On April 28, Executive Yuan spokeswoman Kolas Yotaka stated on Facebook her opposition to central government officials taking part in worship ceremonies for Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功), also known as Koxinga, who used Taiwan as a base to resist the Qing Dynasty after it overthrew the Ming Dynasty in China.
Considering Koxinga from an Aboriginal point of view, Kolas sees him as an invader.
In contrast, Minister of the Interior Hsu Kuo-yung (徐國勇), who is reputed to be a descendant of Koxinga, said that he should be seen in a positive light for having resisted unification with China.
These points of view might seem contradictory, but they actually describe different aspects of Koxinga.
RE-ENACTMENT
Events take place at which people worship Koxinga or dress up as him to re-enact history. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as they do it to recreate history rather than to draw questionable parallels between the past and the present.
One example of the latter is that during Japan’s 50-year rule over Taiwan, they extolled Koxinga, whose mother was Japanese, as a national hero.
Japanese rule was followed by the dictatorship of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), who praised Koxinga’s Tungning Kingdom as a model for “counterattacking the mainland.”
To re-enact history, a depiction should be multidimensional, not made from a single point of view.
For example, the Mount Rushmore National Memorial in the US is also known as Presidents’ Mountain, because it features the heads of four of the most important US presidents.
However, Mount Rushmore was originally territory of the Sioux people. Only after the Sioux were defeated by white people did the federal government take possession of the land. Later, the heads of four presidents were carved into the mountainside, much to the annoyance of Native Americans.
In 1948, the Sioux began work on a statue of Sioux leader Crazy Horse, who fought against the federal army, on Thunderhead Mountain, 27km from the presidential memorial.
People who travel to this area can observe how the US has opposing viewpoints of its history and yet has been able to bring them together and stand united.
In Taiwan, when commemorative activities that recreate the landing of Koxinga’s forces in Taiwan are held, why not include some people playing the role of the Siraya people?
Why not combine the event with worship of Pingpu Aborigines’ home spirits in the vicinity of Tainan’s Koxinga Shrine?
People can live for a long time and go through all kinds of experiences. No one is completely good or bad.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL
A multidimensional re-enactment of Koxinga would be a better way to teach future generations about the many aspects of Taiwan’s history. It would provide a more appropriate historical account of Koxinga himself.
There are differences in the way memorial activities for Koxinga and Chiang Kai-shek are conducted. Koxinga never ruled the whole of Taiwan. No military police are assigned to patrol the Koxinga Shrine. Nobody has ever had to stand to attention and salute a statue of Koxinga.
It should therefore be much easier to make memorial activities for Koxinga more multidimensional than to do the same thing for Chiang Kai-shek.
Chang Ching-wei is a postgraduate student at National Tsing Hua University’s Institute of History.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Recently, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) hastily pushed amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) through the Legislative Yuan, sparking widespread public concern. The legislative process was marked by opaque decisionmaking and expedited proceedings, raising alarms about its potential impact on the economy, national defense, and international standing. Those amendments prioritize short-term political gains at the expense of long-term national security and development. The amendments mandate that the central government transfer about NT$375.3 billion (US$11.47 billion) annually to local governments. While ostensibly aimed at enhancing local development, the lack
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Having enjoyed contributing regular essays to the Liberty Times and Taipei Times now for several years, I feel it is time to pull back. As some of my readers know, I have enjoyed a decades-long relationship with Taiwan. My most recent visit was just a few months ago, when I was invited to deliver a keynote speech at a major conference in Taipei. Unfortunately, my trip intersected with Double Ten celebrations, so I missed the opportunity to call on friends in government, as well as colleagues in the new AIT building, that replaced the old Xin-yi Road complex. I have
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) — who once endured the hardship of living under an authoritarian political system and arduously led a quiet revolution — once said: “Democratic issues must be solved with democratic means.” Today, as Taiwanese are faced with the malicious subversion of our country’s democratic constitutional order, we must not panic. Rather, we should start by taking democratic action to rescue the Constitutional Court. As Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) leads the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) in strangling Taiwan’s judiciary and depriving individuals of the right to recall and development, Taiwanese
RSS