What’s in a name?
The use of the phrase “Chinese Taipei” by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and possibly for Taiwan’s next application to neither “join” nor “return” to the UN is both insulting to Taiwanese and a deliberate Sino/Taipei-centric fudge that excludes pretty much anyone outside Taipei. As the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is keen on using this title, but also insists on the formal constitutional name — Republic of China — Taiwanese athletes can be forgiven if they are confused about exactly which country or region they will be representing at the Olympic Games.
Furthermore, defining an entire geopolitical area by reference to a culture, or the name of one city in that area — e.g., “British London” — is problematic. Are we now to assume that residents in Taichung, Tainan, Kaohsiung, Taitung, Hualien, Ilan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu, Lanyu and Ludao are all Chinese and all nominally from Taipei? If we were to use the name of a city, then why not use “Chinese Taichung?”
To call all people in Taiwan “Chinese” is also wildly inaccurate. Consequently, we should perhaps reformulate the name so that it will better reflect the diversity of cultures and languages in Taiwan. Thus “Austronesian Taidong,” “Hakka Hsinchu” and “Hoklo Tainan” would be equally valid.
While we’re at it, other labels should be changed as well. “Mainland China” could be changed to “Authoritarian Beijing,” Hong Kong to “Cantonese Kowloon” and the US to “Native Peoples’ Washington.”
Furthermore, given the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) new, Beijing-pleasing anti-Japanese attitude, we should simply refer to Japan as “them.”
More seriously, it is clear that while Ma and the KMT live on Taiwan they think in China, and every ridiculous attempt to avoid using the word Taiwan is just another nail in the coffin of the Taiwanese polity and its people. Despite this, the KMT may soon find out that it is neither them nor Beijing alone who will determine the future of this country, but rather the agent that still holds economic and physical suzerainty over Taiwan: the US.
As it remains in the interest of the US that Taiwan never achieve de jure statehood or unification with China, no amount of political goodwill, name changing, begging or pleading will move this country out of its ambiguous “status quo.”
Ben Goren
Suao, Ilan County
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