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.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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”
RSS