A look of firmness set on Chief Kalow’s (蘇萬法) face as he looks over his village, the afternoon sun illuminating his wrinkled face and glassy eyes.
Though the sounds of people chatting in Amis could place Nanjing (南靖) somewhere in Hualien or Taitung counties, its 50 households live along the south bank of the Dahan River (大漢溪), next to the Sanying Bridge connecting Sansia (三峽) and Yingge (鶯歌) districts in New Taipei City.
The story of how a group of Amis people reconstructed the form of their traditional communities in a metropolitan area illustrates the urbanization of indigenous people. According to the Council of Indigenous Peoples, as of January, over 47 percent of indigenous people live in urban areas, a population that is disproportionately young. Beyond this, however, Nanjing is proof that for indigenous communities, even in democratic and diverse Taiwan, the struggle for autonomy and against assimilation continues.
Photo: Itamar Waksman
THE GREAT MIGRATION
According to Hafay Pikar, an Amis researcher and activist, indigenous individuals began migrating to urban centers in the 1960s as Taiwan began to rapidly industrialize. The increase in the cost of living in indigenous communities, driven by factors like new taxes and school fees and combined with the underdevelopment of these regions, drove them to seek work in the urban centers of economic growth.
Additionally, the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) assimilation policies encouraged these people to migrate, viewing it as a way to force them to integrate into Han society. With the government’s support, businessmen — either themselves or through intermediaries — would visit communities on the east coast seeking new workers.
Photo: Itamar Waksman
“The purpose of these policies was to take indigenous people from their communities to urban areas so that they could become a usable part of the labor force,” Pikar tells the Taipei Times.
Businessmen would often seek individuals from specific communities due to their unique skills, like the Amis and their fishing tradition. Once settled in a new area, they would attract other members from their original indigenous community.
Kalow understands the story well. He originally came to what is today New Taipei City in the 1980s to work in carpentry, like most men in Nanjing. He settled in Sansia, where a number of other Amis from his region were living. In the early 2000s, as the economy faltered, he found it harder to afford housing. By 2008, he gave up and constructed his own house along Dahan River, on a plot of land owned by the city. Other Amis people had periodically lived on the land since the 1970s, and there was already another indigenous community named Sanying (三鶯) on the river’s north bank. More households followed, and by 2009 the community chose Kalow as its chief and registered with the Indigenous Peoples Department of New Taipei City.
Photo: Itamar Waksman
Kalow says that, lacking assistance from the government, his only means of survival was to reconstruct a community similar to the one he had left — one centered on interpersonal relationships and communal living.
“We came here for our children, to give them a future where they could grow up together,” he says.
Today, Nanjing is a group of roughly 50 structures made out of wood and tarpaulin, mostly connected by dirt roads and surrounded with fruit and vegetable gardens. In the summer the interior of these homes are sweltering, and in the winter they are frigid. The community is not connected to the city’s gas or water infrastructure, and electricity began to be supplied only three years after its formation.
Photo: Itamar Waksman
Kalow says government policy is at the root of these conditions. The New Taipei City government, which owns the land the community is built on, requires that all structures be exclusively built with wood and tarps. More permanent materials such as cement, bricks or sheet metal, are forbidden. Their use has resulted in structures being demolished without warning in the past.
“It’s useless to rely on the government. Officials and legislators don’t care about us. All we can do is rely on ourselves to protect our own people,” Kalow says.
RESETTLEMENT AND CONFLICT
In 2008, the government completed the Lung En Pu (隆恩埔) public housing estate, with the intent of resettling the residents of Sanying and Nanjing. Most of Sanying’s residents went, but most of Nanching’s stayed put.
“The city government doesn’t want the residents of these communities to live there long-term. They hope to force these communities to integrate into Han society,” says Yang Chia-hsien (楊佳賢), executive director of the New Taipei City Le Wo Community Service Association (新北市樂窩社區服務協會), which serves members of urban indigenous communities throughout New Taipei City.
“The community is a natural formation, but once residents move to public housing, the social fabric disintegrates, creating many social problems,” Yang says.
The residents of Sanying that remained in the old community entered into conflict with the government, and their homes were periodically demolished. For the residents of Nanjing, it was clear that a similar fate was possible.
In 2016, the government agreed to resettle the remainder of Sanying in a new residential area near its original location. But Yang says many residents are still unhappy. The community is split and the overbearing management from officials has caused distrust.
Yang says that the government has taken autonomy away from these communities. In the new Sanying, because the government owns the land, it requires that the community gain approval before making any large changes, like additions to buildings or creating new community projects. But for the residents, who are used to freedom in their villages, a space where the state is often far away, these matters are to be solved by the community. He adds that it has created a sentiment among residents that they’ve been stripped of their self-determination, a sensitive issue for indigenous communities.
Yang says this has been done on purpose.
“It’s impossible that indigenous elites in the government don’t understand the social structures of indigenous communities and that they didn’t communicate this with their Han peers. It must be because the state wants these people to live just like everyone else,” he said.
STAYING PUT
Chief Kalow says he and the residents will not go, adding that a deal like Sanying’s is untenable. Sanying’s residents had to take out a loan according to its agreement with the government, and its lease expires in 20 years. This prospective debt and future uncertainty is unacceptable to the residents of Nanjing.
“There’s no way we can leave this place,” Kalow says. “We spent so much time, money and energy developing this land. The government likes to say that the indigenous are Taiwan’s owners. Isn’t this also a piece of Taiwan? ”
For Kalow, legalizing Nanjing and other communities is a step towards a truly pluralistic Taiwan.
“Don’t treat us like lower-class citizens. Indigenous, Han, Pingpu — we must all be treated equally so that we can share this place. Only then can we have a splendid society,” he says.
Recently the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its Mini-Me partner in the legislature, the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), have been arguing that construction of chip fabs in the US by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電) is little more than stripping Taiwan of its assets. For example, KMT Legislative Caucus First Deputy Secretary-General Lin Pei-hsiang (林沛祥) in January said that “This is not ‘reciprocal cooperation’ ... but a substantial hollowing out of our country.” Similarly, former TPP Chair Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) contended it constitutes “selling Taiwan out to the United States.” The two pro-China parties are proposing a bill that
Institutions signalling a fresh beginning and new spirit often adopt new slogans, symbols and marketing materials, and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is no exception. Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), soon after taking office as KMT chair, released a new slogan that plays on the party’s acronym: “Kind Mindfulness Team.” The party recently released a graphic prominently featuring the red, white and blue of the flag with a Chinese slogan “establishing peace, blessings and fortune marching forth” (締造和平,幸福前行). One part of the graphic also features two hands in blue and white grasping olive branches in a stylized shape of Taiwan. Bonus points for
March 9 to March 15 “This land produced no horses,” Qing Dynasty envoy Yu Yung-ho (郁永河) observed when he visited Taiwan in 1697. He didn’t mean that there were no horses at all; it was just difficult to transport them across the sea and raise them in the hot and humid climate. “Although 10,000 soldiers were stationed here, the camps had fewer than 1,000 horses,” Yu added. Starting from the Dutch in the 1600s, each foreign regime brought horses to Taiwan. But they remained rare animals, typically only owned by the government or
“M yeolgong jajangmyeon (anti-communism zhajiangmian, 滅共炸醬麵), let’s all shout together — myeolgong!” a chef at a Chinese restaurant in Dongtan, located about 35km south of Seoul, South Korea, calls out before serving a bowl of Korean-style zhajiangmian —black bean noodles. Diners repeat the phrase before tucking in. This political-themed restaurant, named Myeolgong Banjeom (滅共飯館, “anti-communism restaurant”), is operated by a single person and does not take reservations; therefore long queues form regularly outside, and most customers appear sympathetic to its political theme. Photos of conservative public figures hang on the walls, alongside political slogans and poems written in Chinese characters; South
RSS