Taiwanese comedian and YouTube talk show host Brian Tseng (曾博恩) is under the spotlight once again after it was revealed that guests were being charged different amounts to appear on his show.
Online opinion is widely divided as to the nature of Tseng’s political leanings, but I would suggest that he values one thing above all else: the pursuit of profit.
Anyone who can increase income and viewing figures will be given a place next to Tseng on his The Night Night Show guest sofa. At the same time, Tseng’s fans tune in for the concomitants of profitmaking: pleasure and entertainment.
Regardless of how Tseng is perceived, most of the online talking heads and Facebook groups criticizing him are not even close to having his influence. People should not be too hasty to judge given that the majority, if they are honest, pursue profit and pleasure ahead of lofty political ideals.
This is an undeniable trait of human nature, so why not let ideals overlap with people’s natural desire for profit and pleasure?
Consider the issue of Taiwanese independence — or perhaps it should be called resistance to unification.
Taiwanese do not want to be ruled by a government that conceals the outbreak of a deadly new virus, causing the epidemic to wreak havoc among its population, and that builds defective dams that are the cause of flooded homes. Is this not a form of self-interest?
The American Revolutionary War was triggered by the inhabitants of 13 North American colonies who were no longer willing to pay taxes to the British government without North American representatives in its parliament. After independence, the US’ founding fathers used a constitution to protect citizens’ rights.
By comparison, political movements that hold high the banner of “justice” and condemn the pursuit of self-interest generally result in failure and misery, for example the Boxers, the Soviets, the Taliban and so on.
Perhaps some readers support Taiwanese independence. They should reflect on why Tseng’s guests are often from the opposite side of the political debate. If identifying as “Taiwanese” is seen as basic common sense, why is it that pro-independence groups and activities are shunned by the vast majority of middle-class voters?
Why is it that, despite having had a Democratic Progressive Party government and legislative majority for more than four years, independence is rarely discussed within official forums? Is it because Taiwanese have not developed their own wisdom and remain brainwashed by the party-state?
Taiwan’s pro-independence political faction always paints its members as “warriors of justice” fighting against the tyranny of the party-state. History suggests that this is not the most effective method, otherwise the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) would have had to completely relinquish power in 1996.
One explanation is that Taiwanese independence and transitional justice are not necessarily mutually inclusive. Many of the people persecuted under the KMT dictatorship were not supporters of independence; quite a few of them supported unification with China.
Another reason is that people tend to be motivated by self-interest and their own pleasure.
Therefore, rather than warn of annexation by Red China, it would be better to emphasize independent nation-building as the path to a safer, more prosperous and beautiful future for Taiwan. Such a movement would gain far more supporters than Tseng could ever dream of.
Jimway Chang holds a master’s degree from National Tsing Hua University’s Institute of History.
Translated by Edward Jones
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS