This week, the popular singer Chang Hui-mei (
It was expected that Chinese nationalists would continue to make a big deal of A-mei's "green credentials." With Chinese authorities continuing to encourage or tacitly allow extreme nationalism, these people will continue to find scapegoats against whom to vent their nationalist sentiment. A-mei is just one of their targets. So long as the Chinese government continues to foster nationalism, similar incidents will continue to occur -- and these future incidents may be even bigger and more violent.
Other groups in China also dare to make themselves heard, and clashes occur between these groups and nationalists. That this occurs in China, a highly oppressive authoritarian country, is something that inspires further thought. Does it mean that Chinese officials, following market reforms, are beginning to tolerate dissent? Or was the recent clash the result of official support for nationalists?
Then there is A-Mei herself. Because of the huge profits and market possibilities of performing in China, since the national anthem incident she has frantically sought to disassociate herself from Taiwan's pan-green camp. She has kept her distance from politics, and when interviewed in China went so far as to suggest that singing the national anthem at President Chen Shui-bian's (
The statements she has made in order to be able to perform in China again may disappoint the Taiwanese public. But to resist the temptation of money and her fans in China could only be expected of a saint. There is no reason to make such demands on A-Mei, who is only an entertainer and not some model of civic virtue. In order to develop her career, she has indeed compromised her principles and attitudes. But as long as this doesn't hurt the national interest, she is free to do as she pleases.
The irony of the national anthem incident is that if China hadn't boycotted her performances, she would never have drawn the attention of the international news media, or made it onto the cover of Time. A-Mei wouldn't be such an influential figure or be used as an index of cross-strait relations. So although A-Mei may have lost some business because of the boycott, this "disaster" has actually brought her considerable good fortune. It's made her one of the Chinese-speaking world's foremost entertainers.
To be more specific, it is her "green credentials" that have made A-mei famous. Without these credentials, she would probably be just another singer who, seeing the end of her career in Taiwan, has no choice but to try to develop in China.
In recent years, Taiwan has been the index of a performer's popularity in the greater Chinese-speaking region. If the singer is well-received in Taiwan, he or she is very likely to be popular in China. Failure in Taiwan's market predicts the same result elsewhere.
However, no Taiwanese performer has ever attained fame in China because of being labeled "pro-blue." This reminds us of Taiwan's own supermodel Lin Chi-ling (
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,