Most short and long-term visitors to Taiwan comment on its unique characteristics, culture and style. Taiwan has an identity that makes it very different from its neighbors and its people are hardy, resilient and adaptive. I would argue that this is the result of more than just historical experience and development; it may also be an essential ingredient of Taiwan’s nature.
Academics certainly wonder how and why after century upon century of different colonizers, with each striving to impose its own brand of an imagined community, Taiwan has still managed to develop its own character and culture. I think that Taiwan did this not by rejecting, but by absorbing the colonizing cultures and cross-breeding them into its own local ways. In other words, Taiwanese have forged what can be called their own unique hybrid culture — the Taiwanese way.
Scientifically, a hybrid is defined as something of mixed origin and composition. In genetics, it is the offspring of genetically dissimilar parents or stock — a description applicable to plants, animals or humans. Taiwan meets this definition, but it also has more; it has hybrid vigor, known as heterosis. Hybrid vigor refers to superior qualities of survival achieved as a result of crossbreeding.
From the time Aborigines first settled here, Taiwan’s culture has been rich in its diversity of thought and religion. At the same time, it has also proven remarkably tolerant, never seeking to control or force others to accept its ways.
Taiwan’s culture is richly expressed in untold foods that few will reject — excluding a resistance by some to stinky tofu. Taiwan’s culture is rich in pleasant, accepting people who by their warm nature are unusually open to outsiders. This is the strength, beauty and resilience visitors have found in Taiwan. It is Taiwan’s hybrid nature and hybrid culture that have underpinned Taiwan’s ability to pursue, fight for and achieve democracy.
Historically, Taiwanese can probably thank Japan for unifying their diverse elements, for making them begin to realize the essence of being Taiwanese and for allowing them to better appreciate their own uniqueness and heritage.
Japan was the first colonial power to master and control the whole island of Taiwan. Previous colonizers — the Dutch, Spanish, Ming and the hesitant Qing — all controlled parts of the island and made their own distinctive contributions. However, those powers usually played one group of Taiwanese against another in an effort to divide and conquer. Japan controlled the whole island and sought to make all Taiwanese subjects of its empire.This forced the diverse groups within Taiwan to unify, if not by desire, then by necessity.
The roots of this unity were present when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) came to Taiwan. Seeing the 50 years of Japanese influence, the KMT tried to mold the island in its own image and likeness. Taiwan absorbed the KMT, but did not wholly endorse its one-party state, its forced language and memorization of things Chinese. Many Taiwanese died in that process; some were sent to Green Island and still others fled abroad and were blacklisted. Eventually Taiwan was able to achieve its democracy.
Taiwan’s hybrid development and democracy has continued, but it remains incomplete. Elements must still be weeded out. The KMT still silently controls and profits from the confiscated lion’s share of state assets, transitional justice has not yet been achieved and certain elements within the KMT still want to deny Taiwanese their true identity. Across the Taiwan Strait, another nation greedily seeks to control Taiwan. Nonetheless, Taiwan’s hybrid nature grows stronger by the day. Taiwan has withstood numerous colonizers and powers and as long as Taiwanese realize this simple truth, the future of Taiwan belongs to them.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath