 20th century Western societies. Just as Gandhi's picking up a handful of salt was the iconic image of the struggle against Western colonialism, Rosa Parks' refusal to leave her bus seat has a direct link to the fights within those Western countries against bigotries of all kinds. Just to remember how bad it was, and how recently, it is worth pointing out that as late as the 1970s no aspiring Britisher working for one of the banks or the big hongs could marry a Chinese wife without it destroying his career.
But that people celebrate Black History Month in Taiwan brigs us to an interesting question: When is anyone going to celebrate Taiwanese History Month? Of course some might say that since Taiwanese represent the majority culture, the idea of a special month of celebration is absurd. Historical events are celebrated all the time whenever an important anniversary arises.
If only that were so. Most of Taiwan's traditional historical commemorations involve things that happened in a foreign country (Double Ten National Day, Constitution Day), to people who had nothing to do with Taiwan (Sun Yat-sen (
The Californian academic Sande Cohen has called Taiwan an "ahistorical society" and so it is. For example, December saw the 90th anniversary of the foundation of, and events surrounding, the Assimilation Society (同化會). This movement, led by Lin Hsien-tang (林獻堂), was the first major political movement in Taiwan. It was formed to try to redress the second-class citizenship of the Taiwanese under colonial Japanese rule by demanding the equality under the Meiji constitution that Taiwanese, as Japanese nationals, were constitutionally entitled too. The movement's leaders were castigated by other Taiwanese for using the idea of assimilation, but as they candidly explained, it was the only platform that could get support in Japan. The story of the movement is replete with so many of what seem like traditional motifs of Taiwanese nationalism: Confused demands, insecure identities, internal dissent over a "soft" approach, an external power it is impossible to fight.
A discussion would have been interesting, but don't expect it in ahistorical Taiwan. For the same reason don't expect anyone to remember the 90th anniversary of the Hsi Lai An (西來庵) rebellion this August. When are Taiwanese going to take our history seriously?
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of