"Taiwan might be China," says Taiwan's pro-independence president
Lai advanced his pro-China opposition's argument in a National Day address
There is a theory in linguistics that different types of logic pathways are formed within the minds of cultures using the alphabet and those using logographic writing systems such as Chinese. It’s a delicate concept because it’s not easy to prove, while suggesting that one writing system creates superior forms of reasoning.
But I have often wondered how much truth there might be to this concept when crossing paths with the loopy pro-independence arguments I encounter in the local Taiwanese media and when discussing the issue with acquaintances.
The latest dousing of cognitive dissonance was poured from Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te in the run-up to National Day, when he said that Taiwan might be the actual “motherland” of all China. By tracing his constitution’s history to mainland China before the Communists took power, he went a long way toward boosting the argument that Taiwan, in fact, belongs to a greater concept called “China,” albeit one only legitimately ruled by himself and not Xi Jinping.
It’s a broad conclusion, but it’s where Lai’s statement logically leads. Before I get to his complete statement, three views of Taiwan need to be understood:
The Beijing view: Taiwan is (or should be) a part of Communist-ruled China. Taiwan was internationally recognized as a province of China at two points in history — from 1887 to 1895, then after the Japanese occupation, from 1945 until a still-undefined point in time. Beijing does not recognize any change in Taiwan’s status as a Chinese province, and views itself as Taiwan’s legitimate ruler given its victory in the civil war started by the Nationalists.
The Nationalist (KMT) view: Taiwan is a province of China, but the Communists are illegitimate rulers, and Taiwan should one day be reunited with the mainland under Nationalist rule. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ruled most of China from 1911 to 1949, after which they were exiled to Taiwan, while the Communists (who ruled other parts of China since 1921) set up shop in Beijing. There was no dispute between the KMT and the Communists over Taiwan’s place in China. The only argument was over the name of the country and the ruling party: The KMT called it the Republic of China (ROC), while the Communists tacked “People’s” to the front of the name (PRC).
The independence view: Taiwan was merely occupied by China, the same way it was occupied by Japan, the Dutch, and the Spanish. It has a long culture and history extending much further back than Chinese rule. There has always been a large cohort of Taiwanese who never accepted any Chinese control as legitimate. This view gave rise to Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in Taiwan.
Taiwan President Lai Ching-te of the DPP comes from the third cohort. Yet in a speech this week, he tried to boost Taiwan’s nationhood by taking the second position. From The Guardian:
Speaking at a concert ahead of Taiwan’s national day celebrations on 10 October, Lai noted that the People’s Republic had celebrated its 75th anniversary on 1 October and in a few days it would be the Republic of China’s 113th birthday.
“Therefore, in terms of age, it is absolutely impossible for the People’s Republic of China to become the motherland of the Republic of China’s people. On the contrary, the Republic of China may be the motherland of the people of the People’s Republic of China who are over 75 years old,” Lai added, to applause.
Why does Lai care if the PRC is “the motherland of China” or not? It shouldn’t matter, because Taiwan is a country independent of China, right? But then he goes further to say that the ROC (aka Taiwan) might be the “real motherland” of all of mainland China. Oh, good grief! It’s like hearing Scottish independence advocates say they are the true rulers of Great Britain.
Taiwanese believe that Lai had to make this statement “because Taiwan cannot declare independence.” Others say that Lai had to respond to a spate of Taiwanese artists and celebrities stationed on the mainland who were (possibly) coerced into wishing the People’s Republic a happy 75th on their social media accounts.
Actually: NO! Avoiding a declaration of independence is not the same as ignoring China completely. There was no need at all for Lai to talk about China, regardless of what social media stars across the strait were saying. He could have talked optimistically about all of Taiwan’s progress as a nation, its innovative economy, unique culture, its growing (though unofficial) diplomatic ties, and its enhanced recognition around the world — without any mention of another country.
Here is the message I wish Lai and other independence leaders would give to the international community:
“Canada and the UK allow democratic mechanisms for their provinces to become independent. The people of East Timor fought and died for their independence, as did the many countries that freed themselves from the British Empire. The world recognizes these rights and struggles. The vast majority of people of Taiwan do not want to be a part of China. This is not an anti-Communist statement. It doesn't matter who governs China. The reality is, the people of Taiwan have proudly built their own nation. However, right now, Taiwan is internationally and officially recognized as a part of China. We respect that. For the sake of world peace, Taiwan does not declare independence. We are willing to live within the framework of “one China” for stability and good relations with our neighbors, including China. But we ask the world — please recognize the views and the hopes of the Taiwanese people, regardless of the political and diplomatic situation. If you support independence for other nations that struggle to be free, please also offer your support to Taiwan as we try to peacefully sort out our differences with China.”
— said no Taiwanese leader ever
The independence view should just forget (or pretend to forget) that China has any place in the Taiwanese consciousness and simply look to the future of gaining recognition from abroad. But instead, Lai (like most independence advocates) comes across like a jilted lover, doth protesting too much about how much he’s over his ex. Or arguing over who owns the house, years after the divorce.
What Lai did in his speech was propagate the old KMT view that allowed Beijing to save face and passively accept Taiwan’s separate governance in the first place: “The argument over what China means to either side is evidence itself that both sides belong together.” Instead of emphasizing Taiwan’s independence, he only reinforced the idea that Taiwan indeed has, and perhaps should have, some connection to China, if only those pesky Communists could be overthrown.
This is not the first time I have been confronted with what seemed to be backwards logic from the independence camp in my efforts to understand Taiwan, particularly when I submitted what I considered to be unique, highly pro-independence op-eds to local anti-China outlets and had them rejected for being too pro-China — the implication being, “we don’t say it this way in Taiwan, therefore something must be wrong with you.”
So I can’t help but wonder if there’s truth to the linguistic theory of writing systems shaping thought. That perhaps Chinese characters, in the words of Marshall McLuhan, “approximate the animated cartoon and are extremely unwieldy, requiring many signs for the infinity of data and operations of social action … Only alphabetic cultures have ever mastered connected lineal sequences as pervasive forms of psychic and social organization.”
Or maybe it has nothing to do with language and writing systems. Perhaps Taiwan and China are like those couples that divorce after 25 years of marriage and manage another 25 years of getting on each other’s nerves and bickering during family birthdays and reunion meals with uncles and cousins and their offspring.
Anyway, Happy 75th and 113th birthdays, China! Cheers to a country that both sides have forgotten is over 4,000 years old.