I’ve joined a few “Taiwanese in America” Facebook groups since I moved back, and am surprised to find the one’s I’ve seen are overwhelmingly blue. By that I mean: Soong is a traitor for leaving the KMT, Chiang Kai-shek was a hero, Taiwan Independence is the greatest threat to the nation, Taiwan needs to choose a side between the US and China and the choice is obviously China, etc. We’re talking about people with their real names and photos of themselves and their kids, so it’s not like it’s been infiltrated by wumaoers or anything. My operating theory is that many of the people in the group are in their 40’s and 50’s (there’s a very obvious fault line in political consciousness between 30s-and-younger and 40s-and-older).
But sometimes I just feel like it’s a parallel universe. Someone yesterday posted a story about 2009 regarding CSB’s son confessing to embezzlement. There was nothing new about it. But it sill opened up a long thread of feelgoodiness and self-congratulatory back-patting. Even discussions that should be innocuous on things like “possibly changing the constitution” invite vitriolic responses about tearing down the nation and dooming its citizens. I posted to ask why most people are against TI, and got several responses along the lines of: “Oh please, we see right through you. Don’t try to spread your propaganda here.” (Anyone who knows me knows I am definitely not a green.)
Anyway, I posted this here because I’m curious if anyone has relevant experiences. Have you talked to a large group of overseas Taiwanese from diverse employment, education, and geographic backgrounds? What has the overall sense of their political inclinations been?
And holy crap now one of them literally just said 歐洲曾經出現過拿破崙和希特勒兩個英雄 “Europe has seen two heroes in Napoleon and Hitler.” And not just one person agrees…
I think this is pretty much the answer. When you browse through the Facebook fan pages of some politicians, comments that are overwhelmingly blue usually come from this age range.
So I’d say it’s a generation thing, not an overseas thing.
[quote=“Hokwongwei”]And holy crap now one of them literally just said 歐洲曾經出現過拿破崙和希特勒兩個英雄 “Europe has seen two heroes in Napoleon and Hitler.” And not just one person agrees…[/quote] :roflmao:
If I were you I would quit the Facebook group asap.
I think people’s views tend to be even more polarized once they live abroad. It also depends on their experience abroad and their past.
First of all, there are three different kind of oversea Taiwanese. One that had to escape Taiwan during the white terror era, the other sort of just moved overseas during the same era, just because they could, and finally the kinds that moved overseas after LTH took office.
The first kind definitely would be a lot more green. Some times so green their views would not be considered appropriate even by most greens. Their views are shaped by their suffering under the KMT dictatorship.
The second kind tends to be very blue. They had the ability to move overseas, mostly because they are the privileged few under the KMT. Had president Ma stayed in the US, that’s the kind of people he would be.
The third kind isn’t really that different from the average Taiwan, but tends to be a bit more polarized because they often only surround themselves with like minded people, and get feed backs for the previous two types of oversea Taiwanese.
They’re incapable of logical arguments and only lob personal attacks. I posted how China Times managed to “skip” over the fact that instant noodles by its affiliate Want Want are problematic, with the line: 媒體有病 (There are serious problems with the media). The response: 有病的是樓住 (YOU are the one with big problems). Real mature guys.
If I had any love for the KMT, these guys would have thoroughly extinguished it.
I’d agree with hansioux that Overseas Taiwanese political views are pretty diverse.
From the 1960s-1990s, my sense is that any group that consciously identified itself as “Taiwanese” rather than “Chinese” was almost assuredly Green in views. As Hansioux notes, many of them and/or their families suffered grievously from the White Terror, and had been jailed or blacklisted. Moreover, this was a time when pretty much only BSR identified as Taiwanese, so many were acutely incensed as the bigotry and discrimination that the KMT displayed in political, cultural and other matters. This generation of Overseas Taiwanese oftentimes also were very much “immigrants” in the traditional concept in that they wanted to become Americans in both citizenship and culture, for both themselves and their children. Their views are reflected somewhat in groups they founded like the Taiwanese American Citizens League; the Taiwanese American Foundation, the Taiwanese Association of American, the Intercollegiate Taiwanese American Students Association, and the TaiwaneseAmerican.org. The first generation (immigrants) groups are/were highly political; the 2nd generation groups (the first U.S. born generation) tend to be more cultural and focus more on broad issues impacting Asian Americans (college admissions “discrimination”, cultural alienation, preserving traditions and language). I don’t know if any such groups have Facebook pages or discussion board on political matters, but you can google them to learn more.
Conversely, my sense is that the KMT supporters from Taiwan in the 1960-90s era almost never identified themselves as “Taiwanese” and generally preferred to call themselves “Chinese”. They heavily controlled the high level political discourse in the U.S. such that it was difficult for people to even identify themselves on the census as “Taiwanese Americans” (simply referring to oneself as such was a political statement in that era). While not entirely so, my sense is that many of the members of such groups were from WSR backgrounds.
I haven’t kept up with the state of Taiwanese America in the contemporary day. I would nonetheless find it interesting if there are groups now which while identifying as “Taiwanese” are also ardently Blue and against TI (in the past, such groups would never have referred to themselves as Taiwanese). I recognize that there is some irony in that statement as I am myself a unification supporter who still mostly and primarily identifies as Taiwanese . . .
[quote=“Hokwongwei”]They’re incapable of logical arguments and only lob personal attacks. I posted how China Times managed to “skip” over the fact that instant noodles by its affiliate Want Want are problematic, with the line: 媒體有病 (There are serious problems with the media). The response: 有病的是樓住 (YOU are the one with big problems). Real mature guys.
If I had any love for the KMT, these guys would have thoroughly extinguished it.[/quote]
Reading this post makes me doubly appreciate Forumosa. While some people were initially skeptical (lol, maybe some were still skeptical) about why a Red Unification supporter would post here (other than for trolling purposes), I am very happy to be part of a thoughtful online community where we can engage in substantive discussion about meaningful issues with a minimum of flaming and ad hominem posts. It is sad, but not surprising, to hear that other forums don’t provide the same opportunity.
I’m surprised. The impression I got was that overseas Taiwanese in Asia (such as those in China) are overwhelmingly blue, whereas overseas Taiwanese in America and Europe tend to be overwhelmingly green.
But I’ve founded overseas Taiwanese in America to be quite more likely to be Blue than I thought.
My sense is that there were exodus of affluent pro-China folks after 1996. …Those who feel disenfrenchised after democratization, and are retiring anyway.
Typically the children would go study abroad in high school or college, while the parents might come and go between two places to adjust their lifestyles.
[quote=“sofun”]My sense is that there were exodus of affluent pro-China folks after 1996. …Those who feel disenfrenchised after democratization, and are retiring anyway.
Typically the children would go study abroad in high school or college, while the parents might come and go between two places to adjust their lifestyles.[/quote]
Also, usually only first generation are interested in Taiwan’s politics. So for those who were forced to leave Taiwan during the White terror period, even if they went as children, they would be about 50 years old. Their children would be far less inclined to involve themselves in much of the Taiwan specific groups or forums. Same goes for those who did well under the KMT and went to the US around the same time. I would say people who are involved in facebook groups such as these are probably around 40 or younger, and have been in the US for less than 30 years. Those are the people who went to the US while Taiwan’s economy was going well and not yet fully democratized. A bulk of them maybe exactly what sofun described, affluent KMT beneficiaries who felt disenfranchised after democratization.
If an oversea Taiwanese encounters shenanigans like this a couple of times, it might be enough to change one’s position (although it could go either way).
The news article describes a Taiwanese tourist visiting Switzerland for the second time, and trying to go to the UN building to buy souvenirs like she did the first time a couple of years ago. She was refused entry to the building because the UN people said her passport and national ID aren’t recognized by the UN. When confronted by the fact that didn’t stop her from entering the gift shop a few years back, she was told the rules have changed, and since Taiwan is a province of China, she needs to show a PRC passport or national ID to enter. All the while some senior adviser looking staff member, seemingly of Chinese origin, just gave her cold stares through the entire ordeal.
I grew up at the tail end of the white terror era, and as such I had no political leaning input from my family growing up what so ever. If any I was instructed by my father to write “unite China under the 3 principles of the people” at the end of every essays by my dad. So I was fully indoctrinated at schools that still fined and publicly punished students for speaking a native language other than Mandarin. I might have mentioned before that I used to imagine restoring the glory of China by recovering the lost historical territories. That’s just what the educational system did to children.
But once I moved abroad, and met enough of similar shenanigans as that lady at UN, I came to the awareness that Taiwan is and should always remain an independent state. It was an transformation revelation that just hit me when I was but a teenage oversea Taiwanese living in Germany. That’s all before the first presidential election in 1996.
I guess another person’s may take away from demeaning encounters like that may be “Taiwan needs to be apart of a strong nation so we will never get looked down upon.” I just get the sense that all these demeaning stuff take place because of China and the KMT’s manipulation, and so for that to never happen again Taiwan needs to truly become independent.
In this group it’s very 順我者昌逆我者亡. They gang up like crazy. Some of the comments on that article from complete nutters:
[ul]-you need to make an appointment first. You cannot just walk in.[/ul]
[ul]-不懂這篇轉的文章在抱怨啥。。。 (I don’t understand what she’s complaining about)[/ul]
[ul]-我認為應該不然就是守門員弄錯, 不然就是這位參訪者自己沒弄清楚程序. (I believe the gate guard made a mistake, or the person being interviewed didn’t know the proper procedure)[/ul]
[ul]-In reference to this NOT being the UN HQ, which is in New York: 沒辦法 她國中沒認真上課 或是太久遠了忘了 (What can we do? The author clearly didn’t study hard enough in school, or it’s too far back for her to remember)[/ul]
[ul]-有沒有可能是這個小姐也在中華民國護照上加貼了台灣國的貼紙才造成無法進去的問題 (What’s the probability this girl put one of those Republic of Taiwan stickers over her ROC passport, and that’s what caused the problem?)[/ul]
[ul]-進不去很合理拉～～ 聯合國又不承認中華民國 (It makes perfect sense they didn’t let her in. The UN doesn’t recognize the ROC.)[/ul]
[ul]-And the only comment I agree with: 偏偏台灣的媒體永遠沒有查證 反正"報導有誤 就有誤阿" 是台灣主流 (Taiwanese media again never doing fact-checks. “If it’s wrong then it’s wrong” is the norm in Taiwan.)[/ul]
And don’t forget the message of “在台灣的中國政府” (The Chinese government, which is located in Taiwan), as written by the old gentleman who thinks Hitler’s a stand-up guy. (He also insinuated that “all Jews” are selfish liars, hence why I engaged him in a debate that ended with: “I can see that since you’re a Jew, there’s no point in discussing Hitler’s legacy further.” Good riddance.)
Hitler’s legacy? Wow. You should have given tit for tat and started a thread on the Japanese Imperial Army’s legacy. “Hey I hear the women in Nanking have bigger boobs than average because of the Japanese blood in them. They are also way smarter.”
Fuck. The world is insane. Unfortunately I live in a country now where anti-semitic remarks are considered serious commentary by the political class.
Consensus on this board seems to be: Democracy creates bad presidents, but in dictatorships, only the strongest rise to the top. Democracy is not suitable for Chinese people. Democracy has not done any good for Taiwan in the past 16 years. Keep in mind – Taiwanese living in the USA.
Do you have any sense as to whether this group favors near term unification under the PRC? If they think democracy is unsuitable to Taiwan, and that dictatorship produces better leaders, then I can’t see why they wouldn’t join me in favoring a PRC-led unification. Wouldn’t even need to have the 1C2S model.
The first question I tossed them was, “Does anyone here support unification, and why?” Like a swarm of angry, hungry, and angry sharks, they came biting and ridiculing me for such a ridiculous question because of course they support it! Curated responses:
[ul]-As the traditional Chinese way of thinking goes, Taiwan has been a part of China since antiquity. But China is not equal to the CPC. 因為中國人傳統觀念，台灣自古就是屬中國土地。共產黨不等於中國。[/ul]
[ul]-…The ROC constitution defines China as inclusive of Taiwan. This is undisputed truth. This is a fact that ROC citizens must accept at birth… Unification is a given conclusion.中華民國現有憲法中 中國完整領土包括台灣 這是不爭的事實 中華民國國民一生下來就該接受此事實… 統一是必然的結果[/ul]
[ul]-United States 為什麼要打 Confedrate States?[/ul]
[ul]-Before Lee Teng-hui, the only dispute in Taiwan was between autocracy and democracy. After Lee, we left behind the first for the second, but he split the Taiwanese people into groups of Taiwanese people and “new” Taiwanese people to secure his own power, giving rise to the independence vs. unification debate. The Taiwanese got democracy, but its nature changed in Lee’s hands. 李登輝上台之前的台灣只有專政與民主之爭，李登輝上台之後台灣脫離專政，朝向真正的民主，可是李登輝為了鞏固自己的權力，將台灣分裂為台灣人與新台灣人之爭，開始有了統獨的糾葛！台灣人得到了民主，卻在李登輝手上變質了！[/ul]
[ul]-I support a China unified by the ROC 支持中華民國統一中國[/ul]
[ul]-I support a China unified under the CPC 我支持中共統一台灣[/ul]
The logic on that last one is great. A: “Because it will make Taiwan better. You want Taiwan to be better, don’t you?” B: “Why will that make Taiwan better?” A: “I won’t comment on whether or not that will make Taiwan better, but it would certainly be better than independence.” What the what.
A few more:
[ul]-Let’s reunite China for freedom[/ul]
[ul]-A lot of weird crap about Hitler that makes me feel bad for the guy who posted it because clearly he has the reasoning ability of a youyouban student and has never gotten proper medical care for it despite being in his 60s[/ul]
[ul]-also from Hitler guy: Democracy is a game only for nations not facing foreign aggression. As Taiwan is facing such strong aggression from abroad, democracy is just a slow suicide. Independence would prove lethal. (Note that since he really loves red China, I’m not sure what foreign aggressor he’s referring to…) 民主本來就是無外患的國家才能玩的，台灣的外患這麼強，玩民主是慢性自毀，玩獨立是飲鴆止渴．[/quote]
[list]-same guy: In a dictatorship, crappy leaders can’t possibly get to the top. But when the people select their leader, there’s no telling what kind of weirdo will come around. 獨裁專制裡面爛人根本出不了頭，人民選出來的，什麼怪人都會有[/ul][/list:u]
Lu: Why can’t we have two Chinas? Why can there only be one?
Le: Why can’t we have one China? Why must there be two?
Lu: Don’t we have two right now?
Le: So we need to unify.
Lu: Why?
Le: Well why do you want two?
ilovehitler87: That’s right! Why do you need two? If there is a benefit, you can bring it up at the negotiating table.
Lu: Right now we have two. Isn’t it good how we can each lead our own leaves?
Just went back and reread… I missed the part where he said Hitler was a hero for taking care of the Jews in a “painless and quick” way, and he said he supports the decision. Then he waxed poetic about the wonders of a gas chamber instead of shooting people and how this shows Hitler’s wisdom. Holy god. I have never said this before, and I hope I never say it again, but… I kind of hope this guy gets hit by a bus. And then it backs up. OK not really, there is definitely value to keeping him around: to remind us of what a human being should not be.
Edit: I couldn’t handle it. I left an angry rant and quit the group. Screw that. To be honest I actually feel really sad that he brazenly endorsed the murder of an entire population and not a single person commented against it. I don’t need to people like this in my life, real or digital.
