I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II.
The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan.
It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not because of it was ordered by SS leader Heinrich Himmler, but because their neighbors — ordinary citizens — reported them.
Public antisemitism in Germany was fueled in part by the perception that many Jews were relatively wealthy. In the wake of the Great Depression, widespread economic hardship created a strong sense of “relative deprivation” among the lower and middle classes, who resented those they perceived as better off — a sentiment that Nazi propaganda actively exploited.
Many Germans reported their Jewish neighbors to get rid of them and take over their properties. That behavior reflects a broader psychological pattern. Many of us had a bad experience in school. For example, a student who is marginalized by classmates might seek acceptance by targeting others who are even more marginalized, to show they are on the same side as them. By participating in the exclusion of a vulnerable group, they attempt to secure their standing within the dominant majority.
After Germany’s defeat in World War I, the country became a target of resentment and hostility across Europe. Rather than confronting the source of that animosity, many Germans directed their bitterness inward, blaming the Jewish population — a group already long stigmatized and scapegoated throughout European history.
We can bring some of those ideas to the case of modern-day Taiwan. Are Chinese spouses or new immigrants regarded as wealthy? I am sure we are all aware that a Taiwanese man marrying a Chinese or Vietnamese immigrant is unlikely to be rich.
Also, before the emergence of the group “new Chinese immigrants,” which group was likely to face hostility in Taiwan? I would certainly be in the running, being a “half” third-generation Chinese mainlander.
However, have the new Chinese immigrants been marginalized by the mixed Chinese mainlanders? Besides a few new Chinese immigrants who have spoken in favor of unification by force, such as Chinese-born social media influencers Yaya (亞亞), Xiaowei (小微) and Enqi (恩綺), there are hundreds of thousands of new Chinese immigrants in Taiwan, and there is no indication that they are not getting along with their neighbors.
Once we understand the underlying factors that allowed ordinary members of the German public to sympathize with the marginalization of Jewish people, we would see that no parallels could be seen in Taiwanese society.
Jimway Chang is a high-school history teacher.
Translated by Eddy Chang
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS