In an article of mine published several years ago, I referred to Sima Qian’s (司馬遷) Records of the Grand Historian (史記). When a pro-independence friend asked me why I had referred to Chinese history, I responded that while this friend was anti-China, he still knew more about the Chinese than the Chinese themselves.
For example, the Japanese study an opponent’s strong points so that they can overcome them, but the Chinese think themselves superior to their enemies and, consequently, are continually falling short of the Japanese.
It is crucial to understand an enemy’s strong points, but many pro-independence supporters look down on their enemies.
Who the People First Party’s (PFP) presidential candidate will be remains unclear. The pan-green and pan-blue camps have evaluated the situation and, while the winner of the presidential election is a mystery, it will definitely not be Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜).
His core supporters are persistent, but that base cannot be expanded, so he cannot gain enough votes.
The pan-green camp criticizes everything about Han, saying that he knows little, lacks common sense, speaks without thinking and makes many promises that he cannot keep, but no one seems to be asking why he has so many hardcore supporters.
Han’s supporters can be found among those who favor unification and oppose the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). This raises the question of why they have picked Han when there are so many other politicians around.
When candidates began to campaign for the Kaohsiung mayoral election, Han trailed far behind DPP opponent Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁), implying that he was not doing too well, but by the end, he had picked up momentum.
How did this happen? A closer look reveals that Han and his hardcore supporters are similar in temperament and disposition, even down to the coarse language they use, but he became one of the masses, instead of just imitating them.
To become one of the masses, it is critical to adopt their language — this is the weak link of the pro-independence camp, whose members are fond of creating special vocabulary that only distances them from ordinary people and makes it difficult to gain supporters.
During the 1990s, I developed a great rapport with the people of Kaohsiung, and some of my friends from up north asked how I had accomplished that, to which I responded that when you spend time with members of the public, you adopt their language and habits, becoming one of them instead of behaving as a leader.
In the past, I often talked about Taiwanese independence, gaining many listeners and readers, but later, I turned toward political analysis and moved away from talk about independence.
Then, several years ago, I was asked again to talk about it at a World Taiwanese Congress, although it had been more than 10 years since I had been asked to do that.
To my surprise, people did not want to hear about Taiwanese independence, they wanted to tell me about it.
In the past, people liked erudite people, but these days they want people who are like themselves. They used to like to listen, but now they want to do the talking.
Anyone who thinks they can win votes by providing incisive analysis is a victim of wishful thinking.
Chen Mao-hsiung, a retired National Sun Yat-sen University professor, is chairman of the Society for the Promotion of Taiwanese Security.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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