Politically correct pork
Dear Johnny,
Is saying "Happy Lunar New Year" politically correct nowadays in Taiwan or will a group of irate "trade unionists" attack me if I say it?
Also, if the coming year is the Year of the Pig, will it be possible to buy decent bacon instead of the crap streaky bacon sold here?
Pete Jones
Taipei
Johnny replies: I've never been one to advocate political correctness. But I've never been one to advocate political incorrectness either. The actual content of both are vulnerable to whoever has the power to induce guilt or outrage at any time.
But I can tell you that "Chinese New Year" is a politically incorrect expression at this newspaper, not just because Taiwan isn't part of China, but also because China is not the only state or national "culture" that marks the lunar calendar.
So if some demented "trade unionists" (politically polite code for pro-blue-camp labor bosses) take you to task for daring to name a calendar event after the moon, refer them to me and I will find out why it is exactly that the Republic of China is averse to politically correct pork.
Zero sum blame
Dear Johnny,
I saw an article on the front page of the Sept. 29 edition of the China Post that stated Taiwan (under the name "Republic of China") was "ousted" from the UN in 1971. From what I have read, this is not exactly true.
There was a proposal for both Taiwan and China to join the UN in 1971, but Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek (
The casual reader would get the impression that Taiwan was simply kicked out of the UN. Is there some reason this article glosses over the facts? Your clarification would be most appreciated.
Jeff Frazier
Taipei
Johnny replies: Sorry about the delay in replying, Jeff. The China Post is loath to cast Chiang and his kleptomaniacal clique in a bad light -- if it did, it would be dumping all over the Chinese Nationalist claim to Taiwan and it would have to rename itself the Taiwan Post. And yes, there is a debate about whether Chiang forfeited continued UN representation by playing a zero sum game instead of looking to the future. Then again, Chiang was never known for his insights into the currents of geopolitical thought.
But these things don't matter any more. As I've said before, Jeff, who cares about the UN? It can't save Darfur, Iraq or the bulk of their tormented residents, and it can't save Taiwan from future Chinese molestation.
Chiang got kicked out and richly deserved it. But he took the rest of us with him into purgatory, and if the UN can't atone for that, then to hell with it, as well as its gutless agencies like the WHO, and the rest of the drivel that passes for debate in the General Assembly.
And believe me, when UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon gets into the swing of things, we will be privileged witnesses to not only faux Inscrutable Oriental posturing, but also some of the most repulsive scenes of Sinofellatio yet seen at UN headquarters.
You'll be wishing Kofi Annan were still around as you dash off to buy a raincoat.
The Johnny Neihu Manual for the Identification of Dissembling UN Secretaries-GeneralTM can spot a China shill oceans away. And I tell you, the diagnostic results for this South Korean do not look very good at all.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS