Formosan ignorance
It is a pity the movie Formosa Betrayed is ending its tour of Taiwan soon.
Even more of a pity is how the general public seem unaware that the movie is being shown in Taiwan. While the film did have a small budget of US$8 million, raised mostly through donations, I am amazed by the lack of talk about the film in the Taiwanese media.
I imagined the media would scramble over this work. This film could help people discover what Taiwan is or what the identity of Taiwan is like, but most of the media was silent. Few people knew about it, and even fewer were actively spreading knowledge of the movie by word of mouth.
Of course, it can easily be seen why the movie was not widely reported: Most media outlets are pro-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or have a non-Taiwan-centric view. The few that did report on it do not have a wide circulation. If one knows about the general politics of Taiwan, this is obvious.
This film is a major step toward open dialogue about the past 70 years of Taiwan’s history. The White Terror, the repression felt by the Taiwanese under the KMT, the events of Feb. 28, 1947, and the killings of Taiwanese professors overseas were, until recently, taboo subjects. Other than numerous books, a few documentaries and anecdotes traded by family members, I have not seen much discussion of the era. Even official documents concerning this period for the most part are still censored and unavailable to the general public.
The attitude displayed by the government, or at least most media outlets, is a “hush-hush” attitude that was typical of the White Terror/KMT period of rule. It is very obvious if one knows about the development of the movie.
If forcing Will Tiao (刁毓能) and the crew of Formosa Betrayed to film their movie in Thailand was not enough, then what about the obvious lack of support from the government for the production of the Hollywood-style movie, which had to be funded through donations.
I urge the people of Taiwan to watch Formosa Betrayed. This is not politically motivated, but historical, as it is perhaps a first step toward opening up about our dark past. The best time for discussion is when the people that lived through that period are still alive, much like the veterans of World War II. Once lost, Taiwan will suffer a blow to its historical identity.
JEFFREY TSAI
Taipei
Values at odds
Apropos your report by Loa Iok-sin on the attempt by an environmentalist group to purchase up to 1,000 hectares of land in Changhua County to prevent the construction of a petrochemical plant (“Activists look to buy another 800 hectares of land,” Aug. 21, page 2), perhaps you could send another staff reporter to ask the Miaoli County farmers what they think of the fact that, whereas 50,000 people are apparently prepared to act to save birds and pink dolphins, none of these people were similarly prepared to help save them and their farms from expropriation. Shame on these environmentalists.
To hold up a bird or a dolphin as of greater value than another human being — which is the only calculation that could possibly account for the comparative inaction of these 50,000 people when the Miaoli farmers were having their land stolen by the government — does not bode well for the future of Taiwan. Such people had better not dare to speak of “human rights” in my presence.
Is it not also very ironic that the tactic which these people have adopted — the purchase of land — itself presupposes the integrity of the principle that property be privately owned, ie, the very principle that these people stood back and watched the Miaoli County government trample upon just a few months back?
For shame — and may it stick to their souls like petroleum and never wash off.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at