Taiwan was part of China
Whilst agreeing entirely with Michael Wise’s comments (Letters, March 29, page 8), I feel I must correct his statement that “Taiwan has never been a province of China.”
In or about 1683, Taiwan was incorporated into the Chinese empire as a prefecture of Fujian Province and Chinese officials controlled contact between the mainland and the island. Taiwan was named as a full province in 1885; indeed it must have been part of China or it could not have been ceded to Japan in the Treaty of Shimonoseki following the Sino-Japanese War (see The Search for Modern China by Jonathan Spence, 1991).
Following the defeat of Japan in 1945, Taiwan was reclaimed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Taiwan has never been part of the People’s Republic of China, and God willing, that it never will be.
PETER WILLIAMS
Dacun, Changhwa County
Prejudice is not all bad
The public furor this past week over the issue of “hateful talk” following comments made on a blog by diplomat Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英) has been rather unsatisfactory.
While I in no way condone the remarks of Kuo, prejudice per se is not always the social evil it is frequently and wrongly portrayed to be. Prejudice is a necessary aspect of everyday thinking.
Many women, for example, are prejudiced against jogging in poorly lit parks at night. Some people are prejudiced against taking a ride in a taxi, given that there are no rear seat belts. However, these prejudices have a rational basis in the known facts of reality. To publicly reject prejudice is to publicly reject the rationality of everyday life.
The notion that all people are born equal and should therefore respect one another completely disregards the fact that all people do not remain equal — some commit themselves to a life of crime, for example.
Am I bound to respect mass-murderers, serial killers, rapists, petty thieves or pedophiles? Of course not. To do so would be to destroy the very notion of respect itself.
Respect — like love — can only be earned by action aimed at realizing certain values shared between two or more people. This is not a trivial playing with semantics — words denote concepts and public misuse of them is an offense against the human capacity for reason.
It is not respect, but the matter of civility of tone and tolerance in people’s dealings with one another that is important to the wider context of political freedom of speech. I may tolerate one who holds and expresses views different from mine, provided he extends the same tolerance to me — but that does not imply that I owe him respect or that he owes me any respect. Thus, both he and I ought to be free to express our valuations and prejudices against one another.
In a democratic society, however, there is a peculiar problem with that. Rather than resolving conflicts of value by reason, trade and peaceful social cooperation, the mechanism of majoritarian rule, the essential feature of democracy, only works because there are prejudices and conflicts of value. A democratic society does not resolve conflicts of value between people or groups of people — it merely contains them in a pressurized form between election cycles, with each political coalition longing for the chance to impose their values and prejudices on others.
Thus, prejudice and conflicts of value — whether rational or irrational — are vital to the life of a democracy and that is a terrible corrosive acid to a civilized life of reason, trade and peaceful social cooperation.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
Politics defiles the spiritual
The refusal — as deplorable, outrageous and craven as it is — of the World Buddhist Forum to invite the Dalai Lama should not come as a surprise to anyone at all, given that the forum began in China on Friday and moved to Taipei on Monday.
A person need only take into account the people who control the political affairs of these two places to resolve this issue. Political affairs on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are currently in the hands of blackguards possessing megalomaniacal and despotic mindsets. As long as Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is president, the Dalai Lama will never be allowed to enter Taiwan.
In the West, so-called “temporal” or secular power has been conflated with — and has defiled — “spiritual” power. This has been the case since the early medieval period and the crowning of Charlemagne in 800.
Chow Mei-li (周美里) is reported to have asked: “Since when is a personal political view a criterion for participating in a forum about Buddhism?”
Her question is heartfelt and reasonable. Implicit in her question is the assumption that “raisons d’etat” should have no influence on, or connection with, spiritual concerns.
Unfortunately, rogues dressed in clerics’ robes have colluded and conspired with jackals in politicians’ garb all throughout history. Powers temporal and powers spiritual have forever been as intimately associated as briars and roses.
MICHAEL SCANLON
East Hartford, Connecticut
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The National Immigration Agency on Tuesday said it had notified some naturalized citizens from China that they still had to renounce their People’s Republic of China (PRC) citizenship. They must provide proof that they have canceled their household registration in China within three months of the receipt of the notice. If they do not, the agency said it would cancel their household registration in Taiwan. Chinese are required to give up their PRC citizenship and household registration to become Republic of China (ROC) nationals, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said. He was referring to Article 9-1 of the Act
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
RSS