President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) attitude toward the most powerless segment of society, the Aborigines, gives an interesting insight into his view of the world.
In an attitude similar to the way white supremacists treat black Americans, during a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Central Standing Committee meeting last week, Ma said that Aborigines were not ready for autonomy, but added that they should be praised for their skills in the fields of sports and music.
Aboriginal activists rightfully protested Ma’s statement, as it not only broke a campaign promise to them, but also demonstrated that he thinks of Aborigines as children who must be guided and applauded for minor achievements, but never set free to reach their full potential. His attitude toward Taiwan’s original inhabitants smacks of the “white man’s burden” used during the colonial era to justify Western dominance of non-Western peoples. Indeed, it could be called the “Han Chinese burden.”
This prejudicial attitude Ma holds toward Aborigines is extended to foreigners, who he accuses of ignorance when it comes to Taiwan, even those who have a proven expertise on Taiwanese society. When former American Institute in Taiwan chairman Nat Bellocchi and others put their names to an open letter criticizing the Ma administration for referring the alleged mishandling of state papers by former Democratic Progressive Party officials to the Control Yuan, Ma’s spokesman implied that they were ignorant foreigners who didn’t know enough about Taiwan to comment. That misrepresentation of the open letter came despite the fact that most of the signatories are well-known experts on Taiwanese affairs. His comments seem to indicate that Ma thinks one has to be Han Chinese to be considered qualified to comment on Taiwanese society.
Another prejudice the president holds is his deference toward China, assuming that anything Chinese is good and that Beijing does not deserve rebuke as it cracks down on its own citizens because it is a necessity when governing the world’s most populous country.
This everything-Chinese-is-good attitude goes so far that Ma’s government has pushed Taiwan to the brink of absorption by a tyrannical neighbor. Under Ma, Taiwan’s schools have acquired a pro-China slant, the economy has all but been “unified” with that of China and most of the rest of the world has dropped any pretense of support for Taiwan’s autonomy.
Ma is guided by a narrow view of the world that prevents him from seeing reality. Instead of recognizing the achievements Aborigines have made — in many fields — Ma sees misguided inferiors who need the beneficial hand of a “Han” leader to guide their way. Instead of heeding the advice of foreign academics who base their constructive criticism of the government on solid research and experience, Ma sees ignorant outsiders that should keep their mouths shut. Instead of panning a repressive one-party government in Beijing that should be condemned for jailing and torturing its citizens and blocking the free flow of information, Ma cozies up to what he sees as a big brother who should be looked up to and emulated.
Like any prejudice, Ma’s view of the world prevents him from thinking about it critically and causes him to make serious mistakes when formulating policies. Those erroneous policies have also allowed, if not encouraged, the rest of the world to slowly abandon Taiwan, while China opens its arms to receive them in a bear hug of death.
“Taiwan, province of China” is a fiction that is fast becoming reality, sped up by Ma’s misguided Han-chauvinistic policies.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS