As the old Chinese saying goes, "A tree's tangerines will become sour if you transplant the tree (
The same could be said of transplanting foreign systems to Taiwan. Once a supposedly ideal system is adopted in Taiwan, it usually deteriorates because of our overabundant creativity.
The nation is debating about whether to make local terrestrial television stations public to try to keep them away from political or military control.
But some people predict that such a plan will fail. Why? The answer to this question is simple, but its social significance is somewhat complex.
First, the word public is so misused in Taiwan that people are not even sure they want "public" local terrestrial TV stations.
Consider, for example, the controversial amendment to a video-game bill that will allow video-game arcades to offer tokens to patrons that can be exchanged for gifts at certain "public welfare stations."
This is a commercial creativity riddled with linguistic equivocation, as the amendment effectively seeks to legalize electronic gambling in the name of promoting public welfare.
On a superficial level, perhaps this linguistic violence is just a reflection of the twisted values and social chaos of the post-modern period -- where a prostitutes' right to work is used to justify prostitution.
Moreover, in an extreme case of such linguistic violence, the local media argue that they have reported on and even distributed the sex VCDs involving the New Party's Chu Mei-feng (璩美鳳) in order to serve the public. That same, twisted logic might equally be used to defend drug trafficking.
But we still have to consider certain characteristics of our social and cultural behavior. Then we can understand that public TV stations are unworkable not because there is no notion of public interest in Taiwan, but because the traditional behavior patterns of Taiwanese people are unsuitable for such a system.
Those who have optimistically brought to Taiwan the Western concept of a strict "society of citizens" (
The pursuit of rational and open democratic dialogue will therefore often degenerate into private exchanges of benefits and secret deals that are far from what democratic systems are intended to promote.
Although we should not underestimate the power of those who are willing to serve society voluntarily, as well as those who devote themselves to humanitarian activities, in the end such power is insufficient to establish a healthy public system.
Existing cultural values and traditions in our daily lives have limited the establishment of public systems.
But this does not need to be a permanent state of affairs. In fact, the enlightened education of our children and of society at large are both crucial to the transformation of Taiwan's society. Unfortunately, today's education system needs to be improved urgently, making the reconstruction of our social systems even more complex. Because Taiwan is adopting the US trend of giving schools and teachers more autonomy over what they teach, we have turned our education system into a political game that is full of "political booty-sharing" (政治分贓).
Is Taiwan's problem a result of its systems, or a result of its unique cultural creativity? The more we consider this issue, the more pessimistic we become.
Chang Shr-syung is an associate professor of social welfare at National Chung Cheng University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS