Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has published a book entitled Taiwan Spirit (原鄉精神) in which he discusses Taiwanese history. He has also announced that former premier Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) will be his partner for the 2008 poll.
It's rather like traveling back in time. Siew's nomination is nostalgic enough, but Ma's take on local history remains almost unchanged from what was found in history textbooks under KMT rule.
It's as if Ma himself is frozen.
Ma's thinking, like that of traditional Chinese politicians, lends great weight to history: Every discourse must have a historical basis. The manner in which Taiwanese history has developed, however, has been rather unfavorable to the KMT, hence his efforts to construct a more flattering perspective on the period after he became party chairman.
In addition to attacking the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) localization ideology, his presentation of history brings us back to the "good old days."
Ma's take on history focuses mostly on politics, but entirely overlooks the Japanese colonial era. His view of history is a residue of KMT indoctrination, but with one new element: the supposed "sadness" felt by Mainlanders -- he claims to be a sixth-generation immigrant -- that can been seen in four "role models" mentioned in his book: Taiwan's first provincial governor, Liu Ming-chuan (劉銘傳), anti-Japanese hero Li Yu-pang (李友邦), Chinese philosopher Hu Shih (胡適) and former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國).
Not once does he mention that much of Taiwan's modernization took place during Japanese colonial rule. Instead, he credits two Chinese -- Liu, for launching the nation on the road to modernity, and Chiang, who supposedly continued the work.
Taiwan's democracy and freedom, for their part, are of Hu's making -- also a Chinese. Lee is the only Taiwanese, and he was only chosen because he resisted Japanese rule.
Ma criticizes the DPP for its "narrow" localization ideology, using terms such as "new immigrant" and "globalization" to show how tolerant he is.
But we see no tolerance for those who opposed the Qing dynasty or the KMT. When he talks about resistance, only the 1915 Tapani Incident -- an uprising against the Japanese -- is mentioned, but not Chu Yi-kuei (朱一貴), who led a rebellion against the Qing administration in 1721, or Lin Shuang-wen (林爽文), who did the same in 1784.
On national development, only Liu and Chiang rate a mention, not pioneering Japanese engineer Yoichi Hatta, who built the Wushantou Reservoir. And when Ma talks about liberalism, he only mentions Hu, while conveniently omitting the Japan-influenced liberal organizations in Taiwan during the period of Japan's "Taisho democracy" from 1912 to 1926.
So Ma's view of history is at least as narrow as that of the DPP.
Ma's biggest problem is his ignorance of public sentiment. As traditional Chinese politics have no democratic tradition, power is the property of intellectuals, hence their affinity for history. History of this kind stresses power and orthodoxy, leaving people in the shadows who only care about their welfare regardless of who is in power.
The KMT rejected a suggestion by C.V. Chen (
Such unfair practices and blatant injustice carried over historical periods are the very issues that Ma should face head on if he has hopes of winning next year's election.
Wang Yu-fong is the director of Pingtung Community College.
Translated by Eddy Chang
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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