Taiwan’s Indigenous Peoples’ Day is on Aug. 1. It was designated a national holiday by former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in 2005. Former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) formally apologized to Taiwan’s indigenous peoples in 2016 for the suffering they had faced from the government in the past. These are two important milestones for Taiwan’s indigenous peoples.
Indigenous people in Taiwan are distinct ethnic groups that do not belong to China, and are the best evidence of a unique Taiwanese identity.
A small number of indigenous politicians who identify with China have fallen into the arms of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and proclaimed themselves to be Chinese ethnic minorities. To Taiwanese indigenous people, this is akin to betraying their ancestors in pursuit of glory.
Only by recognizing Taiwan and supporting its pro-localization political parties can indigenous people have a brighter future.
For a country built on a Taiwanese identity, indigenous people are not only living history, but also a point of pride for Taiwan. They have lived in Taiwan for at least 6,000 years. Most of the kingdoms and societies established by these indigenous people have never been ruled by Chinese empires.
Young indigenous people who have received Taiwan-based education are passionate about resistance, progress and innovation, but a majority of indigenous communities still have predominantly aging populations.
If indigenous groups seek innovation and want to bring more recognition to their communities, they need young people’s power and influence.
Achieving immediate results starts from changing the electoral culture.
The young generation should lead the charge in eliminating “black gold” politics among indigenous groups.
The change must start by allowing more capable young indigenous people to participate in elections, carrying out thorough reforms from within the system. This is a move toward transitional justice for indigenous peoples and returning of their self-determination and value.
Chen Chi-nung is a political commentator.
Translated by Nicole Wong
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
RSS