Democratic progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (
And why is it that textbooks on Taiwanese history from the KMT era never talked about Chiang and the TPP?
As history philosopher Benedetto Croce once said: "All history is contemporary."
The different manners in which people interpret the past often change as interests and allocation of resources change with time. Ma's talk about localization and his historical view on Chiang and the TPP are very telling. This is the history of the elite, which centers on China and important government officials. And in this "great history," traces of the common people -- the "small history" -- don't exist.
In his book On Stories, Irish philosopher Richard Kearney emphasizes that nothing has happened unless it is recorded. Kearney said that all facts of history must be passed on in the form of narration. But according to this theory, during the Martial Law era and the White Terror, the real voices of this land were either oppressed or were those that connected the country with China. Ma's talking about Chiang resisting Japan is a good example of this.
One's historical outlook can determine one's politics. Ma's talk of "linking Taiwan," his interpretations of the 228 Incident and his new book Taiwan Spirit all reveal his Sinocentric view of Taiwanese history.
But Taiwan is a pluralistic society and its politics have been democratized. People now have a variety of viewpoints on Taiwanese history. An increasing number of them are discussing a history that the KMT tried to hide, especially Austronesian culture and the Republic of China as a government in exile. They are also discussing possibilities for the nation's future, such as the drafting of a new constitution, or changing the country's name.
The more people discuss these things, the more Ma's Sinocentric view of history will become that of the minority. Ma needs to base his discussion of localization on Taiwanese history and identity -- much more important issues than the history of individuals.
Huang Ter-yuan is a doctoral candidate at the Sun Yat-sen Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
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