It doesn't take much in most societies for people to rely on stereotypes to judge other cultures or peoples. This is especially the case in societies that are relatively homogeneous -- as is the case with Taiwan, which, no matter how one categorizes its ethnic groups, is largely Han.
A lack of consensus over identity allows Taiwanese to describe themselves in a number of ways in relation to each other and to their neighboring countries. Some people call themselves "Chinese" and some "Taiwanese." Others use a variety of expressions to explain how they perceive themselves as part of a greater whole.
Unfortunately, the flexibility that the Han majority are able to exercise with regard to their identities turns into stiff inflexibility when they meet "Others."
It is necessary to use the term "Others" to refer to groups who lack any identifiable shared trait, except that they are not Han.
In Taiwan, the group "Others" includes Aborigines who are born and raised in this country; Thai laborers who have come here to work at manual labor that most Taiwanese would refuse to do, and for wages that most Taiwanese would never accept; Vietnamese and other Southeast Asian women who have married Taiwanese; Filipina caregivers and housemaids; and the children of "mixed" couples, who are not so easy to pigeonhole. In short, this group includes everyone who does not fit into the Han chauvinist's idea of racial homogeneity.
There is no question that Taiwan is a tolerant place. Still, there are enough instances of obvious bigotry that one begins to notice a broader trend of chauvinism.
Examine a few recent examples: First, the case of the Thai laborers working on the Kaohsiung Mass Rapid Transit project. It is clear that the people who employed them and who were charged with their care felt little obligation to treat them as worthy of respect and possessing legal and moral rights. The workers were treated as chattel, subjected to appalling living conditions and had their freedoms curtailed, while their employers counted their loot on the way to the bank.
After the workers rioted over their treatment, the company decided to sue the "ringleaders" for huge sums of money which they had no hope of paying off. Only after an intensive media campaign highlighted this injustice did the company back down.
Is it naive to believe that racism played no role in this entire situation? Would the company have tried the same thing with Taiwanese workers? Never.
And earlier this week, Taiwan Solidarity Union Legislator Liao Pen-yan (
Was his sudden concern prompted by prejudice? Why didn't he warn Taiwanese married to Chinese to get health checks? China is no ecological paradise, after all.
The good news is that many social groups are not afraid to speak out against discrimination.
But what is sad is how rare it is for a major political figure to speak out against such things. After the Thai laborers rioted, did President Chen Shui-bian (
Think of the impact on racism had, for instance, Chen and Ma made a joint statement deploring the workers' treatment and calling for stronger enforcement of the rights of all foreign workers.
But our leaders are, of course, too busy fighting each other to actually lead, especially when it comes to issues of moral rectitude.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers