The recent uproar over offensive comments posted online by former official Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英) has sparked a lot of discussion about ethnic prejudice, with many people suggesting that Taiwan needs an ethnic equality law. However, it is doubtful whether the ideal of ethnic equality could be effectively brought about through such legislation.
The notion of ethnic equality touches upon almost every aspect of life. While it is an ideal worth striving for, it is hard to define in legal terms. For example, the concept of ethnic equality ought to include economic equality. Should we then take wealth from better-off ethnic groups to subsidize those that are, on average, not so well off?
I think the ideal of ethnic equality would be more effectively put into practice through other laws that are more concrete and easier to implement, although long-term education is also necessary. The most important feature of such a body of legislation would be a language equality law.
Generally speaking, language is the most important basis for an ethnic group’s existence and for its cultural and social survival. Communities identify themselves by their languages and take pride in them.
These days, elementary schools provide mother-tongue classes. Multilingual announcements can be heard on public transportation. There are radio and television programs and Web sites in languages other than Mandarin and these other languages are spoken in councils and the legislature.
These may lead some people to ask if this means that Taiwan now has freedom of expression for other languages. Of course not. All the examples mentioned above only show that the government has stopped enforcing Mandarin and suppressing other tongues.
We are still a long way from seeing equal respect accorded to Taiwan’s languages. The most important point of a language equality law would be to give all the nation’s tongues equal official status — in the Constitution, at all levels of government and at all official occasions.
From the perspective of users of the different languages, the advantage would be that someone who is most at home speaking Rukai, for example, would, in Rukai-speaking areas, be able to make official inquiries in Rukai, and the government department in question would be obliged to find someone who understands Rukai to deal with the matter.
This would make knowledge of Rukai an advantage in the workplace, so more people would want to learn it. Then the Rukai language and Rukai culture would be enriched and passed on to younger generations.
When all community languages are respected by the state and can be used on all kinds of formal and important occasions, then speakers of all languages will be able to speak out in their own tongues with dignity and assurance.
Only then will linguistic prejudice between different communities gradually disappear — and that means non-Aborigines’ prejudice against Aborigines as well as the tendency for fluent Mandarin speakers to look down on those who are not.
Chi Chun-chieh is an associate professor at the Institute of Ethnic Relations at National Dong Hwa University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase