Over eight years of government, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was again and again accused of trying to get rid of Chinese influence — of “de-Sinicization.”
Unfortunately, the DPP government did not dare to meet these criticisms head on. The question should have been — and should be — what is wrong with de-Sinicizing?
The DPP government replaced the word “China” with “Taiwan” in the names of various institutions and companies.
But changing the name of the post office from “Chunghwa [China] Post” to “Taiwan Post,” for example, could hardly be described as de-Sinicization.
On the contrary, such adjustments could be seen as a return to Chinese cultural values.
Confucius (孔子) himself said that “When names are not correct, what is said will not sound reasonable” (名不正則言不順).
Changing the title of the post office and other Taiwanese agencies and companies was, therefore, a return to the fine principles of Confucian philosophy, even if it was a departure from an uglier aspect of Chinese culture — saying one thing but doing another.
Therefore these are hardly grounds for accusing the DPP of de-Sinicization.
CRITICISMS
From another point of view, however, the DPP government should have proudly accepted the criticisms that were leveled at it, declaring: “Yes, we are de-Sinicizing.”
Think about it.
Is democracy a Chinese invention?
Are human rights a prominent feature of Chinese culture?
The DPP is devoted to promoting democracy and protecting human rights. And given that neither of these concepts originated in China, is upholding them not a form of de-Sinicization?
All in all, insufficiently de-Sinicizing is precisely where the DPP went wrong.
If, when praying to the Kitchen God, Taiwanese say that they must offer him something sweet so that he will put in a good word for them in Heaven, what is that if not a continuation of the Chinese tradition of bribery?
If Taiwanese believe that we have to worship the spirits of the departed lest the ghosts be displeased and make trouble, is that not a lesson in the Chinese tradition of bowing down before bullies and thugs?
DREGS
If we Taiwanese don’t comb through our culture and get rid of the dregs of Chinese culture that remain in our hearts and minds, how can we possibly hope to emerge as winners in the “total war” between pro-China and pro-Taiwan social forces?
As the English poet John Dunne said of the revolution in scientific thought that emerged in 17th century Europe, “a new philosophy calls all in doubt.”
The New Culture Movement in early 20th century China also called for the “reassessment of all values.” Likewise, we need to develop a new view of the world — a new weltanschauung.
I once compared the New Culture Movement to the cathartic Sturm und Drang movement of 19th century Germany.
Now that Taiwan has achieved the necessary conditions in terms of its nationhood, perhaps what we need is something like the kulturkampf (cultural struggle) by which Bismarck’s Germany fought to shake off the conservative influence of the Catholic Church.
That is what Taiwan needs now — a clean break.
Chen Chun-kai is an adviser to Taiwan Thinktank and a professor of history at Fujen Catholic University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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