A class in Taichung Municipal Taichung First Senior High School late last month drew a lot of criticism for naming a booth at the school fair “Hsi Huan Na” (烯環鈉) — which sounded like “indigenous bastard” (死番仔) in Taiwanese. A legislator subsequently revealed that an indigenous student at the school was bullied by his peers in a chatroom after the case broke out.
Racial discrimination continues to take place in Taiwan, and the school incident seemingly reflects a culture of complicity that allows it to happen repeatedly.
In 2020, veteran radio host Luo Hsiao-yun (羅小雲), chairwoman of the Golden Bell Awards’ panel of judges, made “hoh, hoh, hoh, hoh” sounds when announcing that Alian Radio (原住民族廣播電台) was nominated for an award, asking indigenous people in the audience: “Shouldn’t you be making this sound?” Due to protests against her remarks, Lou apologized and resigned.
However, one month later at the Golden Bell Awards ceremony, when a Tao boy in a traditional thong accepted his award, mainstream online media mocked him with headlines such as “showing off his buttocks,” “I’m the most visible of all” and “going butt-naked onstage.”
A lot of people also left offensive, discriminatory and sarcastic comments on the live message board of the event organizer whenever indigenous nominees won awards. The organizer did nothing to stop such discriminatory language from appearing on its official Web site.
US sociologist Douglas Kellner has said that a phenomenon may be a sign. A single incident may reflect not only an individual case, but also a serious common problem in society. The school incident, along with the other discriminatory incidents against indigenous people, reflects a core issue: Is society complicit in perpetuating such racial discrimination?
For the students who came up with the disputed name, why didn’t anyone find something wrong with it? When they bullied an indigenous student in the chatroom, why didn’t anyone stand up to stop the bullying? And when online media mocked the indigenous winner, why didn’t any of their reporters think that they have crossed the line?
From Kellner’s perspective, racial discrimination is no longer a problem in competitions, education, workplace or media, but a problem of society as a whole, and many people in our society remain blind to racial discrimination. Oftentimes, they cannot sense the seriousness of the matter until it creates a public stir.
If Taiwanese think that racial discrimination is an important issue, the Ministry of Education should promote ethnic education in high schools and universities. The Ministry of Culture should have cultural interpreters at major award shows, such as the Golden Bell, who can help hosts explain the significance of the traditional costumes worn by indigenous nominees.
The National Communications Commission should require all electronic and online media to bolster on-the-job training on ethnic literacy for reporters.
If the government sits back and watches racial discrimination occur again and again, then we will all become complicit in allowing mainstream culture to keep on bullying indigenous people. In that case, the goal of building a society that respects cultural diversity would only be empty talk.
Hsu Chih-ming is an assistant professor in Shih Hsin University’s Department of Journalism.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
RSS