Over eight years of government, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was again and again accused of trying to get rid of Chinese influence — of “de-Sinicization.”
Unfortunately, the DPP government did not dare to meet these criticisms head on. The question should have been — and should be — what is wrong with de-Sinicizing?
The DPP government replaced the word “China” with “Taiwan” in the names of various institutions and companies.
But changing the name of the post office from “Chunghwa [China] Post” to “Taiwan Post,” for example, could hardly be described as de-Sinicization.
On the contrary, such adjustments could be seen as a return to Chinese cultural values.
Confucius (孔子) himself said that “When names are not correct, what is said will not sound reasonable” (名不正則言不順).
Changing the title of the post office and other Taiwanese agencies and companies was, therefore, a return to the fine principles of Confucian philosophy, even if it was a departure from an uglier aspect of Chinese culture — saying one thing but doing another.
Therefore these are hardly grounds for accusing the DPP of de-Sinicization.
CRITICISMS
From another point of view, however, the DPP government should have proudly accepted the criticisms that were leveled at it, declaring: “Yes, we are de-Sinicizing.”
Think about it.
Is democracy a Chinese invention?
Are human rights a prominent feature of Chinese culture?
The DPP is devoted to promoting democracy and protecting human rights. And given that neither of these concepts originated in China, is upholding them not a form of de-Sinicization?
All in all, insufficiently de-Sinicizing is precisely where the DPP went wrong.
If, when praying to the Kitchen God, Taiwanese say that they must offer him something sweet so that he will put in a good word for them in Heaven, what is that if not a continuation of the Chinese tradition of bribery?
If Taiwanese believe that we have to worship the spirits of the departed lest the ghosts be displeased and make trouble, is that not a lesson in the Chinese tradition of bowing down before bullies and thugs?
DREGS
If we Taiwanese don’t comb through our culture and get rid of the dregs of Chinese culture that remain in our hearts and minds, how can we possibly hope to emerge as winners in the “total war” between pro-China and pro-Taiwan social forces?
As the English poet John Dunne said of the revolution in scientific thought that emerged in 17th century Europe, “a new philosophy calls all in doubt.”
The New Culture Movement in early 20th century China also called for the “reassessment of all values.” Likewise, we need to develop a new view of the world — a new weltanschauung.
I once compared the New Culture Movement to the cathartic Sturm und Drang movement of 19th century Germany.
Now that Taiwan has achieved the necessary conditions in terms of its nationhood, perhaps what we need is something like the kulturkampf (cultural struggle) by which Bismarck’s Germany fought to shake off the conservative influence of the Catholic Church.
That is what Taiwan needs now — a clean break.
Chen Chun-kai is an adviser to Taiwan Thinktank and a professor of history at Fujen Catholic University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
RSS