In a recent speech at the Ketagalan Institute, President Chen Shui-bian (
"People have tried to paint his administration as one that stirs up ethnic tension," the article paraphrases Chen as saying.
Amen to A-bian for that understatement, as it is about time the DPP set the record straight.
The political divide does not occur on a progressive-conservative scale.
Instead, the differences between the two camps -- the pan-blue and the pan-green -- are usually oversimplified and reduced to "ethnic" difference.
Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) fell into the trap of stereotypes when he said: "There have been discussions at home and abroad ... about the appropriateness of the political elite of a minority ethnic group governing a majority ethnic group," ("Wang Jin-pyng to skip KMT primary," April 3, page 1).
One wishes Wang had gone a little bit further in defining who exactly these groups are comprised of, but a hint is all he left us.
Let us look at the words "ethnic" and "ethnicity." A quick glance at the definition of ethnicity on the Wikipedia Web site suffices to realize that it is an enormously complex concept, to such an extent that it can be made to mean almost anything by anybody -- a dangerous thing in and of itself.
In the US, it is mostly used as a cover word for "race."
The more I hear about how "race" is supposed to refer to "Mainlander," "Native" or "Hoklo," the more I need someone to respond to the challenge of defining what these concepts really mean for the country. Perhaps an analogous situation in another country would help shed light on the situation here.
In other words, we can't refer to "ethnic" unless it compares with other, proven examples of situations where clear-cut ethnicity played a role in state affairs.
In the end, however, it doesn't really matter what ethnic means. Where it gains its importance is in how the concept is used.
It can be used as a red herring or a smokescreen. A red herring can be loosely defined as a false statement is used to divert attention from an issue.
The basic idea behind the ethnicity card is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and onto another topic. This type of "reasoning" looks something like this:
1. Topic A is under discussion.
2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B actually isn't).
3. Topic A is dropped.
Applied to Taiwanese politics, the technique is used as follows:
1. Taiwan should change the name of the post-office and bank from China to Taiwan.
2. There you go again, the opposition says, fanning "ethnic" difference.
3. Name-change is dropped.
The meaning of ethnicity is in reality secondary to its rhetorical function: to create a diversion.
As for the word "ethnic," the major metaphor used is often "stirring" or "fanning the flames of," both of which conjure images of irresponsible behavior performed by someone who is reckless in nature. In other words, the term is often ascribed to Chen and the Democratic Progressive Party.
Politics -- in Taiwan and elsewhere -- is a language game. The academic discipline best positioned to understand the war of words is cognitive linguistics.
Once one cuts through the semantics and boils the debate to its essence, it becomes evident that the issue that really matters was there all along -- freedom.
Michael Loncar
Pingtung County
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
The annual summit of East Asia and other events around the ASEAN summit in October and November every year have become the most important gathering of leaders in the Indo-Pacific region. This year, as Laos is the chair of ASEAN, it was privileged to host all of the ministerial and summit meetings associated with ASEAN. Besides the main summit, this included the high-profile East Asia Summit, ASEAN summits with its dialogue partners and the ASEAN Plus Three Summit with China, Japan and South Korea. The events and what happens around them have changed over the past 15 years from a US-supported, ASEAN-led
To the dismay of the Chinese propaganda machine, President William Lai (賴清德) has been mounting an information offensive through his speeches. No longer are Taiwanese content with passively reacting to China’s encroachment in the international window of discourse, but Taiwan is now setting the tone and pace of conversation. Last month, Lai’s statement that “If China wants Taiwan it should also take back land from Russia” made international headlines, pointing out the duplicity of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) revanchism. History shows that the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) stance on regional territorial disputes has not been consistent. The early CCP
RSS