Chan’s White Man’s Burden
At the end of the Taipei Times’ April 21 editorial, “Jackie Chan [成龍] — Friend of Repression,” it states: “The Taipei City Government should do the right thing and replace Chan as its spokesman for this summer’s Deaflympics.”
Despite the fact that I usually agree wholeheartedly with the Taipei Times’ editorial stance, I must, in this instance, with all respect, beg to differ for three reasons:
First, Chan’s views in regard to Hong Kong have been well known for a long time. The Taipei City Government was certainly aware of Chan’s attitude and “world view” before the members invited him to serve as spokesman. Better that they never asked him at all than to retract their invitation.
Second, Chan certainly has his right to freedom of speech. As hopelessly ignorant, naive and truly pathetic as they were, Chan’s comments fell within the acceptable parameters of free speech.
In my opinion, none of his statements were so egregiously hateful, or hate-provoking, that they should be squelched or censored. By the way, I find it ironic that his comments — while receiving considerable notice and commentary in Hong Kong and Taiwan — were ignored in China.
Third, I basically view Chan as a woefully pathetic loser whose “star is descending.” He is desperately clinging to his vanishing career. Hence his groveling and kowtowing.
Most pathetic of all is that he has psychologically internalized imperialist oppression and colonialist ideology.
Chan has psychologically internalized, and made his own, the ideas expressed in Rudyard Kipling’s poem The White Man’s Burden. According to the colonial world view, the non-European peoples of Africa, Asia and the Americas were viewed as helplessly childlike. They were seen as utterly incapable of governing themselves or managing their own affairs. Thus, they were in dire need of a strong, authoritarian “father figure.” White European people viewed themselves as carrying the heavy “burden” of ruling over and encouraging the cultural development of people from other ethnic and cultural backgrounds until such time as these people were able to assume their rightful place in the world by thoroughly adopting Western ways.
Rather than being barred from entering Taiwan, Chan should be encouraged to come and see for himself. Hopefully, he will benefit from the education that he will receive. Hopefully, he will learn through dialogue. At the very least, if allowed to enter Taiwan, Chan will be obliged to explain himself and provide support and proof for his ideas.
MICHAEL SCANLON
East Hartford, Connecticut
No peace without Taiwanese
Fidel Ramos’ key message in his article “Constructing Asia’s missing links” (April 16, page 8) was that peace between Taiwan and China will be established when Taiwan is annexed by China, and when the US stops its arms sales to Taiwan. This is a political position that ignores the Taiwanese who do not want to be part of China, and it ignores the fact that China has about 1,500 missiles aimed at the island and an “Anti-Secession” Law legitimizing a military attack on Taiwan.
Most politicians in Taiwan, regardless of party ideology, agree that deeper economic agreements and an open dialogue with China form part of the way to peace and mutual understanding. This is precisely why Taiwan and China experienced the largest economic integration during Taiwan’s eight years under the Democratic Progressive Party, with independence as its ultimate objective. A pro-China supporter like Ramos should take note of this.
Taiwan’s current Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government is trying to reach a kind of free trade agreement with China. In this context, however, Taiwan is experiencing a heated debate, as China has set the acceptance of a “one China” policy as a condition for an agreement and thus Taiwan would formally become part of China. This is pursued despite 80 percent of Taiwanese being opposed to an agreement with a “one China” condition. Thus, Ramos is speaking against a vast majority of Taiwanese.
US arms sales to Taiwan are, according to Ramos, “a major obstacle to easing tensions.” Arms races are rarely a success, but if China maintains its “Anti-Secession” Law providing for an attack on Taiwan if it will not become part of China, and continues to set up missiles during the current negotiations, Taiwan has the right to buy defensive weapons.
It does not promote understanding of a complex conflict to make a one-sided and distorted analysis of reality while ignoring Taiwan’s democratic population of 23 million people.
MICHAEL DANIELSEN,
CHAIRMAN, TAIWAN CORNER
Copenhagen, Denmark
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS