Typhoon Morakot did more than expose the incompetence and lack of leadership in President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration. It highlighted another salient issue: the plight of Taiwan’s Aborigines.
Like many indigenous peoples suffering the fate of colonialism, these people are pulled in opposite directions. Tugging on one side is the wish to maintain traditional lifestyles and identities; on the other are the demands of survival and dignity in a modern, fast-paced and high-tech society.
As a result, they are being marginalized to the point of extinction. Even if they do fit in, at best, they often face a life of second-class citizenship that teeters on the brink of welfare. If ever the Aboriginal community needed vision and leadership, it is now.
Where to find it? The sight of Aboriginal villages washed away and wiped out after Morakot was horrendous. Worse, however, is the realization that the causes of the problem were not limited to the typhoon. The devastation came as the result of lack of strong environmental policies and after mountainsides denuded of trees were unable to stop mudflows. Then there is the fact that decisions on deforestation were made by profiteers and forces outside the sphere of influence of the villagers.
Living in isolation on ancestral lands, Aborigines are often removed from the decision-making processes around them. Further, without pursuing pertinent related education and degrees that would help legitimize community members and businesses in influencing the government’s decision-making processes, they find their lives controlled from the outside.
The Aborigines do participate in Taiwan’s democratic mechanisms, but they have not learned to use their votes to their advantage. Like any minority, they must fit in.
But while certain affirmative action policies are in place for education and the like, their leadership has no grand plan for their people. Instead, for example, they are satisfied with “vote-buying handouts” and small gifts.
The Aboriginal vote has always favored the wealthy Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — like a dog begging for scraps. This, in effect, is selling a birthright for a mess of pottage.
As they pick up their scraps, the Aborigines have been unable to grasp the larger reality that the KMT is a Sino-centric party shaped by its hierarchical Confucian philosophy. Thus, no matter how pleasant or inflated the talk of the Han, the Aborigines will always rank as second-class citizens and/or Uncle Toms.
Further, Aborigines tend to ignore how they have been culturally denigrated and stereotyped as lazy and as drunkards with loose morals — by the very same hand that gives them a dole.
One way to counter this cultural stereotyping is to elect new leaders who are able to relate to and stress a Taiwanese identity for them. DNA research has demonstrated that 85 percent of Taiwanese have Aboriginal blood. By this, Aborigines are not a minority but part and parcel of the majority. They share a common heritage with most Taiwanese. Only one group, the waishengren — Mainlanders — is not one with them; yet it is those same waishengren who buy them off cheaply and look down on them.
In establishing a vision of fitting in, the Aborigines must realize that their best hope is in building a Taiwanese identity. It is only within the framework of this identity that they will be able to find and maintain true dignity and a competitive and cultural advantage.
Because of this, Ma is actually their worst enemy. He has repeatedly tried to emphasize the fabric of zhonghua minzu — Chinese ethnicity — with all of its hierarchical implications and baggage. Ma’s paternalism has already been demonstrated on numerous occasions by talking to Aborigines as if they were children.
The answer to Aboriginal problems will likewise not be found in legislators like Non-Partisan Solidarity Union Legislator May Chin (高金素梅), who receives money from Beijing, because Beijing operates within the same paternalistic, hierarchical paradigm. A simple look at the plight of the Tibetans and the Uighurs demonstrates the results of that hierarchy. Both groups have become aliens and suffer in their own lands.
If Aborigines think they will fare better because of temporary handouts from China, they are sadly mistaken. Morakot should be their wake-up call. Where have 50 years of handouts from the KMT gotten them?
Aborigines of all tribes must forge an alliance with Taiwan’s environmentalists — both in politics and in life. This is a natural alliance because all want to preserve and protect ancestral lands. Included in this must be the commitment of some Aborigines to long-term education in such matters, just as some must make a commitment to areas such as Austronesian studies.
Research points to how the vast Austronesian linguistic family across the Pacific and Indian oceans originated in Taiwan. This should spur Aborigines on to recapture their dignity and rightful place in the community. Pride in the past will never be found in an outmoded zhonghua minzu, but in an empire that they once built — and why it was lost.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
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
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS