The year 1626 was a turning point for the city we now know as New York. In that year, the director-general of the Dutch West India Co, Peter Minuit, "purchased" Manhattan Island from Native Americans for the now legendary price of 60 guilders. This formally began the colonization of New York, which the Dutch called New Amsterdam.
At that time, Dutch settlers did not take much of an interest in agriculture, and focused on the more lucrative fur trade. Corruption and lax trading policies plagued the area. In the 1630s and early 1640s, the Dutch director- generals carried on a brutal series of campaigns against the area's Native Americans, largely succeeding in crushing the strength of the "River Indians."
The year 1624 was a turning point for Taiwan. In that year, the director-general of the Dutch East India Co, Martinus Sonck, arrived in Tainan and began the colonization of Taiwan. At that time, Dutch settlers in Taiwan, like their counterparts in New York, focused on the lucrative trade in deer fur. An average of 150,000 deer skins were exported to Europe per year.
Among East India Co's 25 Asian locations, Taiwan was ranked second in profits, accounting for almost 4 tonnes of gold that was shipped back to its Amsterdam headquarters.
At that time, Dutch settlers of Taiwan, also like their counterparts in New York, killed many natives, notably in the 1635 massacre of 25 people in Ma-Do and the 1658 massacre of 250 people, most of whom were women.
Today, at the beginning of 2006, New York is no longer colonized and has become the world's financial and artistic center. The famous TV series Sex and City, which portrays life in New York, is viewed regularly by millions worldwide. Similarly, the Sept. 11 tragedy drew the sympathy of millions of people throughout the world.
New York's achievements would have been impossible without the courage and wisdom of the founding fathers of US, who famously wrote "we hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
The founding fathers of US decided to stand up against Great Britain because of its "history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States." Therefore, "the Representatives of the United States of America, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown, that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do."
Yet, for Taiwan, which has gone through colonization by the Dutch, the Qing Dynasty and Japan, this year is one of international obscurity. When President Chen Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) proposed using the name Taiwan to apply for UN membership, he was criticized by the US government.
Taiwan, which in 17th century shared the same fate of colonization with New York, has suffered more than the US over the last four centuries. Taiwan is now facing China, which has conducted massacres in Tibet, suppressed religions and groups such as the Falun Gong and aimed more than 800 missiles at Taiwan.
The brutality of China, which far exceeds that of 18th century Britain, is now gaining the support of the US government. What can be more absurd and tragic than this US government, which has betrayed its founding fathers?
Today, the people of Taiwan have as much right as the founding fathers of the US to fight for the independence of their country. The US government ought to change its shortsighted "one China" policy.
Taiwan in 2006, just like the US in 1776, deserves to be an independent country, and its people -- like the people of the US -- deserve to enjoy the rights of liberty and prosperity.
Bob Kuo is a professor of information systems at National Sun Yat-sen University.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS