Old tricks from a 'new' dog
Rank’s latest post, a preview of the DPP bloggers’ planned hatchet job (fairness and accuracy? I can’t wait) on the KMT’s 馬英九 Ma Ying-jeou while he visits foreign countries and actually does something to improve the ROC’s image, really struck a nerve with me:
The problem here of course is that residents of Taipei City tend to be anti-Chen because of the high proportion of mainlanders in Taipei.
Pardon the vitriol, but if I had an NT dollar for every time I heard this argument or its cousins, I’d have the millions I need to start a proper news translation magazine that reflects the popular discussions in TV and newspapers here.
The 外省人 waisheng ren characterization is tired, worn out rhetoric that the DPP reaches for whenever its poll numbers are down. Personally, I never quite understand how its leaders and supporters deal with the hypocrisy of claiming to support ethnic harmony and reconciliation while shamelessly scapegoating and demonizing a segment of their own population. Well, if decency and morals won’t do it, how about some math to discourage the practice?
外省人 waisheng ren make up only 14 percent of Taiwan's population. True, the KMT was dominated by foreign Chinese when it came to Taiwan, but if the waisheng ren in the guise of the KMT had wanted to rule Taiwan, why did they allow other groups into the government, and then later give away their political control to the forces of democracy?
Now, if 70 percent of the country are descendants of Fujianese or ‘Taiwanese’ and 15 percent are Hakka, and then the waisheng ren come along with 10 percent, how do those that rely on race explain the the last open and free presidential election? 49.8 percent of the country voted KMT. I don’t have any sort of hard numbers to back me up here, but that means anywhere from 36-40 percent of Taiwanese voted against their own, assuming that all the waisheng ren voted as a block and depending on Hakka/aboriginal support for the KMT. What does this mean? Well, no matter how you slice it, the Taiwanese make up either the majority of the KMT’s voter base, or at least a respectable portion of it. Inexplicably, the DPP and their armchair-quarterback Western intellectual cheerleaders blithely portray the DPP as the sole representatives of the people of Taiwan, the Taiwanese and the indigenous groups, especially in the western media.
The DPP has written off the waisheng ren, discounting the large group of waisheng ren descendants, including the so-called strawberry generation, who have broken with their parents and supported the DPP in the mistaken belief that it could bring something new to government. Borrowing a page from Carl Rove’s playbook in the 2004 US Presidential elections, 陳水扁Chen Shui-Bian and the DPP think that they can ignore the middle so long as they can get their more extreme base to the polls. It may be pragmatic and effective, but it’s disgusting to a party that was founded by those who wanted to bring equality and justice to government in Taiwan.
The problem here of course is that residents of Taipei City tend to be anti-Chen because of the high proportion of mainlanders in Taipei.
Pardon the vitriol, but if I had an NT dollar for every time I heard this argument or its cousins, I’d have the millions I need to start a proper news translation magazine that reflects the popular discussions in TV and newspapers here.
The 外省人 waisheng ren characterization is tired, worn out rhetoric that the DPP reaches for whenever its poll numbers are down. Personally, I never quite understand how its leaders and supporters deal with the hypocrisy of claiming to support ethnic harmony and reconciliation while shamelessly scapegoating and demonizing a segment of their own population. Well, if decency and morals won’t do it, how about some math to discourage the practice?
外省人 waisheng ren make up only 14 percent of Taiwan's population. True, the KMT was dominated by foreign Chinese when it came to Taiwan, but if the waisheng ren in the guise of the KMT had wanted to rule Taiwan, why did they allow other groups into the government, and then later give away their political control to the forces of democracy?
Now, if 70 percent of the country are descendants of Fujianese or ‘Taiwanese’ and 15 percent are Hakka, and then the waisheng ren come along with 10 percent, how do those that rely on race explain the the last open and free presidential election? 49.8 percent of the country voted KMT. I don’t have any sort of hard numbers to back me up here, but that means anywhere from 36-40 percent of Taiwanese voted against their own, assuming that all the waisheng ren voted as a block and depending on Hakka/aboriginal support for the KMT. What does this mean? Well, no matter how you slice it, the Taiwanese make up either the majority of the KMT’s voter base, or at least a respectable portion of it. Inexplicably, the DPP and their armchair-quarterback Western intellectual cheerleaders blithely portray the DPP as the sole representatives of the people of Taiwan, the Taiwanese and the indigenous groups, especially in the western media.
The DPP has written off the waisheng ren, discounting the large group of waisheng ren descendants, including the so-called strawberry generation, who have broken with their parents and supported the DPP in the mistaken belief that it could bring something new to government. Borrowing a page from Carl Rove’s playbook in the 2004 US Presidential elections, 陳水扁Chen Shui-Bian and the DPP think that they can ignore the middle so long as they can get their more extreme base to the polls. It may be pragmatic and effective, but it’s disgusting to a party that was founded by those who wanted to bring equality and justice to government in Taiwan.
posted by Taiwan's Other Side at 10:00 PM
7 Comments:
TOS, the stats are nice, but they don't apply to the argumnent on Rank's site: to wit, that the proportion of mainlanders in Taipei is higher than elsewhere. That is a well-known fact which I am surprised you are disputing. Last figure I saw was about a third of the Taipei area. Do you have different figures that say that the proportion of mainlanders in Taipei is the same as elsewhere in Taiwan?
True, the KMT was dominated by foreign Chinese when it came to Taiwan, but if the waisheng ren in the guise of the KMT had wanted to rule Taiwan, why did they allow other groups into the government, and then later give away their political control to the forces of democracy?
Because, as a colonial minority and ruling class, it became necessary to co-opt locals into the government in order to run the country. Basic fact of colonial life everywhere; there aren't enough colonials. Also, the infighting in the KMT was vicious, and individuals who wished to establish power bases they could use against fellow mainlanders frequently turned to the Taiwanese population. For example, Chiang Ching-guo brought in many Taiwanese because he needed his own power base to balance the old guard mainlanders who had supported his murderous father. Similarly, several of the plots in the '50s and '60s by general officers to supplant Chiang Kai-shek hinged on using Taiwanese troops. Linda Arrigo has a case study of her mainlander father-in-law who was touched by one of these plots -- and nearly executed for it -- that I hope to be publishing on my blog next month.
I hope Ma's trip raises Taiwan's profile, but I don't see much encouragement that the US media will be able to make any kind of rich, contextualized presentation of Ma's visit.
Michael
I'm not disputing Taipei's population - just the implication that only waisheng ren could possibly support the KMT, and that the DPP is the 'Tiawanese' party.
I'm not disputing Taipei's population - just the implication that only waisheng ren could possibly support the KMT, and that the DPP is the 'Taiwanese' party.
I know for fact that my Hakka-in-laws are pro-KMT, and they are just about fed up with Chen and DPP’s balkanization of Taiwan.
Michael Turton's characterization of my argument is correct: WSR are a minority in Taiwan but form a disproportionately large percentage of Taipei's population. A 2004 study of Taiwan's population found that Taipei's WSR population is about 15% as opposed to 8% islandwide. And it is well known that WSR vote as a bloc with a much higher degree of solidarity than do other Taiwanese ethnic groups. They also tend to dominate cultural and academic institutions and their views are too often takn at face value by foreign journalists who are only too happy to interview people who are in Taipei and speak English.
Although there are many pro-green Hakkas, it is also true that lingering resentment against Minann Taiwanese menas that many Hakkas are uncomfortable about the prospect of Taiwan for the Taiwanese if 'Taiwanese' means Minnan. The DPP has not been effective enough in allaying those resentments although I would arge that it is the blue camp who is guilty of constantly playing on indigenous and Hakka fears of Minnan voters. And as you point out yourself, Minnan voters are all over the place in terms of who they support.
I'm not disputing Taipei's population - just the implication that only waisheng ren could possibly support the KMT, and that the DPP is the 'Taiwanese' party.
The point is that WSR vote overwhelmingly for the KMT while Minnan voters, as you point out, vote in substantial numbers for the KMT (as well as the DPP) for the reasons Michael points out.
I say Michael's reasons are worth thinking about, but I like to think that at least some of the Minnan voters vote KMT because they actually agree with the KMT. (I know it's a bit idealistic to think that people vote for a party because they support it, but what the heck.) It seems that you two won't even conceed that point. To me, it's just not reasonable to assume that such a huge segment of the popultaion is being coerced or manipulated.
A second point is that the DPP is not 'the' Taiwanese party, as much as it and its supporters have tried to create that perception, but 'a' Taiwanese party. The KMT and its diverse voter base are far more representative of Taiwan.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home