Acrid tree hugging
Dear Johnny,
Your language is acrid — but mostly meets the points. “Fraud” and “face” seem to match Chinese culture as elegantly as its glamorous and mystic history — what a mystery!
Please write more on the hazards of Taiwan’s destruction by man. Concrete is not the concretion of the Formosa (Beautiful) Island. The Taipei 101 tower, the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (I hope it will serve merely as a museum some day), the gigantomanic Hsuehshan tunnel — hell, why not a gondola to everyone’s residence everywhere to avoid road traffic, or even across the Taiwan Strait?
Don’t forget the Kaohsiung City Government’s proposal to build a gondola from the 85-story Tuntext tower across the harbor to Qijin (Cijin or Chi-Chin or Tshi-dshin or however you want to write it).
Engelbert Altenburger
I-Shou University
Johnny replies: I prefer to write it as 旗津, but Cijin will have to suffice for you Tongyong diehards. And that’s the way it’s gonna stay unless the Cabinet can bribe the Kaohsiung City Government into abandoning Tongyong and using Hanyu pinyin, thereby replacing the “C” with a “Q.” Snore.
As for your environmental compliment, I have to say it’s a strange experience being praised for my love of Mother Nature given that in my day I loved shooting helpless animals and vegetation as much as the next idiot doing compulsory military service. Back in those days I only saw weeds, not trees. These days I only see cement, not trees.
Regional trappings
Dear Johnny,
I found President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recent promotion of Taiwan as a “region” of a surreal Republic of China quite interesting.
It is a given that the state-controlled Chinese media will have grabbed hold of his statement that relations between Taiwan and China are not state-to-state in nature but region-to-region.
But the Chinese media will have almost certainly truncated Ma’s theory of a greater Republic of China (ROC) comprising Taiwan (and the islands under its control), China, the Republic of Mongolia, what is now Russian territory and the territory of a number of central Asian states.
It seems painfully obvious to me that the “region to region” statement will do nothing for the status of either Taiwan or the surreal ROC and will simply be seized by the Chinese media as justification for eventual annexation of Taiwan — the inevitable, final nail in the coffin of the ROC’s legacy (except for a few nostalgic ethnic Chinese living abroad with their sentimental Double Ten celebrations).
Anyway, I was wondering how much the credibility of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) depends on prolonging the concept of the ROC — real or surreal. If the KMT were to embrace the concept of localization or “Taiwanization” and were to face up to the blatantly obvious fact that the area Taipei exercises sovereignty over does not include China, then the logical thing for the KMT to do would be to change its name to the “Taiwanese Nationalist Party.”
I know that many who read this statement would roll their eyes and call me a dumb big nose but I think there is a link between the KMT maintaining credibility (indeed, the justification for its existence) and the party seeking to prolong the ROC in some form or another.
Andrew Whyte
Johnny replies: How about being called a smart big nose? The key to KMT credibility is much the same as the key to the credibility of the Chinese Communist Party: practical results and economic prowess. Without that credibility, the KMT would get kicked out on election day — assuming there are more to come — while the Chinese would need to increase police and military spending to cope with the riots of the landless, jobless and mirthless.
The irony is that both parties are enslaved to ideological trappings (even if most don’t really believe in them) and struggle to move forward when these trappings and economics clash.
Well, what did you expect? They all came from the same household of revolutionaries in the first place — before embarking on the biggest and bloodiest family tiff in the history of modern warfare.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS