'Pro-ROC' blogger bashes Tsai and the DPP

A few months ago, I published a response to an article on Free Taiwan, a clearly pro-KMT, anti-DPP blog that claimed to be "an independent blog" and now describes itself as "pro-Republic of China." The author of the article that accuses the DPP of being racist claims that the pro-independence party favors the Hoklo people over other ethnic groups

Just a few hours ago, this very same blogger posted a new article regarding racism, yet again. This time, though, he does not focus on "Hoklo chauvinism" but the Taiwanese identity as a whole. However, I feel the need to publish something that illustrates the fact that Free Taiwan is not a credible blog at all. The author and I exchanged a few emails and here is one that is sent to me, regarding my claim that most people in Taiwan, if not all, have aboriginal blood, dating back to January 4:

And here you are incorrect: 

1. What about the 15% Waishengren?

2. How come the aboriginal people did not completely dissolve into a common Taiwanese identity?

3. How come in the early 20th Century (!) the US Consul on Formosa reports on aboriginals being slaughtered for their meat by Han settlers? Would you eat your aunt or cousin?

Chinese is both blood and citizenship, as R.O.C. citizenship (same goes for PRC citizenship) is passed on generation by generation but not birth within China. Obviously someone whose ancestry is of any Chinese province can still be considered Chinese - he is simply not a member of any Chinese state (be it R.O.C. or PRC). Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Italy have similar concepts.

Here, his third point (highlighted) clearly implies that he genuinely believes that Han cannibalism could be justified if only aboriginals were being eaten. It should be noted that we were, ironically, discussing the issue of racism in Taiwan, until he completely changed the subject.

In his new article, he talks about social values and democratic progress. It is mildly difficult to believe that he understands what those things are when he clearly has some skewed view of what racism is. It is poorly written and barely contains any arguments to back up the claim that Tsai and the DPP use any sort of "racist rhetoric."

Hau on China missile deployment against Taiwan

Former premier Hau Pei-tsun said in a interview that China's deployment of missiles targeting Taiwan is "not a smart move." He suggested that it could only give advocates of Taiwan's independence movement another reason to support their cause. The former four-star general explained that "there is no need to use missiles if China really wants to attack Taiwan, and it can always deploy them as soon as they are called for."

Based on these remarks, it is pretty clear that Hau appears more concerned with the unification process across the Taiwan Strait and less so with what really happens to Taiwan. He pointed out that China still has the ability to deploy its missiles efficiently even if they were not readily deployed. Clearly, the only reason he believes that the deployment of these missiles is "not a smart move" is the fact that it may spur the development of the already significant independence movement in Taiwan, which goes against his party's ideology.

Furthermore, Hau's understanding of the international political climate seems extremely limited. "If these missiles are targeting the United States, it would mean a political statement intended for the United States. As such, it is another matter," he said. It appears that he obviously does not understand that the fact that these missiles are targeting Taiwan is an equally strong political statement intended for the US. Relations between China and Taiwan are not exactly bilateral. Arguably, the "Taiwan problem" is still an issue internationally because of America's involvement in cross-Strait interactions. Hau's lack of understanding and his sinocentric ideology seem to represent the ideals of KMT and the Ma administration in the past few years.

DPP candidate wins chief in Caotun

Caotun (Tsaotun), Nantou had always been a Kuomintang (KMT) stronghold. It is premier Wu Den-yih's hometown and had always voted pan-blue in past elections. The KMT candidate received 60.6% of the vote in the last magisterial election in 2009. Later, in the Nantou County magisterial election, the two pan-blue candidates also garnered over 60%.

The KMT member who won the magisterial race in 2009 was charged bribery and had his election victory invalidated. Almost 35,000 voters took part in the by-election, and DPP candidate Hung Kuo-hao won by just 19 votes. 19 votes might not seem like a lot, but considering the DPP has never won an election in Caotun, this is a huge victory.

As DPP spokesperson Cheng Wen-tsan said, the outcome suggested the grassroot support for the DPP was continuing to grow. It could also illustrate the fact that voters are dissatisfied with the KMT administration in not only Caotun but also the country as a whole.

ROC–Taiwan relations decoded

The relations between the Republic of China (ROC) and Taiwan may be the most complicated in the region. While president Ma and his supporters tend to believe that Taiwan is a part of a China called the ROC, it could be argued that more people, if not the majority, support the concept that the ROC is simply a part of Taiwanese history.

The Kuomintang brought the ROC government from the mainland in 1945. Then in 1949 the capital of the ROC relocated from Nanking to Taipei. For many pan-blue supporters, this seems to be the beginning of Taiwanese history. They probably believe that Taiwan, before the arrival of the Kuomintang government, was a barbaric island. Kuomintang brought order and democracy. Kuomintang brought wealth and modernity.

False. The ROC was not the first political settlement in Taiwan. Nor was it the start of Taiwanese history.

ROC is only part of Taiwan's 400-year history

When the Dutch ruled Taiwan, which was called Formosa at the time, they encountered aborigines who were believed to have established a supra-tribal regime now called the Kingdom of Middag by historians. The kingdom survived the rulings of not only the European colonists but also the Ming kingdom of Tungning led by Koxinga. The ROC was not the first political settlement in Taiwan, not even close.

The ROC entered much later in the history of Taiwan, after Qing rule, a short-lived 1895 Republic of Formosa, and Japanese occupation. What's interesting is that in the both the Qing and Japanese era, Taiwan was thought to be a colony of sorts by the Chinese and the Japanese. Under Qing rule, Taiwan was classified as "Huawaizhidi," a term used to describe barbarian territories outside the Han cultural sphere.

By the Treaty of Shimonoseki, Taiwan was ceded to Japan. Japan sought to turn the island into a "model colony" and much effort was made to improve the economy, industry, and public works. In both eras, the Taiwanese pushed for self-determination and rebelled numerous times.

The ROC administration was marked by corruption and lack of discipline. It did not bring democracy to Taiwan. Taiwan did not have a democratic government until the Tangwai movement of the 1970s. And no, the great Ma Ying-jeou was not part of the Tangwai movement.

Taiwan's relations with the ROC

So now, it should be clear that Taiwan's existence is not dependent on the existence of the ROC. However, without Taiwan, the Kuomintang regime would never have been able to survive the Chinese Civil War.

Different people have different interpretations of the relations between the ROC and Taiwan. The DPP has a clear position, as pointed out in its 1999 Resolution on Taiwan's Future, that Taiwan is an independent country that calls itself the Republic of China officially. This description, to many, is accurate because Taiwan has occupied the majority of the ROC's 100-year history.

Still to others, who believe that the ROC is the true China and that the People's Republic (PRC) is illegitimate, Taiwan is a province of China. But isn't it reasonably evident that those who support this point of view have a skewed perception of reality?

UPDATE: A recent editorial discusses the role of Taiwan's history in Taiwanese politics.

Chauvinism and racism in Taiwan?

The pan-blue camp has been accusing the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of being "racist" for years. In a recent article written by the author of Free Taiwan, "an independent news blog," the same old points are used to attack the pro-independence party. With graphic arts that illustrate the author's point, the argument that the DPP is an inferior party that shouldn't be trusted seems convincing. However, with a closer look and analysis, the article contradicts itself in several aspects.

First, the very first claim of the article is that the DPP does not stand for democracy and freedom because of its "Hoklo chauvinism and racism." Very well, let's see what facts are used to back up this claim... Oh wait, none! The article continues its accusations without ever mentioning how the DPP is chauvinistic and/or racist again!

The rest of the article focuses on how the DPP left out Kinmen, Matsu, Penghu, and other minor islands on its party flag. Ironically, Kinmen and Matsu are part of the Fujian Province in both ROC and PRC jurisdictions. The Hoklo people, sometimes called the Hokkiens, are known for their connection to Fujian. Leaving out Kinmen and Matsu does not seem to be something Hoklo chauvinists would do. If anything, supporters of the Hoklo culture would want to glorify the importance of Fujian. So where is the evidence that the DPP is chauvinist and racist?

The article even claims that the Kinmen and Matsu will "be given to the communists for nothing but Hoklo racism." What? What's fascinating and stupefying is that this blog calls itself Free Taiwan, and not "Free Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu."

The Kuomintang flag displays a symbol that represents the Sun. So let's just assume that the KMT will eventually give up Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu and colonize the Sun instead.