Alongside a revival of local culture, “Old Taiwan” and the “Taiwanese way” — or literally translated, “Taiwanese taste” — have become fashionable again.
Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) appropriation of the name “Taiwan People’s Party” is a notorious example of this trend. Ko claims to be a successor of Chiang Wei-shui (蔣渭水), a Taiwanese democracy pioneer in the Japanese colonial era, simply because both were doctors. What Ko apparently does not know is that Chiang was only one of several doctors in the original Taiwan People’s Party, founded in 1927. Other members of that party, including Chiu Te-chin (邱德金), Peng Ching-kao (彭清靠) and Wang Kan-tang (王甘棠), were also doctors, but Ko only sees Chiang.
Moreover, the first party’s original name was “Taiwan Public Party” (台灣民黨), which was agreed upon after several proposed names were put to a vote. Taiwanese back then might have been more self-disciplined in practicing democracy, unlike Ko, who autocratically decided the name of his party.
People’s ignorance of Taiwanese history clearly restricts how they imagine Taiwan and diminishes its culture.
If only all Taiwanese knew about democracy pioneers Ong Iok-tek (王育德) and Ng Chiau-tong (黃昭堂), who devoted themselves to the Taiwanese independence movement while studying for doctoral degrees in Japan, writing dissertations that are exemplary in their fields.
Knowing about them, Taiwanese would not so easily tolerate the “degree laundering” practiced by certain politicians who have tried to obtain credentials through plagiarism.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has worked to erase all memory of early Taiwanese democracy pioneers. As a result, some Taiwanese have become untroubled by the “status quo.” They follow established rules without imagining how things could be done differently.
“When half of the people in our society become accustomed to the status quo, all of society is deprived of the ability to imagine otherwise,” National Taiwan University history professor Chou Wan-yao (周婉窈) said.
Lack of creative thought would lead to “a fear of imagining our own ‘Academia Taiwanica,’ which shall be an institute without any pro-China academician,” he added.
Taiwanese should ponder her enlightening comments, especially as an Academia Sinica academician once said that there were no intellectuals in Taiwan before 1949. This person even considered plagiarism probes — a pursuit of justice — as “a personal dispute in academia” that is “relatively trivial.”
If Taiwanese had been more familiar with local authors Lien Wen-ching (連溫卿), who in the 1920s wrote Taiwan Language in the Future (將來之臺灣語), and Kuo Ming-kun (郭明昆), a lecturer at Waseda University in Tokyo, Academia Sinica’s Institute of History and Philology would not be monopolizing the studies of those subjects.
People who read Wang Thiam-teng’s (王添?) 1946 article “On the May 5 Constitution” (對「五五憲草」管見) with care realize how sophisticated and knowledgeable Wang was. He was by no means a lesser constitutional theorist.
Official records show that Wang’s education was limited to Ankeng Public Elementary School and Chengyuan School, then a Taipei extension school.
Taiwanese cannot help but wonder what extraordinary contributions Wang would have made to Taiwan had he survived the 228 Incident.
Those who seek to diminish a nation first seek to destroy its history. A nation that is ignorant of its history can never become a great independent nation.
Chen Chun-kai is a professor of history at Fu Jen Catholic University.
Translated by Liu Yi-hung
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has a good reason to avoid a split vote against the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in next month’s presidential election. It has been here before and last time things did not go well. Taiwan had its second direct presidential election in 2000 and the nation’s first ever transition of political power, with the KMT in opposition for the first time. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was ushered in with less than 40 percent of the vote, only marginally ahead of James Soong (宋楚瑜), the candidate of the then-newly formed People First Party (PFP), who got almost 37
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate and New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) has called on his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) counterpart, William Lai (賴清德), to abandon his party’s Taiwanese independence platform. Hou’s remarks follow an article published in the Nov. 30 issue of Foreign Affairs by three US-China relations academics: Bonnie Glaser, Jessica Chen Weiss and Thomas Christensen. They suggested that the US emphasize opposition to any unilateral changes in the “status quo” across the Taiwan Strait, and that if Lai wins the election, he should consider freezing the Taiwanese independence clause. The concept of de jure independence was first
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday reiterated that he is “deep-green at heart” and that he would mostly continue President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) national defense and foreign policies if elected. However, he was still seriously considering forming a “blue-white” electoral alliance with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) less than a month ago, telling students he “hates the KMT, but loathes the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) even more,” while constantly criticizing Tsai’s foreign policy these past few years. Many critics have said that Ko’s latest remarks were aimed at attracting green-leaning swing voters, as recent polls
Taiwan’s Ministry of Labor and India’s Ministry of External Affairs have confirmed that the two countries plan to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) this month on recruiting Indians to work in Taiwan. While this marks another step in deepening ties between the two nations, it has also stirred debate, as misunderstandings and disinformation about the plan abound. Taiwan is grappling with a shortage of workers due to a low birthrate and a society that is projected to turn super-aged by 2025. Official statistics show that Taiwan has a labor shortfall of at least 60,000 to 80,000, which is expected