In Defense of the Republic of China (Taiwan)
RE: Olympics and The Hidden Culture War of “Chinese Taipei”
Welcome to the RE: “Republic’s Editorial,” where our Editorial Team re-examines the pressing issues of our times.
The controversy surrounding Taiwan's participation in the Olympics under the name "Chinese Taipei" has once again attracted global attention during the most recent Paris Games.
The DPP government and various public figures continue to question the use of the "Chinese Taipei" designation, especially in regard to recent incidents, such as the confiscation of a spectator's "Taiwan 加油 (Add Oil)" banner during a badminton match (Ministry slams sign-snatching at Paris Games—Taipei Times).
These “Bannergate” incidents are indicative of the ongoing tensions and fervent ideologies on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Moreover, a recent documentary from TaiwanPlus, shared by the Vice President of Taiwan, emphasized the cultural and national pride of the "Taiwanese people," further fueling the debate.
“Chinese Taipei”: Ideals vs. Reality
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) views the use of 'Chinese Taipei' as a way to suppress Taiwanese identity. In reality, it is a necessary compromise that maintains the sporting spirit of the people of Taiwan while also protecting the sovereignty of the Republic of China (Taiwan).
“Chinese Taipei” is NOT some major conspiracy to deny “Taiwan” athletes and their supporters their ability to represent their “country.”
Rather, the label "Chinese Taipei" reflects the reality of the Republic of China's statehood. In 1981, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) ruled to allow athletes from the Republic of China (Taiwan) to compete, following the international community's recognition of the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the "official China" in 1979.
In an ideal world, it would be wonderful to see Taiwan’s athletes participate as the Republic of China (Taiwan). Unfortunately, the international system does not allow for the recognition of “Two Chinas,” and herein lies the crux of the matter.
Using "Chinese Taipei" is a necessary accommodation to maintain Taiwan's international presence while ensuring regional security.
The solution to the problem is not to fuel the flames by creating a separatist "Republic of Taiwan.” Not only would this mean a potential all-out war with the PRC, but based on the current state of citizen education in Taiwan, this would mean the death of the historied "Republic of China."
To openly participate in this identity politics is not only tactless but disrespectful to many of our forbearers who fought against Imperialism, Colonialism, and Communism.
The Taiwan government appears to frequently neglect its obligation to protect its own citizens, which requires competence in decision-making based on the increasingly volatile state of the Indo-Pacific.
The Untold Stories of Outsiders
Growing up in New Zealand in the late 90s and early 2000s, being from the Republic of China (Taiwan) was a source of pride. It symbolized a legacy of resilience and a shared dedication to democratic values—a heritage that our ancestors fought to preserve.
My grandfather's experiences, like many others, fighting against Imperial Japan and the Communists instilled in me a profound appreciation for freedom and democracy. My grandfather was one of the around 600,000 KMT military personnel, out of an estimated 1.2 - 2 million, including intellectuals, industry leaders, and ethnic minorities — KMT supporters— who left the Communist Mainland from 1945-1949 (20-30% of the population of Taiwan at the time).
The personal histories of many waishengren 外省人 families, “outsiders” from the Mainland during the post-war era, and their descendants are interwoven with the broader narrative of Taiwanese identity.
Significant historical events such as the Japanese colonial conquest, the aftermath of the Chinese Civil War, and the subsequent rule of the KMT, must be considered in current discourse.
Despite the DPP's “negative” portrayal of KMT and waishengren (外省人）, many were young soldiers and sailors, like my grandfather, who had to flee their homelands. These unspoken yet intertwining narratives are critical to shed light on the complex history of the nation.
Increasingly, the term "Taiwanese" is co-opted by extreme factions within the pro-independence movement. For them, being Taiwanese symbolizes support for a new independent country – the “Republic of Taiwan.”
This conceptualization differs wildly from the ROC's traditional cultural roots and liberal constitution. Additionally, "Taiwan Independence" does not represent the will of the people, as 61% of Taiwan's population supports the status quo and ⅓ desire its indefinite maintenance (Election Study Center).
Under DPP rule, the strategy has been to diminish waishengren (外省人) values by slowly “educating” their children with “pro-Independence” ideology while simultaneously portraying Sino-centric value systems as "pro-China.
Cultural Evolution or a New “Cultural Revolution”
"De-Sinicization" involves efforts to diminish the impact of Chinese culture and history in Taiwan, ranging from educational reforms to cultural changes.
The DPP’s mass de-sinicization efforts can be broadly divided into three categories: Education Reform, Cultural Politics, and International Branding.
Education Reform: The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) implements curriculum changes to prioritize Taiwanese history, culture, and geography over Chinese-centric narratives. This includes reducing the number of classical Chinese texts in schools and adding more content about Taiwan's “uniqueness.”
Cultural Politics: The DPP promotes migration from other Asian countries as a broader part of former President Tsai's New Southbound Policy. This policy aims to promote diversity by incorporating Indigenous and Hakka traditions and advocating LGBTQIA+-friendly policies to brand Taiwan in a positive light for the global DEI crowd.
International Branding: Moreover, the DPP seeks to "brand" Taiwan as a distinct cultural and political entity vis-à-vis the PRC on the global stage. This includes attempts to participate in international organizations and promote Taiwan's achievements in democracy, human rights, and cultural diversity.
The most noticeable examples of “De-Sinicization” are the constantly changing tourism advertisements and, more recently, the co-opting of the already increasingly "woke" agenda of the Paris 2024 Olympics to push a #TeamTaiwan narrative.
However, less-mentioned examples include the 108 Curriculum, which decreased the inclusion of classical Chinese texts in the curriculum. Another subtle case is the removal of "Republic of China" on the front cover of Taiwan's new passports.
How this all aims to create unity in the face of an increasingly aggressive PRC remains an enigma.
All these reforms are part of a broader cultural war aimed at severing Taiwan's historical and cultural ties with China. The result? Undermining the shared cultural heritage of the Chinese/Taiwanese diaspora—a potential source of support for Taiwan – to promote a distinct Taiwanese identity.
A far cry from making an "amendment" to a constitution, this "ideological politics" is, in reality, a form of dogma. You cannot create culture out of nothing. What basis is there for "neo-Taiwanese"? Japanese Colonialism? Dutch Formosa? Americanization? Regardless, the push for a distinct Taiwanese identity, divorced from our dominant Chinese heritage, raises critical questions about cultural integrity.
An Untenable Situation
I am not against “Taiwanization,” as outlined by former presidents such as Lee Teng-Hui who sought to develop a Taiwan rooted in a shared Chinese culture and heritage while emphasizing Taiwan’s unique historical, cultural, and social characteristics.
However, the current DPP reign has not continued the Taiwanization policies in good faith and has weaponized culture to serve its political agenda, i.e., a new generation of loyal voters.
The DPP insists on openly advocating for an imaginative farce—a “Republic of Taiwan”—as outlined in its platform. Whether they genuinely support this for the “good” of the people—or their own selfish agenda—is up for debate.
The DPP’s political platform has created an environment where reconciliation with China is increasingly untenable. While they publicly claim to seek dialogue, they have alienated potential peacemakers and paths to peace.
Why? Because the “Republic of China (Taiwan)” is already a sovereign nation.
It's difficult to say whether the current DPP government genuinely desires an independent Republic of Taiwan. Certain factions definitely aspire to this goal. However, the overall strategy is to consolidate political power and gain popular support. Why? To resist the PRC if necessary, while still upholding their party's stance on independence.
De facto, the DPP government can not reconcile with its counterparts in China due to its pro-independence platform. However, the mainstream narrative is that the DPP tries to establish communications with the Mainland, yet the “bad guys” refuse, making themselves out to be the “good guys.”
It’s hard to argue against the DPP and its black-and-white narrative. The DPP's adeptness at branding and public relations has allowed it to dominate the political narrative. Nonetheless, this has come at the cost of genuine dialogue about Taiwan's future.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has effectively branded itself as the champion advocating for a “neo-Taiwanese” identity. Yet, its actions often reflect a self-serving agenda rather than a genuine commitment to the security and welfare of the Taiwanese people.
Lessons from History
My grandfather, despite his lack of formal education, received technical training from the US Air Force in the States and often remarked, “You can tell a lot about a culture by standing at a crowded intersection and observing the passerbys.”
Today, when I observe the streets of Taipei, I witness a society increasingly driven by digital dopamine hits and superficial consumerism, disconnected from the rich cultural heritage that should unite people in Taiwan and the diaspora.
The West, particularly the United States, has been misled about Taiwan’s situation. Yet, I suspect the American government already realizes that the people of Taiwan would be a lost cause if war broke out in the short term. I still clearly remember the 2023 CNN article on how Taiwan’s conscripts saw themselves as “cannon fodder” if war broke out.
Under the veneer of “progressiveness,” they have weaponized the youth against the Republic of China. The same nation that ended thousands of years of Imperial rule and stood as one of the famed Four Asian Tigers during the second half of the 20th Century.
Ironically, Communist China still regards Sun Yat-Sen (the founder of the ROC) with esteem. At the same time, the true heirs of his vision for “China” spit on his legacy.
The DPP has done an excellent job of framing the whole era under the KMT as a net negative, disregarding the economic and modernization boom under their rule and focusing on the overuse of authoritarian powers.
However, their narrative falls apart when placed in the historical context of the Cold War and the existentialist threat of Communism. Like many other countries in Asia, such as Vietnam and South Korea, Taiwan was a frontline state against the threat of Communist expansion.
The repressive measures implemented by the KMT government upon relocating to Taiwan included a period of martial law, which resulted in the tragic execution of thousands. However, the strict control began to ease as early as the late 1960s, and the number of persecutions notably decreased throughout the 1970s, ultimately leading to the official lifting of martial law in 1989.
At the time, many actions were considered a necessary evil and pales in comparison to the US-sponsored Cold War States in Latin America, such as Pinochet’s Chile or Argentina, which led to an estimated “disappearance” of an estimated 10,000 - 30,000 people.
I do not condone the actions of the KMT elites, secret police, and military apparatus during the Cold War era. However, transitional justice efforts have been and continue to be conducted, including the new 2018 Transitional Justice Commission (TJC). But this is all a red herring (for the purposes of “independence”).
The majority of people, regardless of political affiliation, did not participate in the repression. At most, several thousand were under the government's command, well under 0.5% of the population. Is it fair to demonize a whole generation of people based on a few bad apples?
Despite harsh repression, the Kuomintang (KMT) era enabled stability and economic growth, the “Taiwan Miracle,” peaking at 8-10% annual GDP growth. It built the economic foundation for our current technological advancements, safeguarded our values against external threats, as well as investing significantly in education and healthcare.
However, as we know, “Power corrupts absolutely.”
It is now DPP’s turn to wield their newfound power after achieving a third consecutive term. Their use of power, albeit softer, is much more effective and pervasive. They are able to control the narrative and influence not only domestic but international perspectives.
The educational reforms in Taiwan mirror troubling trends in Western democracies, where curricula are revised to promote specific ideologies, potentially co-opting the youth into becoming compliant voters.
A Tale of Two Nations
While important, the DPP’s focus on social issues, such as LGBTQ rights, often overshadows pressing economic concerns.
Economic inequality has worsened, with wealth increasingly concentrated among a few, leaving young people struggling to afford housing and a decent standard of living.
Furthermore, the immigration situation, particularly regarding Southeast Asian workers, is an under-discussed issue that may lead to societal challenges in the future.
As Taiwan becomes more multicultural, the need for a cohesive national identity that respects all backgrounds while honoring our heritage becomes even more crucial.
As a classical liberal, I am concerned about the DPP's governance approach. Their political platform emphasizes a clear separation from China, which complicates cross-strait relations, undermines potential diplomatic engagements, and contributes to regional destabilization.
On the surface, it is easy to celebrate Taiwan's technological advancements and economic growth—just check the fast rise of AI and other tech stocks. Yet, suppose you were to do a closer look and actually live in Taiwan as an ethnic local or just dive a bit deeper into the statistics.
For example, the economic gains have been disproportionately distributed, with wealth increasingly concentrated in the few.
Not only has the wealth generated by the tech boom not translated into widespread benefits for the population, but housing prices have skyrocketed, making homeownership increasingly unattainable for young people.
Disillusionment with the label "Taiwanese" stems from a broader concern about the direction in which the nation is heading. I believe that a genuine commitment to the liberal values of the Republic of China (Taiwan), rooted in our shared history, is essential to navigating the complexities of our current geopolitical landscape.
A Beacon of Hope
The complexity and evolving nature of "Taiwanese" identity amidst a backdrop of geopolitical tensions and socioeconomic challenges cannot be understated. However, the DPP's current trajectory raises concerns about the future of democracy in Taiwan and the potential for meaningful engagement with China.
While I recognize the importance of self-determination, true progress must honor and integrate our historical and cultural roots. Confucian, Taoist, and Buddhist ideals can and should coexist with Enlightenment values and Western liberalism without resorting to de-sinicization.
As we navigate these complex issues, I urge my fellow citizens and leaders to reflect on our shared history and values.
As informed global citizens, it is crucial for us to foster an open dialogue that respects diverse perspectives and encourages critical thinking.
Returning to the issue of "Chinese Taipei" and the Olympics, rather than being seen as a symbol of shame or injustice, "Chinese Taipei" should be regarded as a source of hope for Taiwan and the entire Chinese diaspora.
Moreover, Taiwan should serve as a hub for Overseas Chinese who want to preserve their heritage. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is already a symbol of freedom and liberalism in practice.
If our nation is to truly embrace diversity and classical liberal values, we should call on the diaspora to join us in creating a more prosperous future.
We must strive for a Taiwan that honors its past while embracing an inclusive future—open to all who share our values—working together towards the common good of the “Republic of China” (Taiwan).
Further Reading:
Desinicizing Taiwan: The Making of a Democratic National Identity
From Taiwanisation to De-sinification,
Taiwan’s Immigration Policy: support, concerns and challenges – Taiwan Insight