It was refreshing to hear expert commentary yesterday on a part of the immigration debate normally blocked out by bickering over the ideal number of brides that should come from China: the tendency for governments to treat children of "mixed" marriages -- normally a Taiwanese husband and a Chinese or Southeast Asian wife -- as an administrative problem rather than an opportunity.
Issues of migration are complex and never easily resolved, nor are they reducible to black-and-white categories of right and wrong. In Taiwan's case, there has been a relatively smooth process of adjustment to hundreds of thousands of new residents as Taiwanese men marry women from markedly poorer, non-Chinese-speaking countries.
The numbers are impressive: Three out of every seven children are now being born to a foreign mother; by 2010, these children will amount to one-tenth of the school-age population.
Those inclined to define Taiwan in ethnic terms will be intimidated by these numbers. But there is no reason to feel that way -- as long as the government and a well-meaning population are willing to adapt, and as long as migrants are willing to learn how to integrate themselves and their "mixed" children into Taiwanese society.
Happily, this is an issue on which legislators of substance from both sides of the political divide can unite to develop constructive policies.
The demand for foreign brides is a function of the increasing wealth and urbanization of a society that raises the standard of living -- and increases life choices. Universal education inculcates in all children the principle of opportunity based on merit rather than geography or ethnic group, and from this comes a natural migration of women from rural areas into wealthier cities in search of better opportunities.
For such a system to function properly, migrant women who fill this demographic gap in rural Taiwan cannot be allowed to descend into an underclass.
Basic economics and good governance provide a powerful incentive for the nation to ensure that the productivity of their children as they become adults is no less substantial than that of any other group.
But there is a distance to travel in providing a migrant-friendly environment. Governments and legislatures are all too willing to speak to foreign spouses in a patronizing tone, and this is not helped by labor policies that treat migrant laborers -- the spouses' compatriots -- like second-class citizens.
It is also hoped that reports of husbands refusing foreign spouses permission to attend government-funded skills seminars will decrease. But for this to happen, the government must assume and proclaim that both parties have rights and responsibilities.
There is a strong argument that any mandatory training for migrant women should be accompanied by mandatory training for their husbands, who in some cases do not understand or respect -- and even obstruct -- their wives' legal and human rights.
Other considerations are ideological. If migrants are to integrate properly, it is important that the residue of race-flavored ideology in street signs, company names, government agencies and so on is removed.
We can only hope that mindless praise for "Hua" (
Until this happens, children of mixed marriages will inevitably experience a degree of discomfort as they come to terms with their differences as minorities. The challenge for elected officials, public servants and people of good conscience is to eliminate gratuitous obstacles containing racist terminology and practices and ensure that people are judged on their merits and not their DNA.
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,
RSS