A quote often misattributed to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels holds that “a lie repeated a thousand times becomes truth.” Sadly the preposterous nature of this appears to depict conditions in Taiwan today.
Two major lies enmesh the nation: One is the so-called “1992 consensus” and the other is the meaningless name “Chinese Taipei.” Recent events suggest just how extensive these lies have become in obfuscating public discourse.
The spurious “consensus” was touted by proponents as the backbone that helped propel Kaohsiung mayor-elect Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) and Taichung mayor-elect Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to electoral victories for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), who campaigned on promises of economic gains.
The truth is that the political make-believe of the “consensus” has nothing to do with economic growth nor private investment, and yet it is being pushed as a legitimate representation of reality.
Since 2000, when then-National Security Council secretary-general Su Chi (蘇起) made up the term before the nation’s first democratic transfer of power when the KMT handed the Presidential Office to the Democratic Progressive Party, Taiwanese have been led on a path of deception as the KMT promoted the “consensus” as a supposed understanding reached in 1992 that both sides acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
However, over the years, incidents and statements by Chinese officials have shown that Beijing’s understanding is different from what the KMT has been selling. Beijing’s incessant bullying of Taiwan suggests it could never tolerate the idea of “both sides having their own interpretation,” because agreeing to this would be tacit acceptance of “two Chinas.”
Even KMT Chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said that “the 1992 consensus is each side having its own interpretation, but you cannot say that to China’s face.”
The other big lie is the name “Chinese Taipei,” which was a concession the KMT made in 1981 — during the party-state era — to the International Olympic Committee.
However, this ridiculous name has spilled over from the sports realm. National Central University associate professor of Earth sciences Lin Tien-shun (林殿順) on Friday pointed out the absurdity of an academic institute in Australia unilaterally changing references to Taiwan to “Chinese Taipei” — and even changing Taiwan Strait to “Chinese Taipei Strait” — in a 2003 paper he wrote.
The fictional “consensus” was concocted to serve a political purpose, while the name issue was mounted out of fear, as shown by reactions to the name-change referendum on Nov. 24, which opponents said would jeopardize athletes’ eligibility for the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games. As a result, the referendum — which asked whether the national team should participate at international sporting events as “Taiwan” instead of “Chinese Taipei” — was defeated 55 percent to 45 percent.
These deceptions might be conjured by different means and under different circumstances, but they manipulated beliefs and shifted dispositions.
So politicians clamor to uphold a nonexistent “consensus,” while Taiwanese appear to be satisfied cheering for teams called “Chinese Taipei” without grasping how demeaning and insulting the name is to the nation’s standing and dignity.
“Falsehood flies and truth comes limping after it,” author Jonathan Swift wrote in his essay The Art of Political Lying in 1710.
When will the truth ever catch up and break Taiwanese free of the wall of lies that has encircled them for so long?
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
From the Iran war and nuclear weapons to tariffs and artificial intelligence, the agenda for this week’s Beijing summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is packed. Xi would almost certainly bring up Taiwan, if only to demonstrate his inflexibility on the matter. However, no one needs to meet with Xi face-to-face to understand his stance. A visit to the National Museum of China in Beijing — in particular, the “Road to Rejuvenation” exhibition, which chronicles the rise and rule of the Chinese Communist Party — might be even more revealing. Xi took the members
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
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Friday used their legislative majority to push their version of a special defense budget bill to fund the purchase of US military equipment, with the combined spending capped at NT$780 billion (US$24.78 billion). The bill, which fell short of the Executive Yuan’s NT$1.25 trillion request, was passed by a 59-0 margin with 48 abstentions in the 113-seat legislature. KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), who reportedly met with TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) for a private meeting before holding a joint post-vote news conference, was said to have mobilized her
RSS