Pro-China political parties often use the term “desinicization” to attack pro-Taiwan localization efforts.
Every time I see this issue being politicized, it stirs up all kinds of conflicts in my mind.
What is “desinicization”?
I have a doctorate in Chinese literature and I teach Chinese, but even I have no idea how this term should be interpreted.
If Confucianism is regarded as representative of Chinese thought, it has to be said that there are several Confucian ideas that are contrary to modern democratic values — freedom, culture and human rights — and are worthy of further reflection.
First, when praising the contribution of Guan Zhong (管仲), an important prime minister in ancient China, where the Chinese saw non-Chinese beyond their borders as the uncivilized “other,” Confucius said: “If it were not for Guan Zhong, it would have been us that were the barbarians, who wear their hair unbound, with the lappets of our coats buttoned on the left side.”
Apparently Confucius took wearing the hair unbound and buttoning the coat lappets on the left side as part of barbarian culture and treated the traits with contempt.
Even though unbound hair and left-side buttoning were different from mainstream Central Plains culture in ancient China, this does not mean that it was inferior. People in some regions of India eat with their hands. This is their culture, but we will not say it is a savage and inferior one.
Second, the concept of grand unification does exist in Confucianism.
For example, Confucian philosopher Mencius said: “There is nothing under Heaven that is not the territory of the sovereign.”
This idea alone gave Han and Tang dynasty emperors all the justification they needed for territorial expansion and aggression beyond their borders.
What is the difference between this idea and modern imperialism? And is China’s 2005 “Anti-Secession” Law not the recurrence of this imperialist ghost? Not to mention that this idea goes against the stream of national self-determination and independence in the modern era.
Third, in imperial China, Qin Shihuangdi’s [秦始皇帝, the first emperor of China] policy of standardizing weights and measures and the writing system throughout his then-newly unified empire was indeed a major contribution to the nation; it was actually the realization of a Confucian ideal.
However, in contrast, the more modernized and democratic a nation is today, the more it values ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity. It does not worry that diversity will affect or threaten the government.
Only communist nations need to take advantage of this idea to defend their own regime.
No matter how much Taiwan “desinicizes” itself, Taiwanese still speak and write in Chinese and still have a Chinese spirit to the core.
However, if the meaning of “desinicization” is to remove the anachronisms of Chinese thought and culture, then why is it not appropriate?
Luo Zi-zhi has a doctorate in Chinese literature and is a university professor.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked
RSS