I write in response to George Thompson's opinion piece "`Little sister' case typical of Taiwan," (Feb. 1, page 8).
Thompson (who I presume hails from North America) blames the tragic death of "little sister" Chiu on a variety of shortcomings in Taiwanese society and culture, and goes on to support his view with a myriad of examples and analogies.
Before entering the labyrinth of logic woven by Thompson, it might be wise to state that the passing of "little sister" Chiu was caused by a severe beating at the hands of her father. I need not canvass statistics from North America to lament the fact that many unfortunate children suffer similar fates in Thompson's home country and, doubtlessly, also in Thompson's home town, wherever that may be.
The fact that this battered child was denied the immediate medical care that may have saved her life is tragic, but certainly not unique to Taiwan. There is a plethora of examples of people in Canada and the US being denied life-saving medical care for a variety of reasons: long waiting lists for socialized services in Canada; lack of insurance or financial resources in the US. None of this excuses or mitigates what occurred in the specific case of this one little girl, but neither does it support Thompson's contention that the cause is some unique deficiency in Taiwanese culture.
Thompson proceeds to provide examples of what's wrong with Taiwan. He begins with English cable television stations. How this relates to battered children one struggles to imagine, but he argues that this is indicative of something larger. That HBO et al tend to repeat their programming, in his view, demonstrates a lack of "service, responsibility or accountability," and states that the consumer has "no choice, no exit option and no avenue of complaint."
In a country of 23 million people, where English is the third language (behind Mandarin and Taiwanese), one might be thankful that there is English programming at all. As for choices and exit options, Thompson might consider turning the television off and spending his leisure time in any of the beautiful municipal parks, basketball and tennis courts, or swimming pools that are so widely available in Taiwan. He might rent movies, or become sufficiently competent in Chinese that he can increase his viewing options by 70 or 80 channels. In any case, Thompson demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of commercial television production in addition to weak logic in this example.
Next on Thompson's laundry list of Taiwanese shortcomings is the traffic. How utterly common to hear a foreigner complaining about the driving habits of Taiwanese motorists. Yes, Thompson, the Taiwanese don't drive like the folks back home. Given the sheer density of traffic on this postage stamp-sized island, is it any wonder? Nevertheless, I've yet to see or hear about incidents of road rage in Taiwan in which guns are fired. As for people running red lights, clearly Thompson has never operated a car in Montreal, or Washington, or any other major North American city, where to venture off the sidewalk is to risk life and limb.
Thompson then turns to the educational system. He sees what might be loosely termed "the Confucian method" (in which the teacher lectures), and compares it to the western "Socratic method" (which utilizes a dialogue between students and teacher) and finds the former lacking. One might wonder why it is that Taiwanese students consistently and dramatically outperform western students in standardized testing, given that they suffer in a system in which everyone does the "bare minimum to justify their positions." One might also wonder at the number of western students who leave high school unable to read or write. He defies anyone to "prove him wrong on this point." I believe the evidence does just that, but since he speaks his opinion without regard to facts, I shouldn't trouble to make the effort.
Thompson continues by stating that "anyone living in Taiwan knows ... the same dynamic of irresponsibility, unaccountability and duplicity ... manifests itself millions of times each day throughout Taiwan..." I live in Taiwan, Thompson, and I say you not only exaggerate, but do so from a false premise exacerbated by Western ignorance and arrogance -- a quality I see all too often demonstrated by fresh university graduates who have the whole world all figured out.
If Thompson wants examples of duplicity, he need look no further than the White House; if he wants irresponsibility, he might review the shameful circumstances of Enron; if he seeks unaccountability, he might examine the details of Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, or cast an eye toward the Catholic Church in their dealings with pedophile priests. None of these qualities are unique to Taiwan, and none are the result of "Taiwanese culture" any more than the examples above are the result of "American culture" (whatever that may be).
Thompson closes by stating that his comments are not the result of culture shock. Perhaps not, but they do demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of "culture" (as a concept) and specifically this culture. He states that he has lived in Taiwan for almost three years. I've lived here longer than that, and I have friends who have been here over 20 years. None of us claim to have achieved the level of understanding that would support an analysis of what's wrong with Taiwan. In fact, the one thing on which we "long-timers" agree is that, no matter how long one stays, Taiwanese culture is something that foreigners will never completely comprehend.
It is beyond question that the death of "little sister" Chiu is a tragedy of almost unspeakable proportions. To lay the blame on everyone and everything Taiwanese, however, is not only mistaken, it's stupid and rude.
Frankly, I find Thompson's opinion arrogant, condescending, poorly considered and utterly without merit. Perhaps he ought to seek employment in another country, where nothing bad ever happens, and everyone is polite, considerate and altruistic.
K. Avrom Medvedovsky,
Taichung
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
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
RSS