Last week I wrote an article calling on President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to take a clear stand by condemning the eccentric views expressed in the articles posted on the Internet by diplomat Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英).
Such a condemnation would confirm the government’s determination to uphold the civilized values of equality and mutual respect between members of different ethnic communities. Since my article was written, Kuo has admitted that he was indeed “Fan Lan-chin” (范蘭欽), the author of the online posts, confirming what many people already suspected and provoking a further public outcry. It now seems that the government and opposition are largely in agreement on the need to draw up an act on ethnic equality.
Although I said that Ma should take a firm position on the Kuo case, I now call on Taiwan’s political parties not to take their righteous indignation too far by giving the state excessive legal powers to interfere in the prejudices and differences that exist in our society.
The first thing to consider is that prejudice and inequality do not exist only between different ethnic communities. There is also discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender, nationality, political affiliation and so on. If we really want to set legal limits on the expression of prejudicial and hateful views, it would be better to have an all-encompassing anti-prejudice law than one concerned with ethnic communities only.
Worrying excesses are frequently seen in the exercise of state power. This may be because Taiwan is a newly emerged democracy and bad habits from the old authoritarian system still persist, or perhaps because the idea of human rights has not fully taken hold. Even in the handling of corruption charges against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), many irregularities in judicial procedure have occurred, to the extent that they have aroused concern from international media and human rights groups. That being the case, it is reasonable to worry that serious infringements of freedom of speech may occur if the state authorities intervene in the expression of different opinions and prejudices that exist in society and seek to impose limits on the expression of discriminatory and hateful viewpoints.
Kuo, as a high-ranking civil servant, has already been severely punished by being dismissed for the extreme views he expressed. Although Kuo’s hateful articles were upsetting for most Taiwanese, it may be out of proportion to respond to these events by enacting an act on ethnic equality or an anti-prejudice act that seeks to impose excessive penalties. For Kuo, the place in history he has earned for himself will be a heavy enough burden to bear for the rest of his life.
A democratic system always has to find a balance between the values of political equality on the one hand and political freedom on the other. To maintain political equality, it is necessary to protect the right to take part in the political process without structural inequalities based on wealth, status or education. For political freedom to exist, on the other hand, the right of minorities to “sing out of harmony” must be guaranteed, however extreme and harsh on the ears their voices may be. There is no universally applicable rule as to how to find this balance between political equality and political freedom. It depends on the historical reality of each society and on the capacity of its political leaders for self-examination.
There are two major factors underlying the deterioration in relations between different ethnic communities in recent years. One is the pressure for Taiwan to become more economically dependent on China, weakening its geopolitical position and making people feel uneasy. People with differing political affiliations have very different ideas of what to do under such circumstances and they do not trust one another. This lack of trust gives rise to the second element, which is that supporters of the pan-green and pan-blue camps are less willing to make an effort to understand and appreciate the historical background behind their opponents’ choice of identity. The Kuo case and the furor surrounding it are a fine illustration of how these two factors affect Taiwan.
Having experienced the traumas of the first half of the 20th century, in which governments did their utmost to eliminate those who held opposing views, German-born writer Hannah Arendt wrote that the essence of the human spirit is not brotherhood, but friendship, and that friendship is not a relationship between people who are close to begin with, but rather a requirement when discussing public affairs and a necessity when forming a world view.
Those politicians who really wish to improve relations between the different ethnic communities in Taiwan need to honestly confront the two causative factors I identified above. In handling relations with China, they should seek more dialogue and better communication among Taiwanese. In regard to identity politics and questions of history, they should be more willing to re-examine and reconsider their own views.
If they just make a gesture by passing an act on ethnic equality and leave it at that, relations between communities will not be improved and may even get worse.
Tao Yi-feng is an associate professor of political science at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under