Before Aug. 1 became Indigenous Peoples’ Day and the anniversary of President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) official apology to Aborigines, it was known as the day in 1994 when the government officially dropped the hated “mountain compatriot” (山胞) designation for Aborigines in favor of yuanzhumin (原住民, original inhabitants).
Some might say that the change was merely a symbolic move that did not tangibly improve the lives of Aborigines, but it was an important early victory for the then-fledgling Aboriginal rights movement, which took root in about 1984 and continues today.
The designation issue was at the forefront of an ethnic movement that sought to unite the Aborigines and solidify their identity as a collective people under a name of their own choice.
Today we take the term for granted, but it did not come easily, despite a survey by the Academia Sinica showing that only 7 percent of Aborigines at the time approved of the term “mountain compatriots.”
Even so, the National Assembly dismissed their request and wrote “mountain compatriot” into constitutional amendments in 1991 and 1992.
Reluctant to acknowledge Aborigines’ claim as the first inhabitants of Taiwan, the government in 1992 even suggested terms such as “early inhabitants” (早住民) and “ethnic minorities” (少數民族).
These sound absurd after 25 years, but Taiwan was then a society in transition, only recently removed from authoritarian rule, according to which everyone was “Chinese.”
That said, the government’s refusal to comply might have been a blessing in disguise, as it helped raise the public status and visibility of Aborigines.
With each protest detailed in the newspapers, this was the beginning of a shift in public consciousness from Aborigines being an impoverished, backward populace who did not matter to the long-oppressed first inhabitants of the land who would be silent no more.
Looking at these reports, it is apparent how invisible Aborigines were and how oblivious mainstream society was to their plight.
A 1991 Taiwan Times article had to refer to the American movie Dances With Wolves to highlight what Aborigines were going through.
However, the designation issue quickly became a national debate, with university students publishing letters supporting the cause.
So it was more than just a symbolic achievement.
The eradication of the term “mountain compatriots” from government use should always be remembered.
However, what is often not mentioned is that the change was just one of many requests presented by the Taiwan Aboriginal Rights Association to the National Assembly in 1991, 1992 and 1994.
As early as 1988, the association made a declaration of rights that touched on issues that are still pertinent today, such as land rights, cultural and linguistic preservation and self-governance. That year saw the first large-scale protest for Aboriginal land rights — the same topic as the most recent demonstrations.
Unfortunately, these issues are much more complex than a simple name change and remain mostly unresolved. Even the granting of official status to Aboriginal languages might not reverse their path toward extinction.
Aborigines are angry at Tsai, whom they claim has not lived up to the promises she made in the apology.
While it takes time to implement new policy, it is also important to understand their frustration. There is just so much patience and trust a group can have in the government if they have been fighting for the same thing for decades.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
On Monday last week, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Raymond Greene met with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers to discuss Taiwan-US defense cooperation, on the heels of a separate meeting the previous week with Minister of National Defense Minister Wellington Koo (顧立雄). Departing from the usual convention of not advertising interactions with senior national security officials, the AIT posted photos of both meetings on Facebook, seemingly putting the ruling and opposition parties on public notice to obtain bipartisan support for Taiwan’s defense budget and other initiatives. Over the past year, increasing Taiwan’s defense budget has been a sore spot
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had