Imagining the other
This is intended for Martin de Jonge (Letters, June 2, page 8) and every arrogant egocentric who shares the opinions expressed in that letter.
De Jonge complains, as have dozens before him, that “When locals see my face, they immediately start speaking to me in English.” My response to that is: Well, duh!
De Jonge should get outside long enough to imagine the world as seen by, say, a 30-year-old citizen of Taiwan. This hypothetical person may have had, via TV, movies, personal contacts, anecdotal testimony from friends, relatives, coworkers and casual acquaintances varying degrees of exposure to perhaps thousands of non-Asian-faced aliens.
Of that number, perhaps 70 percent probably have had so little knowledge of any local language or dialect that they are unable to frame even the simplest greeting, formal or otherwise. Another 25 percent have probably known a little Mandarin, but pronounced what they knew so badly as to render it incomprehensible. The remaining 5 percent probably consisted of people with broadly varying degrees of competence in some local language or dialect. Thus, our imaginary Taiwanese, upon encountering his umpty-umth waiguoren would seem to have more than ample reason to believe that English offered the best chance to understand and be understood by said waiguoren.
That is, unless the foreigner is instantly recognizable as a Mandarin or Hoklo (also known as Taiwanese) speaker, or has some distinguishing characteristic that indicates he or she is fluent in one or more local tongues.
So, I put it to de Jonge and all the people out there who think local people should recognize on sight that they speak Mandarin, or Taiwanese, or whatever: Do you have characteristics that advertise the languages you speak? If neither applies, I suggest you stop complaining and start putting more effort into trying to see things from other people’s point of view.
C. AMBROSE
Ching Shui, Taichung County
Disappointed reader
I have been reading the Taipei Times daily for several years; I used to enjoy it a lot more. Sadly, the quality of the reporting, and most especially the editorials, has declined sharply. Reporters have failed to follow up on key facts and issues regarding stories fundamental to Taiwan’s interests.
For example, after Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators and ministers fumed over the comment made by Masaki Saito, head of the Taipei office of Japan’s Interchange Association, that Taiwan’s status is still unresolved, your reporters did not ask: If Taiwan’s status was resolved, what is it? This unfolding story had been reported on for several days and yet at no time did I see a mention of an attempt to get the answer to this key question from any KMT member.
Your editorial on June 2, “Something sinister on the horizon,” is a sad example of my concern. The editorial attempted to criticize KMT and President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) China policies by comparing them to Israeli policies regarding settlers in the West Bank. Are the two situations so similar they demand analogizing?
By using the phrase of the day, “facts on the ground,” you try to contort the argument that Ma’s policies are “sinister” because Israel’s policies result in “uncertainty.” That is a pretty big stretch, though unfortunately it’s not much of a surprise.
The Taipei Times has published several editorials on Israel, all of them highly critical. While some may argue justification for this, these editorials have been so appallingly one-sided and lacking of any nuance that I must wonder if the editor isn’t anti-Semitic. No, criticizing Israel does not make one anti-Semitic, but continually publishing gratuitous, ridiculously unbalanced editorials might, and this latest example substantially supports my point.
If The Taipei Times has concerns that Ma and the KMT’s recent legislation, diplomatic efforts and economic cooperation regarding China are inimical to Taiwan’s interests and that once they become operational, they and their tragic consequences will be hard to reverse, then that’s an easy enough point to make all on its own.
I will say that the June 2 editorial wasn’t quite as heavy-handed as usual in its attack on Israel. However, conflating two such complex and unrelated international policies involving several divergent countries for the purpose of impugning Israel or the KMT and Ma (the editorial is unclear) does not bode well for the integrity, discretion and professionalism of your paper.
HOWARD WESTON
Taoyuan
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Much has been said about the significance of the recall vote, but here is what must be said clearly and without euphemism: This vote is not just about legislative misconduct. It is about defending Taiwan’s sovereignty against a “united front” campaign that has crept into the heart of our legislature. Taiwanese voters on Jan. 13 last year made a complex decision. Many supported William Lai (賴清德) for president to keep Taiwan strong on the world stage. At the same time, some hoped that giving the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) a legislative majority would offer a
RSS