For Emma – adapted from an argumentative dialogue
Do we fight war with weapons or words? In my last post, I described the abysmal foreign policy the United States incorporates to defend itself against foreign “threats.” I noted that the American government has successfully rendered its people to believe that constitution-infringing acts like the USA PATRIOT Act are necessary to defend ourselves and our national sovereignty. A populace that does not question its leadership fails to challenge it – that is the ultimate goal of any government that seeks to control. ‘Control,’ in this case, means the ability of your people to do as you (the administration) say.
This time, I ask, how does a state wage war? In particular, I will investigate the state of national identity and ideology in the Republic of China and how political causes have been able to provide highly nationalistic – yet high quality – education to its students in the last decade under the rule of now jailed president Chen Shui-bian. A brief review of the social consequences of such actions on today’s youth will also be described.
Taiwan’s Personality Crisis
It is without saying that the Republic of China (abbrev. ROC; Chinese, 中華民國), better known as “Taiwan” to foreigners, has long been in an ideological struggle with itself to determine its place in the world. The root of the problem lies in controversial nature of cross-strait relations (海峽兩岸關係) between the ‘two Chinas’; with both parties claiming ownership of each other and neither party admitting legitimacy, the rest of the world has also experienced much difficulty to recognize which China is legitimate. Only twenty-three sovereign states – most of them minor island countries – recognize the ROC as a legitimate government, while most countries, including the United States, have adopted a de facto relations policy with the island entity.
Any writing, scholarly or un-scholarly, on Taiwan seems to demand a historical explanation for the current state of affairs. This is indeed necessary. Following the outbreak of the Second World War, the fledgling Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Nationalist Party (KMT) ceased fighting to form a bittersweet coalition against the threat of the Japanese Empire. Immediately after V-J Day, cooperation was dropped and fighting between the two fundamentally socialist political parties resumed for four more bloody years of conflict. Communist leader Mao Zedong’s force of go-for-broke, diehard soldiers managed to root out the Nationalists, but instead of absorbing them into the new People’s Republic of China (abbrev. PRC; Chinese, 中华人民共和国) 1949, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek fled to the island of Taiwan, which had just been relinquished from years of Japanese rule. He declared that Taipei be the provisional capital of the ROC; he still believed he owned all of mainland China, forming the basis for the modern diplomatic situation and the “Two Chinas” issue. With the postwar establishment of the United Nations, the ROC, a founding member, was recognized as the legitimate representative of China. However, with passing of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 forty years ago, the ROC was expelled and replaced by the PRC, making it much more difficult for the ROC to represent itself as a sovereign state or anything otherwise. The UN’s absence of an explanation of what the ROC actually is has made their status an open-ended question.
Current issues with Taiwan’s self-determination and national identity exist. In the 2008 Beijing Olympics, athletes representing the ROC were instead titled as from “Chinese Taipei.” (As it turns out, this is because of an IOC mandate that forced Taiwan to represent itself as something other than the “Republic of China.”) China’s claim over the island (and a smattering of other territories) would make the PRC the third largest country in the world, but American rankings that determine Taiwan to be an independent state put the United States in the third spot instead.
Forging an Identity
In the midst of such limbo in self-identity, aggressive and persistent measures have been taken to construct national identity, especially one respective to that of the PRC. From the days of Chiang Kai-Shek, nationalist ideologies have been implemented to eliminate remnants of Japanese culture in Taiwan. The ROC uniquely instates its own “Minguo Calendar” (Chinese: 民國紀元) that corresponds to the year the ROC was founded, 1911. (This year marks the 100th anniversary of the ROC; likewise, the passing of a century on the calendar.) During a 30-year period of diplomatic freeze between the PRC and ROC between 1949 and 1979, the Nationalist Party loosened its socialist stance and eventually adopted a center-right, more conservative position. At the same time, the ROC looked to the United States of America for ideological influences and rapidly became ‘Westernized’ and ‘Americanized,’ although only recently has the KMT allowed an opposition party to arise – the Democratic Progressive Party (abbrev. DPP; Chinese, 民主進步黨).
The DPP is the largest “green” party in the ROC – “green” parties support Taiwanese independence, while the “blue” faction (KMT) takes a more progressive approach of cooperation with China. Since its inception in the late 80s, the party and the series of smaller parties (forming the Pan-Green Coalition) have simply been a collective opposition force; its existence merely justifies a level of democracy and political competition in Taiwan – another way to differentiate the ROC from single-party state PRC. Their radical views earned them little support from a majority of Taiwanese. For a decade after their establishment in 1986, the DPP had no method to ascend any members to presidential positions due to the lack of democratic elections. Their role in volatile Taiwanese politics seemed limited to participation in the raunchy unicameral Legislative Yuan (Chinese: 立法院).
In the next few years (1990s), the DPP would gain steam in the Legislative Yuan and create increasingly violent spectacles on televised sessions of legislative meetings, a normal sight in Taiwanese politics. When the first-ever democratic elections were held in the ROC on 1996, the DPP failed to defeat longtime KMT incumbent Lee Teng-Hui, a Taiwanese native who was eventually expelled from the KMT for his overemphasis on localizing culture and support of an independent Taiwan, despite championing economic and democratic reforms as president for twelve years. Lee’s ideologies ironically conformed more to the platform of the DPP.
The 2000 ROC Presidential election and its verdict would prove to turn a new chapter in the search for identity, which for years has teeter-tottered between Chinese nationalism and “Taiwanization” – Taiwanese nationalism (this theme will prove important). The DPP marginalized its political platform to accept the status quo regarding Taiwan’s international status, while a rift in the KMT and the political mudslinging during campaigning allowed DPP candidate Chen Shui-bian to win the election with only about one third of the popular vote, most of which came from southern counties/cities such as Tainan County, Kaohsiung, and Pingtung County; the population in southern Taiwan is typically regarded as lower-class than the more educated population in the north, which features sizeable populations of college graduates in major metropolitan areas such as Hsinchu and Taipei.
Soon after President Chen was sworn in, he ignored the platform (screw the platform) and swore by a fast-and-furious, aggressive campaign of Taiwanization. Signs that featured “China” or “Republic of China” were strongly suggested or mandated to be replaced with “Taiwan”. Localization of culture and “desinicization,” the elimination of Chinese cultural elements, were stressed throughout. Evidence and naming of organizations or entities with Chiang Kai-shek were removed or replaced. Taiwanese nationalism and the Taiwanese identity soon became the prevailing concept of the island entity, with the ruling DPP ultimately supporting the total independence of Taiwan and stronger partnerships with Western ally United States. A propaganda campaign of some sort was necessary to perpetuate the idea that Taiwanese nationalism is righteous and appropriate. The most powerful and lasting propaganda campaign, as it turns out, lies in how one educates the posterity of a state.
Blue Sky, White Sun, and a Wholly Red Earth -青天, 白日, 滿地紅
Lee Teng-hui, a native Taiwanese, was strongly nationalistic and favored Taiwanization, but nobody on the entire island knew what to expect when a radically nationalist party took the reins of the entire state. Chen’s education reforms were not profoundly sweeping – he simply accelerated the development of already nationalist curriculums that were being implemented. It was rumored that Chen altered political maps to feature Taiwan prominently and above Mainland China, a bold, but not impossible, move. Heavy emphasis was placed on Taiwanese history and local Taiwanese culture, and history of the Chinese on the mainland – including over 4000 years of imperial history and beyond – became grossly underrepresented as a result. Students were required to memorize (the characteristic of any East Asian education) names, location, and geography of Taiwan in its entirety – the island’s area is only slightly larger than Maryland state. Students also learn and memorize the National Anthem and the National Flag Anthem – the latter being the equivalent of the Pledge of Allegiance. Through their locally nationalistic study of history, Taiwanese youth are strongly informed that their country – which very status is disputed – is the best on Earth. Taiwan is flawless. China, Japan, Korea, even America – they are all flawed. Forget self-determination!
The mandated study of Taiwan and Mainland China through an intensely nationalistic perspective as a covert social propaganda campaign has proved effective. It should be strongly argued that the propaganda has brainwashed students from Tainan to Taipei. The strategy has given children an entity to strongly affiliate themselves with, but this collective solution to an identity crisis feels all-too-superficial – after all, adolescents usually undergo numerous crises in their search for self. Pupils are told by the government to antagonize Mainland China and its ruling scoundrels – the Communists, who took the entire area away from the Republic that righteously deserves it. All this is alluded to despite the KMT’s socialist ideology under Sun Yat-sen during the first third of the party’s existence. Although Taiwan has been extensively Westernized and Americanized in culture, economy and politics during the last half century, students may be oblivious to or refuse to believe that there are any traits of foreign culture in Taiwan, which should be labeled uniquely ‘Taiwanese’ and nothing else. Radical members of the DPP believe the Republic of China should be renamed the ‘Republic of Taiwan’; surely, some students may take up this viewpoint with positivity.
More incriminating evidence on the brainwashing of young Taiwanese students exists. Taiwanese students tend to hold more radical views in regards to China than their parents – they believe, after all, Taiwanese culture sprouted from the island itself. In an outstanding example of Orwellian ‘doublethink,’ Taiwanese are capable of acknowledging the fact that they hold Chinese heritage but assert that they are singly ‘Taiwanese’ – nothing else. Only two percent of Taiwanese are aboriginal; the other ninety-eight percent of residents bear original ancestry in mainland China, predominantly in neighboring Fujian Province. It is simply illogical that the requirement for students to be informed about Chinese history is near-nonexistent. Meanwhile, the definition of what ‘Taiwanese’ really means is nowhere to be found.
The difference between Taiwan’s manipulative textbooks against, say, the PRC or America’s slanted textbooks, is the nationalist nature of the curriculum. Blatant Taiwan-centering of textbooks that creates a narrow-minded worldview (apologies for writing ‘world’) does little to foster an attitude of international cooperation or friendly diplomacy. Few high school students in Taiwan that seek higher education look to the United States or elsewhere – their critical opinion of American cultural values and beliefs would prove unsettling. Students who attend international schools may to turn to the United States for college, only to receive a culture shock.
Textbook biasing, however, is no Taiwanese affair. No one-hundred percent objective history textbook has every found its way to any classroom desk anywhere in the world. China has long biased against the KMT in their history textbooks but has recently readjusted the bent on some crucial events such as the defeat of the Japanese in the Chinese Civil War. History textbooks in the US generally criticize communism and advocate market capitalism as the ideal political-economic system. General cultural standards in the US idealize the Founding Fathers, who were really nothing more than spearheading a rebellion in intellectual style – they were treading uncharted waters with a declaration of independence and not confidently strutting along with nationalism flowing out of their pockets. The overtly nationalistic history curriculum under President Chen, this pro-blue faction article suggests, is similar to a secessionist group – say, the Confederate States of America – educating a mainstream United States.
Chen Imprisoned, Taiwan Nationalistic
If you don’t believe the extent to which Taiwanese have been brainwashed from slanted history textbooks, take to the Internet. The first entry on Urban Dictionary for “Chen Shui-bian” describes a benevolent president who has done far more good than harm – a total contrast from his actual presidential run, which eventually earned him 19 years of imprisonment. Tone and other linguistic qualities suggest that the entry was written by a Taiwanese individual who strongly supports the green faction and is downright disillusioned in his evidence.
Nationalism is a powerful fighting force that can be described in far too many metaphors. Guns and F-16 fighter jets are not the only way to wage war; a domestic campaign of subtle propaganda, properly executed, is all it takes to muster up a force of nature, one that is willing to die for something they may not even have good reason to affiliate themselves with. The DPP’s eight-year stint was enough to effectively control the opinions of a whole generation of youth – the Nationalist Party, as its namesake suggests, has little intention to lessen the Taiwan-centralized curriculum too severely. You don’t need martial law to force anyone to do anything. You don’t need a bomb to take over the world. “Just give the education a reform.”
SAT Vocabulary: (government/history-specific terms in italics)
1. infringing - v. trespass upon
2. populace - n. the common people
3. nationalist - political ideology that involves strong identification with a group of individuals with a political entity (usu. a nation)
4. de facto - in practice (but not in theory) (also see: de jure)
5. fledgling - n. a young bird; used to describe anything that is young
6. coalition - n. combination in a body or mass
7. relinquish - v. to give up using or having
8. self-determination - n. principle that nations have the right to choose their own sovereignty and political status freely
9. implement - v. to put into effect, to institute
10. inception - v, n. founding
11. collective - adj. Consisting of a number of persons or objects considered as gathered into a mass, or sum.
12. volatile - adj. changeable, unstable
13. unicameral - n. in government, composed of a single legislative body
14. incumbent - n. one who holds an office
15. mudslinging - n. negative campaigning
16. prominent - adj. conspicuous in position, character, or importance
17. mandate - n. a command; v. to require/make involuntary
18. affiliate - v. to relate; n. some auxiliary person or thing
19. aboriginal - adj. native peoples of a place
20. blatant - adj. offensively loud or clamorous; obvious
21. muster - n. to assemble, gather up
22. martial law - n, v. to impose military rule on an area, usu. in emergency or war
No comments:
Post a Comment