Politics has driven much of the dispute between the Ministry of Education and the Taipei City Government over an official Romanization system. The clash of ethnic and cultural factors in the debate has triggered an endless war of words that does little to resolve the differences.
For centuries, a majority of the people in Taiwan could not read Chinese because education was largely limited to wealthy families. Only after the introduction of Christianity were members of Christian churches in Taiwan able to read the Bible and sing hymns in their mother tongues -- in Romanized form. It was largely due to church-sponsored efforts to devise Romanization systems that the various ethnic groups -- Hokkein and Hakka immigrants and aborigines -- were able to preserve considerable portions of their languages despite 50 years of Japanese colonial rule and decades of the KMT's martial law regime.
This historical background has long made language use a symbol of both oppression and resistance in Taiwan. It has also made rational debate on the question of languages and Romanization systems difficult.
Supporters of China's Hanyu Pinyin system -- represented by the KMT-led Taipei City Government -- need to understand the deep wounds left behind by that history. At one time or another, the ethnic identity and mother tongues of Taiwanese and aborgines were all brutally suppressed by the powers that be. Official regulations forbade people from speaking in their native languages at public places and in schools. The city government cannot use Taiwan's need to stay connected with the rest of the world as the sole basis for its demand that the people of Taiwan immediately adopt a system aggressively promoted by Beijing and now accepted by the international community. Such persuasion takes time.
Some in the pro-Hanyu camp have even used the term "de-Sinicization" to describe the motivation of those who favor Tongyong Pingying. Such criticism could easily escalate ethnic tensions.
However, proponents of the Tongyong system also need to face up to the fact that Hanyu has long been accepted by the international community -- including the UN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Time magazine and academic institutions around the world. It is therefore inappropriate for the education ministry to forge ahead with plans to make Tongyong compulsory in Taiwan's schools.
In light of the needs of the nation's various ethnic groups, the best option would be to use Tongyong as the main system for instruction, so that each ethnic group can use the spellings for place names, street names and personal names that are preferred by the persons involved. Forcing people to spell their names in Hanyu would be as unreasonable as the old practice of forcing Aboriginal people to adopt Han names.
While teaching the Tongyong system, teachers would only need to make the time to compare it with Hanyu in the few instances where the two systems vary. This way students would become familiar with both systems. This format would allow for both local cultural development and allow Taiwan to stay connected with the rest of the world.
Rational communication and dialogue is what is needed now, not more emotional attacks that only serve to inflame passions. The easier it is for people -- both within Taiwan and around the world -- to communicate with one another, the better off we will all be.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS