I think the next few months are going to fun as we watch the Blue media sort out how it is going to react to having a Blue legislature and a Blue Administration in power. For the last eight years the Blue media here have taken leave from ethics and restraint in unabashed bashing of the DPP. The tension in Blue newsrooms between servile kowtows to the political parties they serve, and their anti-government reflexes, must surely be a thing to behold.In the meantime, the Net is abuzz with a remarkable TVBS poll, which ESWN was kind enough to put on his website. The numbers themselves are unremarkable...
Q3. If you can choose, would your prefer Taiwan to become an independent country, or unify with mainland China, or become a state in the United States of America?
58%: Independent country
17%: Unified with mainland China
8%: Become a state in the United States of Amreica
17%: No opinion
Q4. If you can choose, would you prefer Taiwan to become an independent country, or unify with mainland China?
65%: Independent country
19%: Unified with mainland China
16%: No opinion
Q5. In our society, some people think that they are Chinese while other people think that they are Taiwanese. Which do you think you are?
68%: Taiwanese
18%: Chinese
14%: Don't know/refused
....reflecting numbers that we've seen in other polls. What's remarkable about them is that they come from TVBS, which got in trouble a while back for being 100% Chinese-owned, and has supported the Blues unstintingly since Day 1. Also on tap at ESWN is a China Times poll -- CT is a Blue-stalwart from way back -- that says approval for Ma is falling while disapproval is rising. A DPP poll had found that a few days ago, and an Apple Daily poll found similar numbers. Taiwan News observed:
Moreover, the survey of 889 Taiwan adults carried out June 5 and June 6 found that satisfaction with the performance of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) of the Kuomintang had slipped to 50.8 percent from 54.
DPP Public Survey Department Director and former Research, Development and Evaluation Commission deputy director-general Chen Chun-lin (陳俊麟) stated that "we rarely see a leader's satisfaction ratings fall so fast and dissatisfaction rating rise so rapidly."
The DPP pollster said the KMT president had originally aimed to use cross-strait liberalization and Chinese tourism to compensate for concern on the economy and oil prices, but noted that the poll showed that the poor handling of the oil price hikes and other issues by the KMT Cabinet of Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) had affected Ma's ratings.
"These results should be a warning to the Ma government that most Taiwanese people are deeply concerned over its concessions on sovereignty and lack confidence in its competence on domestic policy," Chen stated.
According to the DPP poll, 68.3 percent agreed that Taipei should "uphold dignity and not allow any concessions on Taiwan's sovereignty" in the cross-strait negotiations between Taipei's semi-official Strait Exchange Foundation and Beijing's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits.
Only 22.8 percent said that "for the sake of resuming talks, Taiwan can make some concessions on the sovereignty issue," the DPP pollster related, while 8.9 percent had no opinion.
The Taiwan News piece did not mention, probably due to a lack of space, that 59% of adults felt that Taiwan's security would not be significantly enhanced even if the PRC did make some reductions in the missiles pointed at the island. As many have noted, the real problem isn't what weapons are pointed at us, but the intent to use weapons in the first place.
The public is deeply angry over the price increases, but I think politically the Ma government's move was wise. Make them feel the pain early, get it over with, as the public has short memories. I've heard lots of complaints but I spend so much time in Deep Green Tainan that I can't say how representative they are. I have also heard that some of the Blue media are withholding their polls from the public because they do not reflect favorably on Ma.
Old habits die hard.
[Taiwan]
14 comments:
.
.
.
Word from Keelung (a deep-blue city) is that people are really pissed about the gas hikes, too. I also heard that there were some Taiwan corporate heads that tried to convince PandaMa to ease it with the gas prices by offering an increased percentage of taxes.
PandaMa, (or whoever pulls his strings), refused.
This gas hike is not sitting well with the public and I don't think it will be forgotten as quickly as you think, Michael.
.
.
.
I have rarely seen a poll that asks if Taiwanese would prefer becoming a state of the US or a part of China before. I found it interesting that 8 percent chose US statehood -- a remarkably high number since statehood is not an option. Furthermore, by looking simultaneously at the first two questions, you see that that 8 percent seem to be part of a group that does not want to unify with China at any cost, and would rather throw in their lot with a third party (including the "evil empire") if they could not have an independent Taiwan.
I also find it interesting that the poll did not allow respondents to choose the status quo. This is actually a positive in my mind since the "status quo" is not a realistic long-term option. No status quo really exists, in fact. Taiwanese will be forced to choose eventually. Without US defence or a credible military, we all know which way they will be pushed (not much of a choice). This shows that there would be a lot of unhappy Taiwanese in that case. Too bad nobody is listening.
Again, we see numbers which support the notion that separate Taiwanese ethnic and national identities are not tied to the political fortunes of a single particular party.
Just like in Korea with their anti-mad-cow protests, we will probably see in Taiwan anti-mad-horse large protests in the future. The only difference it won't be against the USA, it will be against the KMT for capitulating to China.
(Btw, there are some great photos and comments in the link. Also if you look in the archives, you will find a few amazing photos of the China dam break.)
Whichever party can best align its policies to reflect the feelings of the electorate will eventually prevail. We saw that in the 90's when, although the KMT was the dominant party, it could only hope to maintain that dominance by adopting many of the policies favored by the DPP. This eliminated the DPPs traction with voters and better aligned the KMT with Taiwanese VOTERS. I think the KMT leaders may think they can enact a few Chinese nationalization policies and they can swing support toward a pan-Chinese ethnic and national identity. It may be that the KMT leaders erroneously assume the poll numbers are the result of 8 years of DPP Taiwanese nationalization policies (read: "desinicization") and not the result of DPP policies that reflect the sentiments of the people. A good example is the revival of "Chung hua minzu" and "Mainland China", two very loaded terms that were popular with the GIO (propaganda office) in the late martial law era. The terms were not accidental and diligently employed for political ends. James Soong was known to be very meticulous in inserting KMT terminology into GIO publications when he served as the head of the GIO.
The DPP used the name "Taiwan/Taiwanese" and "China/PRC" in a similar way. The only difference is which terms resonate with the public. Very few Taiwanese seemed to have a problem with "Taiwan/Taiwanese".
On another note: Bringing Chinese to Taiwan where they can interact with Taiwanese may have the unintended consequence of helping both sides realize the idealized "one" is actually a foreign "other".
Rising costs of oil and food are going to have a very negative impact on perceptions of the government. No amount of positive spin is going to help as people feel the effects of this on a daily basis. If this dissatisfaction combines with the KMT making unnecessary concessions of Taiwan's sovereignty to China then the results will be interesting.
It took six years before the large faux protests against Chen Shui-bian. I think it might be just six months before we see some real action against Ma and the KMT.
Good to see at least some people are paying attention to what's going on.
The poll reveals nothing new, nothing changed. Why wouldn't people here want their autonomy, their independence?
It is interesting to consider why the poll was released, though, and the timing of it.
I really do believe there's a lot happening that's not in the news. The power plays on all sides must be intense. Whatever is behind the US freeze on weapons, Chinese propa-pandas, violent protests at the Japanese office in Taipei all due to a detained fishing captain, Ma "giving away" Taiwan...I think it's all smoke and mirrors.
Taiwanese would never give up Taiwan to China. I've never even met (so far) a deep blue person who wants that. I DO think that the KMT wants total control over Taiwan--I can believe that; it's in their history and it's their philosophy. I do think Ma wants to create a personality cult, and will use Chinese-ness to make these things happen, at the risk of opening up a deeper rift than the DPP was ever accused of doing.
As is often the case, there are two sides to the same issue.
As someone else mentioned above (while dismissing it), I for one see these results as being strongly influenced by the DPP's de-Sinification policies, as well as 5 decades of mutual isolation.
On our blog, we mention the TVBS poll as a measure of how far we have to go. But combining that poll with the other poll ESWN has translated, there's plenty of reason for optimism about an eventual solution as we finally get to know each other.
http://blog.speak4china.com/?p=217
Nearly 50% of Taiwanese are willing to identify themselves as zhongguo-ren. That is, not ethnic Chinese, but political Chinese.
77% of Taiwanese identify themselves as members of the zhonghua minzu, which has become the new foundation for cross-strait discussions.
Bottom line, there's no doubt in my mind about the outcome if a reunification referendum were to be held today. But the meetings in Beijing this week are all about putting into motion policies that will hopefully set cross-strait relations on a healthier path.
I for one see these results as being strongly influenced by the DPP's de-Sinification policies, as well as 5 decades of mutual isolation.
Tang, the DPP did not have any "de-sinification" policies. Around here we celebrate Chinese holidays, speak Chinese languages, eat Chinese foods, and worship Chinese gods, all in our unique Taiwanese way. The DPP did not stop any of that. What the DPP did was remove markers of KMT colonialism in Taiwan -- for example, removing references to the personality cult around the mass murderer Chiang Kai-shek, and returning the name Taiwan to organizations such as the post office and telecom that previously held it, such as the Post Office. This was exactly what the Eastern Europeans did with markers of Soviet colonialism in there, or what the Indians did with markers of the Raj in India. Perfectly normal activity in post-authoritarian and post-colonial settings.
Michael
Tang,
A group of some highly regarded international academics (see: Chin A-Hsau's compilation of essays in Bentuhua) analyzed the DPP's project and found what sets it apart from the KMT project is that it was not being directed from a highly centralized political ideology with the purpose to transform Taiwanese people into Chinese citizens (see Said's definition of colonialism), but rather "indigenize" the state to reflect the realities of how Taiwanese view themselves. I find it funny that Chinese nationalists rail against the DPP for trying to make moves to "desinicize" Taiwanese, but in the same breath declare the people of Taiwan are and will always be Chinese based on a primordialist mythology. If the latter was the case than why should they worry about the former?
.
.
.
Nearly 50% of Taiwanese are willing to identify themselves as zhongguo-ren. That is, not ethnic Chinese, but political Chinese.
Can someone please explain what in the hell "political Chinese" means please?
Am I then, "politically Canadian"?
This sounds like an Orwellian term to me. In other words, your nationality (or ethnicity, if you want to stretch it) = your political affiliation. Give me a freakin' break!
.
.
.
Fascinating. I wonder what that survey would look like after 4 years (/8?) of KMT. Higher or lower?
:)
Tang Buxi, you make a large error. Since when has it only been five decades of mutual isolation? It has been five decades of mutual isolation for the KMT and the waishengren immigrants, which make up a small percentage of Taiwan's inhabitants. The KMT immigres were Chinese to start with, and many of them are still alive. For the rest of the Taiwanese, there has been little contact with China for over 100 years. Why should any "de-Sinicisation" have to be a part of the picture?
You are assuming that there is some Chinese quality that the whole island possesses and that the KMT did not foist its own ideology on a population that already had a set identity, or at least was lacking a "Chinese" one, when the outsiders arrived. This way of thinking, by the way, is a common error of Chinese in China and die-hard pro-unification Blues.
It is possible that, one day, Taiwanese will be amenable to unification. However, this will not come through cramming outdated lingo down their throats and treaties to bring in more tourists. Rather, it will come if the population of Taiwan feels that China is a country that they would like to be a part of. That can only happen if China undergoes a significant political and social makeover to the point that they are actually liked by Taiwanese, and even then a choice for unification would not be a certainty since unification involves a host of other nuts and bolts issues as well. For example, do I want to pay taxes to belong to an eventual Chinese health care system (or lack thereof)?
This is precisely why those who favour unification want to cram the idea down others' gorges. This is the only way to imprint the idea with any success. And that success is not assured. How many Austrians valued unification with the Third Reich, even after being assured that they were German?
One more thing. You mention that 77 percent think of themselves as Zhonghua Minzu. However, whether this is correct or not, it doesn't take into account the fact that you can see yourself as a "Hua Ren" without seeing yourself as a "political Chinese" (to use your term). There are many Malaysians, Singapoeans, Indonesians, Australians, and Americans, for example, who see themselves as Chinese, yet do not identify themselves as members of the PRC. Rather, they have their own national identity in addition to an ethnic one.
The point of all of this is that identity is a very complicated beast. It develops through far more than the policies of the gouvernement du jour. So while it is possible that the KMT could have some limited success with a renewed "Sinicisation" campaign (it was they who embarked on Sinicisation in the first place), they could not succeed short of a tabula-rasa, revolutionary campaign to wipe Taiwanese identity off the map. They could attempt this during the CKS/CCK years (and they did, although they were not entirely successful), but doing so now would be a bit difficult.
The only way unification will come about, at least in any of our lifetimes, is through coersion or other non-democratic means, hence the need for spiraling defence budgets across the strait...
Post a Comment