I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II.
The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan.
It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not because of it was ordered by SS leader Heinrich Himmler, but because their neighbors — ordinary citizens — reported them.
Public antisemitism in Germany was fueled in part by the perception that many Jews were relatively wealthy. In the wake of the Great Depression, widespread economic hardship created a strong sense of “relative deprivation” among the lower and middle classes, who resented those they perceived as better off — a sentiment that Nazi propaganda actively exploited.
Many Germans reported their Jewish neighbors to get rid of them and take over their properties. That behavior reflects a broader psychological pattern. Many of us had a bad experience in school. For example, a student who is marginalized by classmates might seek acceptance by targeting others who are even more marginalized, to show they are on the same side as them. By participating in the exclusion of a vulnerable group, they attempt to secure their standing within the dominant majority.
After Germany’s defeat in World War I, the country became a target of resentment and hostility across Europe. Rather than confronting the source of that animosity, many Germans directed their bitterness inward, blaming the Jewish population — a group already long stigmatized and scapegoated throughout European history.
We can bring some of those ideas to the case of modern-day Taiwan. Are Chinese spouses or new immigrants regarded as wealthy? I am sure we are all aware that a Taiwanese man marrying a Chinese or Vietnamese immigrant is unlikely to be rich.
Also, before the emergence of the group “new Chinese immigrants,” which group was likely to face hostility in Taiwan? I would certainly be in the running, being a “half” third-generation Chinese mainlander.
However, have the new Chinese immigrants been marginalized by the mixed Chinese mainlanders? Besides a few new Chinese immigrants who have spoken in favor of unification by force, such as Chinese-born social media influencers Yaya (亞亞), Xiaowei (小微) and Enqi (恩綺), there are hundreds of thousands of new Chinese immigrants in Taiwan, and there is no indication that they are not getting along with their neighbors.
Once we understand the underlying factors that allowed ordinary members of the German public to sympathize with the marginalization of Jewish people, we would see that no parallels could be seen in Taiwanese society.
Jimway Chang is a high-school history teacher.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS