When the US media reported recently that former US vice president Al Gore's daughter Sarah Gore had married Taiwanese-American businessman Bill Lee (李君偉) in a California ceremony attended by both the Lee and Gore families, the local media in Taiwan took the news as a happy omen. However, a racist comment appeared on an Internet chatroom in the US just after the wedding that read: "Al Gore's daughter is marrying a chink? Boy, that is one Inconvenient Truth."
For readers here who might not be familiar with the insult, "Chink" is a derogatory word for people of Chinese or Taiwanese origin.
It is sad to see such racism in the US. But it's also interesting to note that none of the US news reports about the marriage mentioned that Lee's family was originally from Taiwan. This shows how multicultural the US has become, in that none of the wire services or gossip magazines felt the need to mention Lee's ethnicity.
Bill Lee, 36, is an American whose parents emigrated from Taiwan, and his father, Lee Chin-mu (
Lee Chin-mu, who is a professor of medicine in the US, hails from Tainan County and moved to the US soon after graduating from the medical school of National Taiwan University, media in Taiwan reported.
Sarah Gore first met her husband at a function for her father's Oscar-winning environmental documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, People magazine added, noting that the movie's executive producer, Jeff Skoll, served as best man at the wedding.
"As one person joked during the wedding toasts, global warming helped bring Sarah and Bill together," a family friend told People.
What does this marriage of the Lee and Gore families mean for Taiwan? It will probably lead to more news reports here about the former US vice president's work on global warming, and to more invitations for Al Gore to give lectures here.
Other than that, this is a typical "boy meets girl, girl marries boy" story uniting two families in the US, with a small but interesting sidebar about the connection to Taiwan.
Dan Bloom is a freelance writer in Taiwan.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
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
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS