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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS