On April 28, Executive Yuan spokeswoman Kolas Yotaka stated on Facebook her opposition to central government officials taking part in worship ceremonies for Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功), also known as Koxinga, who used Taiwan as a base to resist the Qing Dynasty after it overthrew the Ming Dynasty in China.
Considering Koxinga from an Aboriginal point of view, Kolas sees him as an invader.
In contrast, Minister of the Interior Hsu Kuo-yung (徐國勇), who is reputed to be a descendant of Koxinga, said that he should be seen in a positive light for having resisted unification with China.
These points of view might seem contradictory, but they actually describe different aspects of Koxinga.
RE-ENACTMENT
Events take place at which people worship Koxinga or dress up as him to re-enact history. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as they do it to recreate history rather than to draw questionable parallels between the past and the present.
One example of the latter is that during Japan’s 50-year rule over Taiwan, they extolled Koxinga, whose mother was Japanese, as a national hero.
Japanese rule was followed by the dictatorship of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), who praised Koxinga’s Tungning Kingdom as a model for “counterattacking the mainland.”
To re-enact history, a depiction should be multidimensional, not made from a single point of view.
For example, the Mount Rushmore National Memorial in the US is also known as Presidents’ Mountain, because it features the heads of four of the most important US presidents.
However, Mount Rushmore was originally territory of the Sioux people. Only after the Sioux were defeated by white people did the federal government take possession of the land. Later, the heads of four presidents were carved into the mountainside, much to the annoyance of Native Americans.
In 1948, the Sioux began work on a statue of Sioux leader Crazy Horse, who fought against the federal army, on Thunderhead Mountain, 27km from the presidential memorial.
People who travel to this area can observe how the US has opposing viewpoints of its history and yet has been able to bring them together and stand united.
In Taiwan, when commemorative activities that recreate the landing of Koxinga’s forces in Taiwan are held, why not include some people playing the role of the Siraya people?
Why not combine the event with worship of Pingpu Aborigines’ home spirits in the vicinity of Tainan’s Koxinga Shrine?
People can live for a long time and go through all kinds of experiences. No one is completely good or bad.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
A multidimensional re-enactment of Koxinga would be a better way to teach future generations about the many aspects of Taiwan’s history. It would provide a more appropriate historical account of Koxinga himself.
There are differences in the way memorial activities for Koxinga and Chiang Kai-shek are conducted. Koxinga never ruled the whole of Taiwan. No military police are assigned to patrol the Koxinga Shrine. Nobody has ever had to stand to attention and salute a statue of Koxinga.
It should therefore be much easier to make memorial activities for Koxinga more multidimensional than to do the same thing for Chiang Kai-shek.
Chang Ching-wei is a postgraduate student at National Tsing Hua University’s Institute of History.
Translated by Julian Clegg
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
RSS