Man-Made Values and the Taiwan-China Confrontation

The China Post blames the DPP for everything with this one:

Over the past ten years or so the government has been making efforts to indigenize (bentuhua) the island. The tendency to do so has been strong particularly since the independence-minded Democratic Progressive Party took power in 2000. The drive has created many side effects, mostly negative, for the island.

In education, the government has tried to teach the people that Taiwan is the best place in the world and that the students should spend most of their time learning about its geography, history and natural environment.

Economically, the government has tried to limit local businessmen to the local market and adopted policies that prevent them from investing in the Chinese mainland. Politically, the administration has been seeking a Constitution tailored to Taiwan. Culturally, the administration has been attempting to promote native beliefs and customs and to rid the island of what it considers to be Chinese values.

Most of the measures adopted to realize these goals have had a negative impact on Taiwan society. The tendency has had a divisive effect and contributed to turmoil and chaos.

The effort to de-emphasize Chinese values, such as Confucianist teachings, has created a moral void, which is the main reason for the sharp increase in crime.

Taiwan has suffered greatly from the man-made confrontation between Taiwanese and Chinese values. It is time to drop this misguided, narrow-minded policy.

It's not for nothing that a friend of mine consistently refers to the China Post as "the ComPost" though I think this is wrong: the China Post doesn't make very good fertilizer. There's a lot here to comment on.

It's always important to note that "analytical" writing in the local culture is entirely free of the concrete, and insists on sweeping absolutes that no one can take seriously. Consider the first paragraph:

In education, the government has tried to teach the people that Taiwan is the best place in the world and that the students should spend most of their time learning about its geography, history and natural environment.

The Post is pro-China, so naturally it denigrates any commitment to Taiwan. Those of you who wonder what the pro-China crowd thinks of Taiwan need look no further than this first paragraph, which speaks of Taiwan in a tone of patronizing contempt.

Further observe that the paper claims, absurdly that students "should spend most of their time" learning about it. I have a child in the system, and the reality is that the students study Taiwan in subjects that touch upon it, such as social studies and geography, and spend the rest of the time learning Chinese, math, music, and other non-Taiwan oriented subjects. The paper is effectively frothing at the mouth. The Post cannot come right out and say that it is pro-China, so it cannot make a case that studying Taiwan, which is where the students live after all, is wrong. It is symptomatic of the progress that democracy has made here, and the widespread embrace of a Taiwan-based consciousness, Thus fettered, the Post can only fulminate at Taiwan, knowing the reader will understand exactly what it means.

Economically, the government has tried to limit local businessmen to the local market and adopted policies that prevent them from investing in the Chinese mainland. Politically, the administration has been seeking a Constitution tailored to Taiwan. Culturally, the administration has been attempting to promote native beliefs and customs and to rid the island of what it considers to be Chinese values.

That last sentence is absolutely fascinating. For years that KMT insisted that there was no such thing as Taiwanese values and no such thing as Taiwan. Essentially this position that Taiwanese values are being promoted over Chinese values accepts that in fact there are such things as Taiwanese values. This argument, that the DPP is de-Sinicizing Taiwan, is a common complaint made by Chinese who demand that Taiwan be annexed. Recall the complaint of the student at Tsinghua to Taiwanese author Li Ao when he spoke there earlier this year:

My question is this. You have defined yourself as a mainland style scholar, and you are famous for having a patriotic heart. But we are very concerned that the Taiwan authorities are pushing for de-Sinofication. That will have a huge impact on young people, who are the future citizens and political decision-makers in Taiwan. How do you think that cultural Taiwan independence can be opposed? A chasm in culture means a permanent separation.

"A chasm in culture means permanent separation." The Post follows this line too. Who is holding the Post's leash? Again, note also that there is not a single concrete example of what a Chinese or Taiwanese value is, and how the DPP is sweeping the former away. The paper simply repeats Chinese anti-Taiwan coded speech.

The comment about the Constitution is even funnier. Is the Post seriously arguing that the Constitution should be tailored to the needs of some other place that is not Taiwan?

It is quite true that the DPP is worried about investment in China. So are many others, including Taiwan businessmen, who have recently begun to diversify away from China. Another common quality of local pro-China commentary is that it is history-free -- sure enough, here the Post's amnesia extends to forgetting that it was the KMT that adopted a "Go Slow" policy in 1996. In this instance the China Post is simply following the usual pan-Blue policy of attacking polices it originally approved of, simply because the DPP has now adopted them.

Most of the measures adopted to realize these goals have had a negative impact on Taiwan society. The tendency has had a divisive effect and contributed to turmoil and chaos.

Again we have sweeping statements: most of the measures adopted to teach the Taiwanization goals have had a negative impact, but the Post does not name what any of these measures might be. Nor does it make any attempt to demonstrate what most might mean. Again it is simply frothing at the mouth.

The effort to de-emphasize Chinese values, such as Confucianist teachings, has created a moral void, which is the main reason for the sharp increase in crime.

One wonders -- if Taiwanese values are not Confucian values, what are they then? The Post's entirely negative approach is simply a litany of empty complaints. Note how the Post does not establish that Confucian values have been de-emphasized, nor does it establish a link between that and rising crime. It simply asserts. My 11 year old can turn out better-reasoned stuff than this.

Taiwan has suffered greatly from the man-made confrontation between Taiwanese and Chinese values. It is time to drop this misguided, narrow-minded policy.

Finally, the Post gets something right. Taiwan has indeed suffered greatly from the clash between Taiwanese and Chinese values -- during the 1950s-80s, when local culture was supressed, local teachers, writers, artists, and politicians were harassed, imprisoned, and executed, and when an idealized and totally stagnant and empty version of Chinese culture was used to control and reshape the island's social environment. Ironically, the KMT's attack on local social systems and culture is the main reason why so many locals are so adamant about re-asserting them. Had there never been any political suppression, Taiwan would probably place much less emphasis on being Taiwanese. Congratulations, China Post for the great success of your own cheerleading: there is hardly any better illustration of the old dictum that the culture of the colonized is formed in response to oppression of the colonizer than the experience of Taiwan. You're absolutely right: the clash is man-made, and you made it.

[Taiwan] [DPP] [media]