Late last month, Minister of Culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台), went to Washington and gave a talk at George Washington University on the topic of “soft power.”
Given that she is a noted writer and literary critic there were some expectations that she would present a cogent picture of the dynamic world that constitutes Taiwan’s world of arts and culture.
However, she failed to live up to expectations and chose instead to focus on Confucian values, elaborate on the anachronistic Analects and highlight the “Chinese character” of Taiwanese society.
As several students pointed out during the question-and-answer period, Taiwan’s culture is a rich mixture of many cultures — aboriginal, Japanese and even some European influences dating back to the Dutch and Spanish periods. Yet, Lung chose to neglect this vibrant mix.
Several members of the audience also reminded those at the event that Confucianism had been a Martial Law era tool of repression and asked if President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration’s renewed emphasis on such values was in fact an attempt to move the clock backwards.
A student from Hong Kong also questioned Lung’s assertion that the renewed interest by China in Confucianism was really an expression of “soft power.”
The student felt that China was not really interested in “soft power,” but was re-colonizing Hong Kong and was in fact trying to brainwash the inhabitants of the former British colony.
Several other students questioned Lung on her words and actions in relation to the Taipei 228 Memorial Museum, where she had sought to downplay Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) role in the brutal 1947 suppression during which 28,000 Taiwanese were killed by Chiang’s troops. One angry student compared it to the denial of the Holocaust.
However, one of the most interesting aspects of the speech was not discussed during the session at George Washington University.
As aforementioned, Lung highlighted Confucian values and specifically mentioned the four principles of morality and the five virtues as outlined in the Analects, which in her view guide life in Taiwan: Being “kind, upright, courteous, temperate and magnanimous.”
How do these five Confucian virtues jibe with reality in Taiwan under the Ma administration?
If anything, Ma and his government have been vindictive and divisive, especially where it concerns former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). If Ma was magnanimous, he would have granted medical parole to Chen a long time ago.
The way the Ma administration has abused the judicial system to pursue the former president and his family certainly smacks of political retribution — very little of the Confucian kindness, uprightness or magnanimity to be seen there.
Actually Lung, in her speech at George Washington, was very eloquent in describing what Taiwanese really care about: The freedom to write, paint or sing what we want; tolerance of those we do not agree with; protection of those who are unjustly persecuted; rejection of leaders we distrust; creating what comes from our heart.
The main issues now is that Ma and his government need to learn to practice what they preach.
In their present form, the practices are too reminiscent of the “Confucianism” seen in China where advocates of reform and change, such as Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) and Ai Wei-wei (艾未未), are silenced and unjustly prosecuted.
Mark Kao is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs in Washington.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS