After 1949, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Mainlanders who emigrated from China to Taiwan ruled over the Taiwanese majority. The party maintained power by uniting Mainlanders and isolating them from the Taiwanese who already lived here, separating them into an official class.
This segregation policy adopted by the KMT aimed to divide the Taiwanese people based on a good-bad dichotomy: Those who opposed the KMT were labeled villains, Taiwanese independence activists or even followers of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), while those who chose to cooperate with the KMT were treated as their servants.
The most important tools for implementing this segregation policy were the educational system and the media, which were used to teach the Taiwanese obedience and smear the images of those who opposed the KMT.
With the passage of time, and as a result of social changes, the Mainlanders living in Taiwan have become divided into two groups, "Taiwanese Main-landers" who identify with Taiwan, and "Chinese living in Taiwan" who do not identify with Taiwan. The longstanding policy to create an official class of Mainlanders produced a cultural and political phenomenon unique to the group of Chinese living in Taiwan.
Many people from this group believe they are the natural ruling class of Taiwan. They feel that they are wiser than the Taiwanese people, are an enlightened official class and are the teachers that should reform the Taiwanese people, who naturally should be obedient to their rule.
When former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) passed away, this group of Chinese living in Taiwan lost their ruling position, but having internalized the culture of the official class, they felt a sense of crisis and were unable to adapt to the changes brought by democracy. Unable to maintain face and keep up the false dignity of the official class, they turned to organized cultural villainy.
Through their own privileged media outlets, they have resorted to reporting using double standards, insults and prejudice. While they only spent a few days reporting on the source of Ma's fortune, worth NT$80 million (US$2.45 million), they are offering around-the-clock coverage of the scandal surrounding President Chen Shui-bian's (
When Ma goes jogging every morning he becomes an advocate for exercise for everyman, while Chen's inspection tours of southern Taiwan are construed as dereliction of duty.
Examples of how Taiwanese are insulted and discriminated against in the media abound. This is not enough, however, and they have announced that they will join hands with their old enemy the CCP to speed up the exodus of Taiwanese capital to China and hollow out Taiwan. They are even promoting Taiwanese agricultural exports to China to erode the DPP's stronghold in southern Taiwan.
Their goal is to help China annex Taiwan, whether they are in power or not. To them, Taiwan's democracy is but a symbol of their shameful loss of power. They cannot understand what democracy means to the Chinese people who live under the rule of the CCP. The official class cannot bear that its servants have stood up and wrested power from them. This also explains why pro-China media outlets led by the group of Chinese living in Taiwan are acting with the deadly frenzy of a pack of crazed dogs.
Chang Cheng-shuh is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
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
RSS