After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression.
In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning to Taiwan, I became quite busy with my duties at the start of the school term and was forced to set my annoyance aside.
The museum’s exhibit about Taiwanese indigenous groups undoubtedly reflects its stance on concealing reality, further illustrating that its curators are completely detached from the ideological trends of the international community.
The term “indigenous peoples” is used extensively throughout the world and is distinct from the term “ethnic minorities.” Therefore, the International Council for Traditions of Music and Dance, supported by the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), has separate study groups for “Indigenous Music and Dance” and “Music and Minorities.”
In a report submitted to the UN in 1987, Jose R. Martinez Cobo proposed a definition for indigenous peoples that has since been revised and supplemented by scholars. Currently, indigenous peoples are defined internationally as those who live in and have a “strong link” to their ancestral lands, but became marginalized under colonization. They have “languages, cultures, beliefs, and knowledge systems” that are distinct from those of their colonizers.
From this, we can understand that having lived under the rule of colonizers is a prerequisite to being classified as indigenous. Taiwanese indigenous peoples have never lived under the rule of the People’s Republic of China — not even for a single day. They cannot even be considered Chinese indigenous people, let alone part of China’s ethnic minorities.
Although not all Chinese ethnic minorities were necessarily colonized by Han Chinese, the two groups have a long history of cultural exchange. In contrast, Taiwanese indigenous peoples have only had a maximum of 400 years of contact with Han Chinese.
Present-day Taiwanese indigenous peoples have been somewhat influenced by Han Chinese, but their Austronesian languages and culture are distinctly different. Therefore, from an academic perspective, it is groundless to define Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities.
The National Museum of Ethnology was established during the 1970 Japan World Exposition held in Osaka. At that time, research on indigenous peoples had not yet been popularized and the international community believed indigenous people would eventually disappear.
In the 21st century, not only have indigenous people not disappeared, but their presence has led to what anthropologist Marshall Sahlins calls “anthropological enlightenment.”
The National Museum of Ethnology was founded more than 50 years ago. Throughout the past half-century, the international perception of museums has undergone significant changes — museums are no longer places for the top-down education of the public.
The 2025 Expo is to be held in Osaka once again. On this occasion, I sincerely hope that the National Museum of Ethnology can keep up with the times. Reclassifying Taiwanese indigenous peoples is the first step on the road to change.
Chen Chun-bin is a professor at Taipei National University of the Arts.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS