Sat, Jan 03, 2004 page4

• Probing mainlander identity

  Stephane Corcuff, a lecturer at Sciences Po in Paris, specializes in the national identity of Taiwan's mainlanders. Yesterday Corcuff released his book 'Light Wind, Warm Sun: Taiwan's Mainlanders and the National Identity Transition' (風和日暖:台灣外省人與國家認同的轉變), an abridged Chinese-language version of his doctoral thesis. Corcuff talked on Wednesday with 'Taipei Times' staff reorter Debby Wu about his new book, the complex national identification exhibited by mainlanders, and the attitudes they express toward the issue of independence

  • By Debby Wu / STAFF REPORTER
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Taipei Times: Could you talk about mainlanders and reunification?

  Stephane Corcuff: I have a very strong interest in [the issue of] reunification in my research because it is central to Taiwan's future, identity and political debates. In my questionnaire [conducted in 1997], I asked a few questions about that.

  One of the most important findings in the book was the question of the attitude of mainlanders regarding national reunification.

  

  Stephane Corcuff says mainlanders have a complex national identity which tends to be obscured by electoral processes.

  PHOTO: GEORGE TSORNG, TAIPEI TIMES

  The first question was about their position in principle regarding reunification: Do you think the ROC [Republic of China] government should absolutely insist on the policy of reunification?

  The first surprise was that I expected maybe 70 percent of mainlanders would have said yes, but in fact only 50.3 percent said so. Over one-third said no.

  We can analyze this further with different generations. 78.3 percent of the first-generation mainlander said yes, and that's no surprise. When it comes to the second generation, the figure is much less [41.7 percent]. And then we come to the third generation [34.7 percent] -- and look at the discrepancy between the first and the third generation, it's huge -- over 40 percent.

  I asked the second question intentionally from a different angle. This is one of the ... most important findings in my research.

  I put the objective of reunification in perspective with other priorities in Taiwan society -- getting rid of the mafia and corruption, administration reform, economic development, environmental protection and Taiwan's international visibility.

  It's extremely interesting to see that only 5.4 percent of the mainlanders choose reunification as their first priority. Over 80 percent choose reunification as their fifth or sixth priority among the six issues.

  What they choose as their top priority is getting rid of the mafia and corruption, then administration reform, economic development and environmental protection. Reunification comes even after environmental protection.

  Everyone knows what is more urgent is not reunification, but these [other] things. This shows very clearly that mainlanders in Taiwan are Taiwanized, or rooted in Taiwan.

  Secondly, it shows the importance of political socialization. When [they] put things into perspective, they logically say that reunification is a priority, but the last priority.

  But when you ask the question straightforwardly, over half say that we cannot give up reunification.

  So is this a contradiction? If yes, it can be explained by the remaining impact of past political socialization and electoral politics.

  One of the main findings of this research is that the Taiwanization of mainlanders in Taiwan cannot be denied and it is an inevitable process. It's a natural movement, but politics constantly interferes with it.

  TT: Is there anything else you would like to highlight from your book?

  Corcuff: We have to make it clear that not all mainlanders support reunification. So why do so many "new inhabitants" [新住民, Corcuff's preferred term for mainlanders] vote for other "new inhabitants?"

  I propose an answer to this: Mainlanders have a pluralistic national identification, which comprises of China and Taiwan both at different degrees, changing from one person to another, but changing also in the same person at different moments.

  plurality

  Taiwan's mainlanders come from China, so they have this identification with China. But they have spent their life in Taiwan for so many years, so who would dare to deny that they also identify with Taiwan? The fact can be seen clearly from the statistics. So it's pluralistic.

  If you have two elements, the China part and the Taiwan part, then are the things static? No. Depending on the situation, they would stress this or that.

  If they go to America, will they be pleased to be called Chinese, knowing that people in America would understand the word "Chinese" as PRC citizens? Probably no. They would say, "No, I come from Taiwan." Even in certain cases, they would say, "No, I am Taiwanese." In some instance, they would say, "I am a Chinese from Taiwan."

  You already see the pluralistic identification with the case that, in Taiwan, they may stress, "I am a mainlander."

  In China, what will they say? "I come from Taiwan." They can't say "I am Chinese" because they are different from local Chinese. This shows the plurality of their national identification. This is a phenomenon in daily life, but when it comes to voting, it's a different situation.

  When it comes to voting, you have to make a choice because you cannot choose both A-bian [President Chen Shui-bian 陳水扁] and [Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman] Lien Chan (連戰) at the same time.

  Even though most, if not all, mainlanders do identify with Taiwan, when they have to vote, they make a choice for mainlanders. When you make a choice, you have to give up your plurality because you cannot vote for two people at the same time. But why would they then choose mainlanders and not Taiwanese since Taiwan is also a part of their identification?

  First, it's the result of the past, the past political socialization.

  Second, it's a habit to vote KMT. To vote DPP [Democratic Progressive Party] they need to make an identification adjustment. It's a rationalization of identity pluralism. This is something human beings can do, but very few people do it. For example, there are mainlanders who support independence.

  Meanwhile, old mainlanders still have fears about Taiwan. They feel ill at ease. They are concerned about their future, and they don't know whether they would still have a future if Taiwan changes its national name.

  Of course they have a future. It is not possible that Taiwanese would throw them into the sea or send them back to China if Taiwan changes its name. But they still do not face the fact, and they are still worried. Naturally they vote for someone who is good at manipulating their national identification crisis.

  I am not talking about Lien Chan here, but all pro-reunification politicians. Though they are Taiwanized already, they still give their votes to mainlanders' parties.

  war

  Then there is a third situation not many people think about: the situation of war. If there is a war between China and Taiwan, what will mainlanders do? Will they choose China? Will they choose Taiwan? Will they choose to emigrate?

  In a way, this is a question of life and death for many people. This is a situation we call in French une situation limite: you have to make a choice that you always fear to do, that you always hope you will never have to make.

  In this situation many people assume mainlanders will choose China, but I don't think so. Because then mainlanders have to choose between China and Taiwan for good. That's not political rhetoric or political ideology anymore -- this is the question of their own daily future.

  I suppose many mainlanders will choose Taiwan, especially the young. Probably the old too, because they will have no other possibility.

  TT: You said that Taiwan's future should be decided by its 23 million people. Your words actually match the ideology of the DPP. Your thoughts?

  Corcuff: I don't think the KMT, PFP [People First Party] or the New Party would dare to oppose this idea. Basically it's their idea too, but for political reasons they have to differentiate [themselves] from the DPP, so they don't stress it as much. They are ill at ease. Basically they can't oppose it.

  I am not pro-independence as people might think because I have this discourse. This is because I am not Taiwanese, I am not mainlander, and I am not Chinese.

  I just want to promote one idea -- the only thing I am in favor of is to let all Taiwanese, including mainlanders, or the "new inhabitants," to choose their own future.

  TT: You mention in your book that you sympathize with China too. Where exactly does that sympathy lie?

  Corcuff: With its history, language and culture.

  But not necessarily with every aspect of its society or politics. I love Chinese history, literature and language. I really like China, but the China I like maybe has disappeared already.

  It's the same problem for the mainlanders -- they identify with a lost China in their imagination but not the real China.

  When many mainlanders go to China, they find that the China they see is very different from the China they imagined. Because they identify with China, they are too embarrassed to give up their original identification just because the real China isn't the imagined one.

  So when they see problems in front of them in China, some still act as if China was still a great place to unify with. This kind of compromise is a big problem.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    US removes no independence statement

  • 2

    Taiwan thanks Japan for family registry change

  • 3

    MAC warns of PRC arrests, detentions

  • 4

    Taiwan blacklists two Chinese schools

  • 5

    Inter denied top spot in Serie A by rivals Juve