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 (
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS