The race between Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
The question of whether or not the KMT is a party that only represents Mainlanders has recently become a topic of heated discussion.
As a Mainlander living in Taiwan, I would like to provide my views on the question: The KMT is indeed a party dominated by a handful of narrow-minded, obstinate and repulsive Mainlanders. Although the KMT rank- and-file is mainly composed of Hoklo and Hakka, it is still considered by many of them a party that belongs solely to Mainlanders.
During the political unrest following last year's presidential election, the mob supportive of the pan-blue camp lingered on Ketagalan Boulevard for weeks and targeted the KMT's Hoklo political figures for verbal abuse and intimidation.
Even though he is the legislative speaker and KMT vice-chairman, Wang was physically threatened, an indication of how this group of people looks down on the Taiwanese and how antagonistic they are toward the Hoklo.
It was a similar situation when Han Chinese served as government officials during the reign of the Qing Dynasty. Despite their high position, they were regarded by the Manchu as no more than stooges.
In all honesty, this clique of people directing the KMT have cast a spell over the foolish Mainlanders, mesmerizing them to uphold the "Republic of China" and a "Chinese nation."
But what really baffles me is that there are still a large number of Hoklo willing to cast their ballots to support a political party that is fundamentally antagonistic to them.
Wang is more capable of maintaining the party as one that is able to represent the will of the party's entire membership. If Ma wins the election with the support of most of the Mainlander KMT veterans, he will never be able to shake off the party's stereotyped image of being a Mainlander's party.
Once I read a book dealing with British people living in Singapore who fell in love with the nation.
After Singapore declared independence, these British people, some of whom even served as government officials during the colonial period, chose to stay there and became Singaporeans.
When the British were ruling India, quite a few appeared haughty and superior.
However, many of them also developed an affection and love for the nation and began to dedicate themselves to studies of the hydrology of the Ganges River, the Himalayas and Sanskrit. Some of the British public servants and soldiers even localized their eating habits and lifestyles and considered India their second home without feeling disgraced.
Although the degree to which British people identified themselves with India may have differed from person to person, they were not antagonistic to the country in which they chose to live.
We wonder then: how come Mainlanders who fled to Taiwan more than half a century ago still despise the people who cared for them and distance themselves from the sovereign nation that has been sheltering them?
While electing the next party chairman, KMT members should elect the candidate who can truly represent Taiwan, rather than one who continues to oppose Taiwanese independence and projects an image as a foreign but superior being.
David Ming is a political commentator and author of Heartfelt Wishes of a Citizen.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS