Late last month, Minister of Culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台), went to Washington and gave a talk at George Washington University on the topic of “soft power.”
Given that she is a noted writer and literary critic there were some expectations that she would present a cogent picture of the dynamic world that constitutes Taiwan’s world of arts and culture.
However, she failed to live up to expectations and chose instead to focus on Confucian values, elaborate on the anachronistic Analects and highlight the “Chinese character” of Taiwanese society.
As several students pointed out during the question-and-answer period, Taiwan’s culture is a rich mixture of many cultures — aboriginal, Japanese and even some European influences dating back to the Dutch and Spanish periods. Yet, Lung chose to neglect this vibrant mix.
Several members of the audience also reminded those at the event that Confucianism had been a Martial Law era tool of repression and asked if President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration’s renewed emphasis on such values was in fact an attempt to move the clock backwards.
A student from Hong Kong also questioned Lung’s assertion that the renewed interest by China in Confucianism was really an expression of “soft power.”
The student felt that China was not really interested in “soft power,” but was re-colonizing Hong Kong and was in fact trying to brainwash the inhabitants of the former British colony.
Several other students questioned Lung on her words and actions in relation to the Taipei 228 Memorial Museum, where she had sought to downplay Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) role in the brutal 1947 suppression during which 28,000 Taiwanese were killed by Chiang’s troops. One angry student compared it to the denial of the Holocaust.
However, one of the most interesting aspects of the speech was not discussed during the session at George Washington University.
As aforementioned, Lung highlighted Confucian values and specifically mentioned the four principles of morality and the five virtues as outlined in the Analects, which in her view guide life in Taiwan: Being “kind, upright, courteous, temperate and magnanimous.”
How do these five Confucian virtues jibe with reality in Taiwan under the Ma administration?
If anything, Ma and his government have been vindictive and divisive, especially where it concerns former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). If Ma was magnanimous, he would have granted medical parole to Chen a long time ago.
The way the Ma administration has abused the judicial system to pursue the former president and his family certainly smacks of political retribution — very little of the Confucian kindness, uprightness or magnanimity to be seen there.
Actually Lung, in her speech at George Washington, was very eloquent in describing what Taiwanese really care about: The freedom to write, paint or sing what we want; tolerance of those we do not agree with; protection of those who are unjustly persecuted; rejection of leaders we distrust; creating what comes from our heart.
The main issues now is that Ma and his government need to learn to practice what they preach.
In their present form, the practices are too reminiscent of the “Confucianism” seen in China where advocates of reform and change, such as Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) and Ai Wei-wei (艾未未), are silenced and unjustly prosecuted.
Mark Kao is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs in Washington.
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