Dragon Boat Festival was originally a day to dispel disease in the summer.
But after poet Qu Yuan (屈原) of the ancient kingdom of Chu was said to have thrown himself into a river on the day more than 2,000 years ago, it turned into a holiday to commemorate him. Today, Lunar New Year, Dragon Boat Festival and Moon Festival are all important holidays in Chinese culture.
But is Qu’s suicide the kind of behavior that should be encouraged? And what does Qu have to do with Taiwan?
Former South Korean president Roh Moo-hyun committed suicide on May 23 to protect his name. In Taipei, Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) talked about Roh’s suicide in a positive light.
Pan-blue camp politicians and commentators also took the opportunity to mock former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), as if they thought he should commit suicide to salvage his dignity.
Such comments, however, incited strong public condemnation, because talking about suicide as a way of solving a problem or encouraging others to kill themselves may inspire anyone encountering hardships to do so.
Such exhortations show a lack of humanity.
If we should not sympathize with Roh or praise him for committing suicide, then why should we commemorate the day Qu committed suicide and celebrate it as a holiday?
Must we really follow the Chinese tradition of making zongzi — steamed rice dumplings wrapped in bamboo leaves — and hold dragon boat races to commemorate a suicide thousands of years ago by someone completely unrelated to Taiwan? Isn’t that tantamount to encouraging suicide?
If it is not, Taiwan should instead commemorate the pro-independence activist Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕), who set himself on fire 20 years ago to defend freedom of expression. We should not hail Deng’s action, but recognize that he felt that he was forced to take such action because of events. Without his sacrifice, Taiwan would be unable to enjoy the freedom of expression and democracy it has today.
Compared with Qu, who killed himself because he was unable to fulfill his wishes, Deng is more deserving of remembrance.
We often say “Taiwan and China, one country on each side.” But we still naively celebrate Chinese holidays and identify ourselves with Chinese culture and China. Small wonder that many Taiwanese refer to themselves as “Chinese” without thinking about it. This is why it is so difficult to build Taiwanese self-awareness.
There is no need for Taiwanese to purposely avoid Chinese holidays if the holidays relate to Taiwan. But there is no value in celebrating holidays with no connection to Taiwan.
It is time for Taiwan to review its national holidays. We should only commemorate people and events related to us instead of blindly following Chinese traditions.
We Taiwanese must follow our own path to build a culture and customs that belong to us.
Kuo Cheng-deng is a doctor.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
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
RSS