In these troubled times, Taiwanese know they are different, but they might not always be able to verbalize how different they are. From the Japanese colonial era on, Taiwanese began to gain a unified sense of their difference.
At that time, unlike under the Qing Dynasty’s rule, the Hoklo, Hakka and Aboriginal people realized that they should not let outside rulers play one group against the other. They became united in forging an identity.
Thus, as Taiwan now distances itself from the Martial Law era, propaganda and attempted indoctrination by the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) one-party state, its citizens feel more free to claim their true identity — Taiwanese. For process, Taiwanese should examine three terms: creolism, syncretism and hybridization.
Taiwan has emerged from the bonds of what some call the forced learning and Stockholm syndrome of its one-party state to become a democracy. Ironically, however, after gaining its present democracy, Taiwan now hears new dissonant controlling overtures from a different nation on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
Taiwanese hear phrases such as, “We are all Chinese. We are brothers,” from China.
Of course, they are not, and those overtures are always made over gun barrels and missiles. Taiwanese should instead first begin to examine the term “creole states.” Professor and author Benedict Anderson applied this term to people who might share a common language and common descent from another country, but who will fight any oppressors of their country for their freedom.
Those willing to examine history closely will see that Taiwan’s history is full of such experiences and is very different from China’s history. Taiwan’s identity is different from China’s, and Taiwan’s mentality, particularly with its newly achieved democracy, is far different from China’s.
Second, the term creolization was first associated with the field of linguistics, but in the past decades academics have taken it far beyond liguistics and applied it to numerous other fields, including culture and identity. “Creole” is applied to cultures of intrinsically mixed origins, as in the US state of Louisiana or the Caribbean. In this regard, Taiwan, with its indigenous cultures that mixed with Dutch, Spanish, Ming loyalists, Manchu Qing, Japanese and finally the fleeing KMT, fits this bill.
Next, syncretism is often associated with and compared with the usage of creolism. It is used to describe the reconciliation of different systems, such as of religious belief or language, where there are heterogeneous or partial results. One can view Taiwan in much the same way, since it has reconciled the many cultural and religious systems left by its past colonial forces.
The third term, hybrid, is also applied to mixed origins, including those of genetic or language backgrounds. While this term has been used from grains to livestock to automobile engines, I prefer it because it carries the aspect of “hybrid vigor” where there is a resultant increased vigor and/or other superior qualities as a result of the interbreeding. Those who know the resiliency and adaptability of Taiwanese can relate to this.
Whether creole, syncretic or hybrid, Taiwan’s experience and its identity are its own. They are of a land that has seen successive waves of colonization and immigration coming to its shores. The colonist and immigrants have all mixed with its Aboriginal culture to make Taiwan, Taiwan.
To be sure, there are still unresolved elements, such as just retribution for the stolen state assets and transitional justice for all the numerous past political crimes. Nevertheless, identity-wise, Taiwanese have found in democracy the true expression of their creole, syncretic or hybrid nature. Let no other state try to take it away.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS