On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei.
Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators.
In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern” regarding how Chu’s words threatened to trivialize the atrocities committed against the victims of the Holocaust, “distorting the memory of the past for political ends.”
The representative offices of France, the Netherlands, and Belgium in Taiwan soon reposted Germany’s statement. The Israel Economic and Cultural Office in Taipei issued an even more direct rebuke, stating that Chu’s “comparisons are deeply offensive to the memory of 6 million Jewish people who suffered and perished.”
Chu’s remarks raise serious objections, as many commentators have pointed out. There is also the need to reflect upon how we develop discourses of past traumas. It is not that we must never draw comparisons between different instances of suffering and injustices; the question is how.
Scholars of trauma narratives have suggested that different modes of commemoration can facilitate or hinder collective healing. Emory University sociologist Xu Bin (徐彬) said that, in the aftermath of a disaster, such as Hurricane Katrina or the 2008 Sichuan Earthquake, the state might be tempted to lean on a “can do” narrative, glossing over the depth of the victims’ suffering and, instead, emphasizing the promise of resilience. This leaves survivors feeling alone and unheard.
Alternatively, Christina Simko, as associate professor of sociology at Williams College, said that an “acting out” narrative, exemplified by the Holocaust Museum or some Sept. 11 speeches, aims to create the social space for a collective re-experiencing of the emotional pains caused by these tragedies. Simko’s research further suggests that, rooted in a deep appreciation of such pains, a “working through” narrative may eventually emerge, which seeks to develop greater compassion for broader human suffering.
If we attempt to discuss the Holocaust in today’s Taiwan, it is our duty to bear witness to the suffering of the 6 million Jewish people who were murdered in the Holocaust, feel the pain the best we can, and only then might we possibly begin to make meaningful comparisons between different atrocities and cultivate a compassionate narrative about how to avoid repeating similar horrors.
Chu’s remarks did not contribute meaningfully to any established narrative of Holocaust trauma — neither the “working through,” nor the “acting out,” nor even the more sanitized “can do” discourse. Moreover, this instance was one of several misappropriations of the Holocaust memory in Taiwan in recent years. In 2016, for the anniversary of Hsinchu Kuang-Fu Senior High School, a class held a Nazi-themed parade. Last month, a KMT Youth League member wore a Nazi armband, held a copy of Mein Kampf and raised Nazi salutes outside the New Taipei City Prosecutors’ Office. These reveal a worrisome lack of historical understanding or sensitivity.
Instead of bearing witness, developing compassion, or even encouraging resilience, these young people and politicians used others’ trauma as a metaphor for their alleged victimization — victimization by mainstream culture, by their political opponents, or by other powers. By reducing others’ traumas to merely a metaphor for their own grievances, these actions serve to erase Jewish people from their own story of suffering and are therefore fundamentally selfish and deeply harmful — even if unintentionally.
It is high time that we cultivate deeper understandings of histories and humbler appreciations of others’ traumas.
Lo Ming-cheng is a professor of sociology at the University of California-Davis.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS