A centennial is a very special moment; the celebration of the nation’s 100th anniversary should be a joyous event for the whole country. However, because the organizing committee wants to avoid the sensitive phrase “the nation’s founding,” the logo and the slogan for the event will say: “The Republic of China: 100 Years of Excellence.” In one fell swoop the organizers have changed the spirit of the whole event, and no one really understands what is being celebrated anymore. This has nothing to do with excellence, and many people simply feel disappointed.
Jerry Fan (范可欽), an advertising professional involved in organizing the event, said the phrase “nation’s founding” was a bit sensitive, so to stay more neutral, it was decided to highlight Taiwan’s place in history, and that’s why “nation’s founding” was replaced with “excellence.” Fan said “excellence” both highlights the historic record over the past century and implies a wish that the next 100 years will be just as excellent.
A report in the Chinese-language Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) has set off a debate by saying that the Republic of China (ROC) government was afraid of using the phrase “100th anniversary of the nation’s founding” for fear that it might displease China. Council for Cultural Affairs Minister Emile Sheng (盛治仁), who is leading the organizing committee — the Republic of China (Taiwan) Centenary Foundation (中華民國建國一百年基金會) — hurried to calm things down by saying that using the word “excellence” did not preclude the use of the words “nation’s founding” and added that both the name of the foundation and the activities were celebrations of the ROC’s founding.
The slogan “100 Years of Excellence” is in itself not all that excellent. Slogans do not represent reality, and most are an expression of a common emotion and hope used as a hypnotic device. The main point, however, isn’t whether the slogan is excellent, but rather how Fan, who is not even on the preparatory committee, can decide that the words “nation’s founding” are sensitive and should be replaced by the word “excellent.” How was this decision reached, and what were the opinions of the other participants in the discussion?
The organizing committee and the government must understand that the public doesn’t care if an excellent slogan will make for an excellent activity. What it cares about is that the ROC must not decide that even its own founding is too sensitive to be mentioned. The government cannot constantly denigrate Taiwan by always thinking first about what China might say or think. Fan is in advertising, and it is part of his job to use big words, but his ideas are representative of the kind of person who immediately shrinks two sizes as soon as China is mentioned. That kind of person turns with the wind, and if a cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) is signed, Taiwan will move even faster toward China. The 100th anniversary of the ROC’s founding may well be its farewell.
The People’s Republic of China celebrated its 60th anniversary last year, and even produced a film called The Founding of a Republic (建國大業). Now the ROC is about to celebrate its 100th anniversary, but doesn’t even dare to say so, which is humiliating to many people. Fan has aroused questions among many Taiwanese and has called up deep worries about the continued existence of the ROC. Not only will pan-green supporters be annoyed at this, it will also be unacceptable to many swing voters and even pan-blue supporters.
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
RSS