Chen Mingzhong – A Taiwanese Person’s Path For ‘Left-Unification’
By: Lu Zhenghui (呂正惠) and Chen Yizhong (陈宜中/陳宜中) Translated by: R.Huang
Original article link: https://www.guancha.cn/LvZhengHui/2014_04_17_222810.shtml
Alternative link: http://www.taihainet.com/news/twnews/twls/2008-06-27/268028.html)
26 June, 2008
Mr. Chen Mingzhong (陈明忠/陳明忠) was born in 1929 in Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung (高雄), Gangshan district (冈山/岡山), Taiwan, into a big landlord family. During the period of Japanese occupation, after successfully passing the entrance exam into the Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung Municipal Senior Highschool (高雄中学/高雄中學), due to being bullied and harassed by other Japanese students during Mr. Chen’s studies, it was only then that he fully become conscious of the fact that he himself was a Chinese person, and thus beginning his ‘Resistance Against Japan’. After graduating and becoming forcibly enlisted by the Japanese Imperial Army, Mr. Chen was forced to work in the military defence lines. However, due to an escape attempt, Mr. Chen was caught and placed into detention. After ‘Guangfu’ (光复/光復) [1], he went to study at the Taizhong/Taichung Agricultural University (台中农学院/台中農學院) (which what is now Zhong Xing/Chung Hsing University (中兴大学/中興大學)). During the ‘February 28’ (二二八) Incident [2], he directly took part in the uprising contingents, and was part of the Two-Seven Dare-to-Die Corps (二七部队的敢死队/二七部隊的敢死隊) [3], led by Xie Xuehong (谢雪红/謝雪紅) [4]. He was the last person to leave during the Wulanqiao Battle (乌栏桥战役/烏栏橋戰役).
In 1950, due to the White Terror (白色恐怖) [5], Mr. Chen was arrested. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison. In 1960, he was released. Due to his natural talents in chemistry, he begun to work at a pharmaceutical company, and later becoming a factory manager. In 1976, he was arrested, sentenced and imprisoned again, being accused of having been directed by the Communist Party of China (CPC) to launch a rebellion in Taiwan. During his sentence he was cruelly abused and tortured – but was still nevertheless unyielding in his principles. After the continuous appeals for release by the ‘Chinese Diaspora Students for the Protection of Diaoyu Islands’ (海外保钓学生/海外保釣學生) [6] and other amnesty organisations, his sentence was finally reduced from the original death sentence to 15-year imprisonment, finally being released in 1987 under medical parole. Mr. Chen and Mr. Lin Shuyang （林书扬/林書揚) [7](who were imprisoned for a total of 34 years and 7 months, one of the longest years of political imprisonment in modern Taiwan history) have become the two most respected figures for the ‘Left-Unification’ (左统/左統) (Left Wing + Unification) [8] movement in Taiwan.
After the Guomindang/Kuomintang (KMT) had settled in Taiwan, and losing the hearts of the people, the anti-KMT bloc in Taiwan gradually made a left turn, with sympathies turning towards the Communist Party. During the 1950s, that is the period of White Terror rule, the main goal for the KMT was to eliminate all forces of resistance. In the left-wing bloc, nearly a third were executed, and the remaining two-thirds were imprisoned, and very few leaders had survived. Those leaders who had survived and those who had participated in the movement, after being released from prison, have now become the ‘forgotten group’ in Taiwan, living in the vast shadows of Taiwanese society. [9] Merely just having to live has become a problem for those who managed to survive. In 1987, after Mr. Chen’s second time of being released, he established the ‘The Mutual Aid Society for Political Victims of Taiwan’ (台湾政治受难者互助会/台灣政治難者互助會) [10]. Yet this was precisely the same time when the Taiwan separatist movement was slowly forming and gaining traction in the mainstream – the left-pro-unification bloc would no longer have the same level of influence it once had. After this, they established a second organisation, ‘The China Unification Federation’ (中国统一联盟/中國統一聯盟) [11] (a united front of both left-pro-unification, nationalists and other non-left wing pro-unification figures), and as well as a ‘Labour Party’ (劳动党/勞動黨) [12], but these all produced lacklustre results.
One of the main problems for many of these veteran left-wing pro-unification people is that it is very difficult within the current political climate to openly express their views to the wider public. Despite the efforts to understand the experiences they had while being imprisoned, and the things that happened during this time, there exists a significant language barrier. Many of these figures, for half of their lives had received their education in Japanese, and the opportunity for them to receive a proper education in Chinese was highly difficult, as many were imprisoned – at the very least – for 10 years, and especially during the golden period where of which this opportunity was still accessible. The two most infamous figures of this movement, Mr. Yang Shuyang, and Chen Mingzhong, while they can speak Mandarin, write in Chinese, there exists a significant difference between the accents of their spoken Mandarin and the Mandarin that is spoken in Taiwan today. For many years, very few could understand their views, leading them to feel a great deal of helplessness.
Below is an interview that contains one of the first and most complete expressions of the views of someone who was part of the 1950s anti-KMT left. This interview touches upon Taiwan, modern China, socialism and other important topics, and a full expression of the views, opinions and sentiments held by the likes of Mr. Chen and the many other forgotten veteran left-wing revolutionaries in Taiwan – for each and every one to think about, reflect, discuss or refer to. This should be something of far-reaching value for many.
‘February 28th’ is not the tragedy of the Taiwanese people
Q: Mr. Chen, your experience can be said to be a very unique one. We don’t have any questions set up in advance for our interview, so you can talk about whatever you like whenever you like. So please, begin when you feel it is suitable to do so.
Mr Chen: I would like to begin with ‘The Tragedy of the Taiwanese People’. Today, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has consistently maintained that ‘February 28th’ is the greatest tragedy of the Taiwanese people. This is fundamentally incorrect. From my experience, Taiwanese people during the period of being subjected Japanese occupation, we received absolutely no respect from them in any form – this is the true ‘Tragedy of the Taiwanese people’. It was during this time when I become conscious of the fact that I was a so-called ‘Qing Slave’ (清国奴) [13], a Chinese person, that I began my resistance; it was at this moment that my life had completely changed.
During the period of Japanese occupation, we Taiwanese people were second-class citizens. My thoughts, beliefs and views began to change at around when I started my senior year studies at the Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung Senior Highschool. During this time our class had 50 people, with only 10 who were Taiwanese. The rest were all Japanese. I would constantly be referred to them by the label of a ‘Qing Slave’. I would also get hit and beat up by them for no reason. I didn’t understand why. It was after these instances that I knew that I was not Japanese. One incident that really had an impact on me was when I was fighting with this Japanese student. Right after, about 10-15 Japanese students came in a group to beat me up, and during the end, one of them said: ‘You can fight with the mainland people (Japanese people) [14], but you cannot win.’ I thought it was said to treat everyone equally? I always thought I was Japanese, yet these people said that when a Taiwanese person and Japanese person fights, the Taiwanese person cannot win – what is this about? My mind was gradually drowned in confusion. It was about two to three years after that I became conscious that I was in fact not a Japanese person, but a Chinese person. It was then that my thoughts had completely changed.
To be a Taiwanese person during the period of Japanese occupation, truly, you received absolutely no dignity or respect. We were second-class citizens, or even third-class citizens (if we were to include the Ryukyu people [15]). My family was a big landlord family, so compared to the lives of many other Taiwanese people, our lives were slightly better. Every day our family had milk to drink. But our generally well-off class background was irrelevant, as in front of the Japanese, we received absolutely zero dignity or respect. We weren’t human to them. And it was then that I began to know how important dignity was. Just like how other tenant farmers had no dignity in front of me, and just like how I had no dignity when in front of the Japanese, it was then that I began my resistance against the Japanese occupiers, and it was also then that I gradually became a socialist. All Taiwanese people, in front of the Japanese were fundamentally despised upon. Were we Taiwanese people even human? Is this not the true ‘Tragedy of the Taiwanese People’?
Q: What is your own personal view of the ‘February 28th’ Incident?
Mr. Chen: ‘February 28th’ was a resistance against the despotism of the KMT. ‘To rebel is a right’ (造反有理), this is a peoples’ philosophy. February 28th was resistance, it was not a tragedy.
Q: Your resistance against the Japanese, and your resistance against the KMT government; what are the fundamental differences between the two?
Mr. Chen: Of course both are not the same! The Japanese are foreigners, they despise and look down upon all Chinese people (including we Taiwanese people); the KMT is a Chinese government, they are not a good government, so our resistance is towards a bad government of our own. The group that settled from the mainland into Taiwan after the Civil War had both good and bad people. One of my teachers at the Taichung Agricultural University was a Waisheng person [16]. The university’s principal was also one too. Both of them were very knowledgeable, very open – I greatly respected them both. I not only not opposed them, but also protected them.
During this time, I never viewed ‘February 28th’ as a conflict between provincial identities. What we were resisting was corrupt officials. But the corrupt people were nowhere to be seen, as they had completely hidden away. In fact, it was precisely due to this that innocent Waisheng people had become false targets; some Waisheng people were assaulted and beaten up, and some were even killed. We must understand, that the essence of ‘February 28th’ was not a conflict of provincial identity, but rather an opposition against KMT despotism. It was precisely a conflict between the state and the people.
In regards to ‘February 28th’, the DPP has concertedly created this kind of artificial impression, that during ‘February 28th’ the KMT was purposely engaging and perpetrating a massacre on Taiwan. [17] From my understanding, the deaths from ‘February 28th’ sit at around 1000 (over or under). In 1950 when I was arrested and imprisoned for the first time, I talked with the many fellow victims who were from all over Taiwan, to fully understand the situation in other regions. According to this little survey, the amount people that were killed during the incident were really just approximately around the aforementioned number. After, the DPP had established the ‘Commission of Reparations for the February 28th Incident’ (二二八赔偿委员会/二二八賠償委員會), with a huge expense. Even today, the amount of money still has not been completely received. At least from what I’ve heard, there have been no more than 1000 people who have gone to seek reparations due to death or damages, and additionally, within this number, some of the victim families are from the White Terror and not the February 28th Incident. The DPP has not made any of this information public and is still continuing to manipulate the people of Taiwan. It really shouldn’t be like this.
The White Terror on the other hand was the KMT’s crackdown on the people, it was indiscriminate regardless of provincial identity.
Q: Some Taiwanese separatists say that ‘February 28th’ was when the Taiwan separatist movement begun. Do you disagree?
Mr. Chen: A lot of people (especially the Taiwan separatist bloc) say that ‘February 28th’ was when the Taiwan separatist movement begun. I completely disagree with this narrative.
After Guangfu, we Taiwanese people warmly welcomed back the troops of the motherland, and one could see the palpable disgust felt towards the era of Japanese occupation. However, after seeing just how bad this motherland government was, we started to question, what do we do? Very quickly, we knew that now there are two motherlands: one was the CPC Red Motherland; and the other was the KMT White Motherland. And the one that was oppressing us was the KMT, the White Motherland. It was after this that consciousness amongst the youth of Taiwan gradually begun drifting left; sympathies towards the Communists grew greatly. Of course, there were also some people like me who already became a socialist during the period of Japanese occupation; but there were also many that due to their opposition against KMT despotism that they shifted to the Communists. So as such we can see that within the Communist bloc in Taiwan, there were two kinds of people; one was the people who had already become socialists during Japanese occupation, and the second being the ones who drifted left after ‘February 28th’ and their dissatisfaction with the KMT. Within the latter, there were some who due to their opposition against the KMT had become pro-separatist – and Lee Teng-hui (李登辉/李登輝) [18] is the prime example of this tendency. Nevertheless, many drifted left but did not support separatism. According to the now publicly available archive documents in the garrison quarters of Taiwan, before and during the ‘February 28th’ incident, underground CPC members in Taiwan numbered only just about 72 people; however, after the White Terror and the ensuing crackdowns, CPC members numbered to about 1300 people. From this comparison, we can see that it was after the ‘February 28th’ incident that the youth started turning leftward.
Q: How do you view the White Terror?
Mr Chen: After the Civil War, the KMT lost and retreated to Taiwan. During this time, we viewed that the ‘Liberation of Taiwan’ was a sooner or later thing. Yet no one thought that in 1950 when the Korean War broke out, the U.S would brazenly bring its Seventh Fleet into the Taiwan Strait and violate Chinese sovereignty. [19] With the protection of the U.S, the KMT was reassured, and begun unleashing mass arrests and crackdowns, massacring those who were opposed to them, especially the underground CPC members.
I want to emphasise, the White Terror, was the KMT’s rule by terror on the people. If one was suspected to be against the KMT, irrespective of what provincial identity you were, and irrespective of if there was any evidence or not, you would be arrested. Before I was arrested, probably around May or June 1950, a newspaper reported that the underground party leader Tsai Xiaogan (蔡孝干) [20] had surrendered, and called upon all underground party members to come clean. During this time, Tsai Xiaogan in total provided about 900 underground Communist Party members, primarily those who were working in the Taiwan Province Party Work Committee System (台湾省工作委员会/台灣工作委員會) [21], and added with other divisions such as intelligence. About 1300 party members had suffered under the White Terror. But another focal point is also that according to Xie Chongmin’s (谢聪敏/謝聰敏) [22] reference to the Legislative Yuan archive documents, in total the amount of people arrested during the White Terror amounted to about 140,000-150,00 people, and we can see that majority were falsely accused.
Another thing is that according to Fan Yun (范云/範雲) of the Department of Sociology in the National Taiwan University (台大社会系/台大社會系) amongst the 140,000-150,000 victims, about 40 percent were Waisheng people. At this time, Waisheng people only approximated to about 15 percent of Taiwan’s total population, and obviously the amount of Waisheng victims during the White Terror was very high. So as such, the White Terror is not only a tragedy for Bensheng people, but is even more for the Waisheng people. The so-called ‘Tragedy of the Taiwanese People’ comes from a foreign regime that is controlling and propagating the pan-Green narrative – it fundamentally does not fit with the reality, facts and history. To speak more accurately, the White Terror should be seen as ‘The White Ruling Class’s Terrorisation of the People’ – it is precisely the KMT’s rule of terror over all Taiwanese people (including Waisheng people), and has absolutely nothing to do with conflicts between provincial identities.
Political attitudes shift leftward
Q: Mr Chen, if you do not mind, can you discuss more in detail how ‘February 28th’ changed your own personal political views?
Mr. Chen: Before and after ‘February 28th’ I had already completely lost all hope towards the KMT regime. But this changed upon knowing that the mainland has a Communist Party and is truly a revolutionary government. After this I knew about Mao Zedong’s ‘New Democracy’ (新民主主义/新民主主義). Mao Zedong said, China was in a semi-feudal and semi-colonised (半封建、半殖民) period. On one side, we are under the rule by feudal traditions, for example, China still had lots of big landlords, with many tenant famers that worked all year round, all on the verge of starvation. And on the other side, we were subjugated by imperialist invasion, subjected to bullying by foreign powers, with no national dignity; for example, the Chinese people of Taiwan have always been bullied by the Japanese people. Mao Zedong, knowing that even though that the class composition of China consisted of the peasantry, proletariat, petite-bourgeois intellectuals, national capitalists, he proposed that these four classes should all be united together, to one strike down on the old feudal landlords, and on the other strike down on all comprador bourgeoisie that have been brought out by foreign powers – and it is only though this that China would have a future. It was through this I had an epiphany of sorts. It was at this moment I came to understand that the KMT regime is essentially a regime that represented the big feudal landlords and the comprador bourgeoisie; and they are the minority of China, and that their continuous existence purely depends on the support from the U.S imperialists, to wantonly bully the majority of Chinese people (including Taiwanese people). I had become fully aware of why the KMT used such brutal and sanguinarias methods to keep hold over Taiwan; and the same time I understood why the ‘February 28th’ resistance had failed – it is because we did not fully understand the true conditions of China. As such I drifted into the position of supporting a ‘New Democratic Revolution’ (新民主革命).
After ‘February 28th’, many Taiwanese youth had been struck with this new form of consciousness. For example, my school captain, Zhong Heming (钟和鸣/鐘和鳴) when I was studying at Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung Senior Highschool, after graduating he had passed the entrance exam for the National Taiwan University. But he instead had chosen to abandon this and to not enrol, and instead chose -- with a bunch of friends – to smuggle into the mainland, to participate in the War Against Japanese Aggression. After Guangfu, he returned back to Taiwan and became the principal of Jilong/Keelung Senior Highschool (基隆中学/基隆中學). After ‘February 28th’, and it is because he became conscious, that to save China is to participate in revolution – and it was at this time that he joined the underground Communist organisations in Taiwan. Sadly, he got imprisoned. During this time martial law was not implemented yet, so he was sentenced under a probation order – but he was disobedient and resistant, and ended up getting executed by the KMT.
I must also say another thing. The ‘Taiwan Relations Act’ (台湾关系法/台灣關係法) [23] is a U.S’ domestic law, and yet the DPP thinks that this not something to be ashamed about; they fully accept the U.S’ extraterritorial reach; the KMT too does not think this is something of shame. In fact, both are actually the same; they are both ‘the turtle with no tail laughs at the turtle also with no tail’ (‘龟笑鳖无尾’/ ‘龜笑鳖無尾’) [24]; both are slaves of the U.S. When has Taiwan truly had Guangfu? Before we were Japan’s colony, and now we are the U.S’ colony.
Do you guys know this? During the martial law period of Taiwan, many of the separatists were never placed under the death sentence, because the U.S did not allow the KMT to sentence them under such. The most infamous example of this was Yunlin County’s (云林县/雲林縣) Su Dongqi (苏东启/蘇東啟). [25] He wanted to launch a conspiracy against the KMT and devised a plan to grab weapons from a military aid warehouse. He first discussed this plan with Gao Yushu (高玉树/高玉樹) [26], but Gao Yushu knew that this would not work, so he secretly reported Su Dongqi; so, when Su Dongqi went to grab the weapons, he was arrested, but he was never executed, and was sentenced to life-imprisonment instead. There was only one Taiwan separatist that was executed during this period, and that is the only exception – all the other Taiwan separatists were never executed.
During this period, the Taiwan separatists were mainly Taiwanese people (Bensheng people), yet the KMT never killed them. If the KMT regime’s main enemy were Taiwanese people or Bensheng people, then why didn’t they kill them? In contrast, when the KMT was cracking down on underground Communist organisations and arresting Communists or Communist sympathetic people in Taiwan, they were never this soft handed, and were actually particularly brutal; they killed them without any hesitation. What does this say? Would you really try to call this a so-called ‘provincial conflict’?
Another thing, during the 1990s, when Taiwan separatist sentiments were at its all time high, the DPP left no mercy with their malicious chastising of the left-wing pro-unification figures, regardless of what provincial identity they were; the KMT too was also like this. At this point, the contradictions between the DPP and KMT are an internal contradiction; [27] and their common enemy has always been the left-wing pro-unification people. Because both the DPP and KMT are the dogs of the U.S, both of them do not stand for China. Taiwan on the surface has achieved Guangfu, but yet in reality it has only became re-colonised again, but this time by the U.S – this is the true post-war tragedy of the Taiwanese people, just like how before, the tragedy of the Taiwanese people was during Japanese occupation. Throughout my whole life in Taiwan, I have never truly lived as a real Chinese person, and this is my own personal tragedy.
The Taiwan separatist movement has its roots in the landlord class and its descendants
Q: The KMT regime still has another layer to it. During these years, Old Jiang (Chiang) [28] brought all the Waisheng elites to rule Taiwan, and this had laid the seeds for provincial conflict, and after this has led to the DPP and Taiwan separatists to continuously manipulate and bring up these forms of identity politics. Can you please delve a bit deeper into the origins the Taiwan separatist movement?
Mr. Chen: Before we spoke that ‘February 28th’ has always been distorted as being the origins of the Taiwan separatist movement. I think even the basic time frame of this narrative is incorrect. ‘February 28th’ took place in 1947; and the first Taiwan separatist to commit a political crime was around 1960. Before 1960, it was only Liao Wenyi (廖文毅) [29] and few other Taiwan separatists that were political prisoners; all the others all wore red hats. [30] Wang Yude (王育德) [31]established the ‘Taiwan YMCA’ (台湾青年会/台灣青年會) in Japan at around 1960; the U.S-Taiwan Separatist Alliance was forged in 1970 – this was already many years after ‘February 28th’. Again, after the ‘February 28th’ incident, the Taiwanese youth shifted left, but they did not necessarily shift to Taiwan separatism.
I am by the position that ‘Taiwan separatism’ came to incarnation during the land reform period in Taiwan. [32] Of course, land reforms are necessary, but standing in the perspective of the land lord, their views would very different. My own family were landlords, and many of my relatives were also landlords. What they view is that: ‘Since the KMT never did the ‘tiller has his own field’ (耕者有其田) on the mainland, after retreating to Taiwan, they begun it on Taiwanese people with the purpose to destroy Taiwan’s landlord class.’
At the same time, the price of land acquisition was very different. Taiwan has a two-phase rice harvesting season [33]; during the middle is when the grains are planted. But the method of calculating land acquisition was also based on the two-phase rice harvesting seasons, and the miscellaneous crops that were planted during the intermediary period were not counted. The KMT on one head used the grain prices of the late-War period as the standard for calculation, so the land was very cheap; and on the other side, the stocks of the Big Four companies in Taiwan (Taiwan Cement, Taiwan Agriculture and Forestry, Taiwan Mining and Taiwan Fertiliser) (台泥、台湾农林/台灣農林、台矿/台礦、台肥) that were only worth one or two yuan, were all overestimated to be worth 10 yuan, became compensation. So going back and forth, the original 20 yuan had become 1 yuan, so of course many people were not satisfied.
The landlords were not satisfied, but they could not do anything about it. Because of the White Terror, any opposition towards the KMT would lead to one being arrested, so no one could say anything. But because these landlords were generally well-off, many sent their children to study abroad in Japan and the U.S. Amongst the foreign Taiwan separatist figures, the Tainan No. 1 Senior High School (台南一中) and Jiayi/Chiayi Senior High School (嘉义中学/嘉義中學) have the most alumni; over half of the cadres who support Taiwan separatism in Taiwan all graduated from these two schools. It’s because the best land is in the Jianan Plains （嘉南平原）[34], and many children of the Jianan/Chianan landlords became the primary force of Taiwan separatism.
One of the best examples of this is Lin Xiantang (林献堂/林獻堂). [35] During the period of Japanese occupation, he led the ‘Taiwan Cultural Committee for the Resistance Against Colonial Rule’ (台湾文化协会反抗殖民统治/台灣文化協會反抗殖民統治) [36]; he once said while visiting the mainland, ‘I have finally returned to the motherland’, and after coming back to Taiwan, he was hit in the face and berated by a Japanese hooligan in public. Such an unyielding patriot, once his class interests were harmed, they would just simply abandon their national consciousness all together. After the land reforms in Taiwan, Li Xiantang ran to Japan, and supported Qiu Yonghan (邱永汉/邱永漢) [37] to push for Taiwan separatism. This is also why that since Taiwan had its first county mayor elections, the first county mayor outside of the KMT was in Tainan, with the election of Ye Tinggui (叶廷珪/葉廷珪) [38], and this is why Tainan has always been the landlord’s cave.
Another thing is that as the landlords were subject ‘the tiller has his land’ and had received stocks of the Big Four as compensation, many soon shifted to develop and running small-medium sized enterprises, and naturally the political force of these landlords was gradually formed. The people in the Taiwan interior [39] who run these small-medium sized enterprises of Taiwan all have direct links to the Taiwan separatist organisations in the U.S, and this is how Taiwan separatist sentiments began to grow. So, we can see that the Taiwan separatist movement was in fact the result of Taiwan’s land reform, and is also a purely landlord-led movement. This conclusion is derived from my long-years of research, and I too was the first person to say this. Regrettably, a lot the raw data I had collected during my years of research has been lost, but I think this topic should undergo proper research in the future.
Q: How do you view the current situation in Taiwan?
Chen: I want to do some criticism of the pan-blue bloc. At first, I think their deification of the Two Jiangs (Chiangs) [40] is highly inappropriate, and many victims of the ‘February 28th’ Incident and the White Terror of the 1950s, to this day cannot forgive the Two Jiangs (Chiangs). Again, I find it very unacceptable that they have deified them. Every time I see them go to Ci Hu (慈湖) [41]; it almost feels analogous to seeing the Japanese leaders going to the Yasukuni Shrine. There really doesn’t seem like there is any difference between the two.
The rule by the Jiang (Chiang) family over Taiwan has numerous points of controversy. For example, they were the ones that first invited U.S influence into the island, and placed Taiwan under so-called U.S ‘protection’, which has been one of the fundamental culprits for confrontation between the two straits. U.S soldiers in Taiwan all have diplomatic immunity, and this in itself as is a direct re-enactment of what took place during the late-Qing and it’s ‘concessions’, but now it’s the ‘extraterritorial laws’. Another thing is that they also accepted U.S domestic laws such as the ‘Taiwan Relations Act’ as legitimate; to let it be used on Taiwan, which has only forced Taiwan to merely become a U.S vassal; to willingly be the minions of the U.S and to contain and halt the development of the motherland.
Another thing that was the result of the rule by Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kai-shek) over Taiwan is that it has produced the ‘provincial complex’. It was because of the rule of Jiang’s (Chiang’s) regime that the ‘provincial complex’ fermented, leading to the revival of the ‘Huangminhua Movement’ (皇民化运动/皇民化運動) [42], causing ‘Taiwanese consciousness’ to became alienated into ‘Taiwan separatist consciousness’. In other ways, the causes of ‘Taiwan separatist consciousness’ and how the Taiwan separatists were allowed to proliferate so far in the first place really can be attributed to the consequences brought by Jiang’s regime. The pan-blue bloc has never even thought about this, and has not even bothered to examine this. Just like how they worship the Two Jiangs (Chiang), they don’t really care one bit about the sentiments and feelings held by Bensheng people in Taiwan.
The other thing that I find absolutely deplorable about the pan-blue bloc is that they support so-called ‘One China; One Taiwan’, going by the position that the Republic of China is an independent country, and that they are not even willing -- and do not dare -- to call themselves China. I find this disgraceful. That the Republic of China is somehow an independent country, how do you even make sense of this? The Republic of China after retreating to Taiwan, the sovereignty of China of course rests in the People’s Republic of China. Sovereignty is not something that goes by what one says is or not, but rather if it is acknowledged by the world. Taiwan and the Jiang (Chiang) family regime, even though it had land, people and a state, it however was not sovereign, and therefore cannot be called a sovereign country. The only appropriate term for would be a ‘regional government’, ‘renegade government’ or ‘government in exile’.
And the thing is that these pan-blue people always think that Taiwan is more advanced than the mainland, and because of their anti-communism, they do not want to reunify. They want to eternally ‘maintain the current situation’. The times are changing, and conditions too are also changing; the current state cannot be maintained forever. The Chinese people of Taiwan should stop obeying the U.S. In reality, in international law and with everything else, there is only one China, and the mainland and Taiwan are all part of this one China. The ‘sovereignty’ of China should be shared between both straits; and the ‘right to self-government’ are the rights that Taiwanese people ‘exclusively enjoy’ – this is basically what One Country Two Systems (一国两制/一國兩制) is! Under these circumstances, the mainland maintains that it will not tax, send officials, or even send troops into Taiwan, why is this wrong? Why keep rejecting it? I think the there is virtually no difference between the pan-blue’s ‘One China, One Taiwan’ and the pan-Green Taiwan separatism. Because ultimately the primary interests of these two parties have always that they want power over the island of Taiwan. They have never really genuinely placed the interests of the Taiwanese people and Taiwan into consideration.
How self-governing is achieved
Q: ‘One Country, Two Systems’ has continuously been demonised in Taiwan. ‘Sovereignty is shared, self-governing is exclusive’ (主权共享、治权独享/主權共享, 治權獨享) [43] this concept actually may be acceptable for even the Taiwan separatists. But yet within the international context, this becomes a highly sensitive and complex issue, and it is precisely because it directly interacts with Taiwan’s political status under the One China framework that makes Taiwan such a controversial and sensitive issue. With regards to this topic, can you please detail a bit about your views on it?
Mr. Chen: The attitude of the mainland, under the One China principle, is that the two straits can always reconcile differences through talks. In other words, country, and even national flag can all be discussed. The problem is that both the pan-blue and pan-green parties all completely reject the ‘One China principle’, so basically talks between the two straits is impossible. If Taiwan rejects the most basic thing, that is the ‘One China Principle’, then how would mainland launch talks in the first place? Another thing, talks and power are also related. Taiwan ideally would choose the time that is most beneficial for its interests to engage in talks, as that would hold more strength to what is said. Yet in reality, don’t you think that Taiwan has already this opportunity to engage in talks completely slip by?
Q. To confront the impasse between the two straits, what do you think is the best way to break through this?
Mr. Chen: I honestly think it really is an issue of mentality. Taiwan always thinks that the mainland is poorer than Taiwan, or less developed. Yet currently and in the future of cross-strait relations, the most pivotal thing remains: Will Taiwan recognise the objective reality of ‘China’s rise’? Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian (陈水扁/陳水扁) [44]all look down upon the mainland. But if they keep up this kind of attitude, rejecting the real development of the mainland, be unwilling to cooperate, engage in talks with the mainland, then Taiwan is going to be at a loss again.
From my understanding, the mainland through revolution, had experienced a lot of difficulties, hardship and did admittedly make many mistakes, but it was finally during the 1990s that she would begin to develop and rise. In fact, the development of the mainland precisely has always been the dream for our old-left in Taiwan. To speak again, during those years, the people who settled in Taiwan were even poorer than us Taiwanese [45], even more corrupt, and were also looked down upon by Taiwanese people. After the Taiwan economy received U.S assistance, Taiwan had quickly developed; yet after this, the rich Waisheng people became just like the rich Bensheng ren, they all look down upon the mainland. Actually, it is mainly due to how big the mainland is, and the many existing problems, and as well as added with being essentially encircled by the U.S, that its development has been comparably slow during previous years. It is mainly because that they are slower, a bit poorer you, that Taiwanese people look down upon them. Now, they are beginning to rise and develop more quickly, having a far brighter and greater future than you, and you just completely reject them. I think this is the primary essence of the relationships between the two straits. Taiwanese people (including both Bensheng people and Waisheng people) should really do some self-reflection. Stop trying to think of yourself as some victim.
The Taiwan Unification Bloc also doesn’t really understand the mainland
Q: Listening to what you have said, I want to hear – for your more left-wing perspective – on the current state of the mainland, and as well as views on the Chinese revolution.
Mr. Chen: Taiwan has always thought that the mainland is poorer than Taiwan, but in reality, right now, the mainland is beginning to have some cash in its hands. Aren’t we always talking about ‘Harmonious Society’ these days? This is an expression of how the mainland has the capacity to change itself through the internal. For example, we used to hear how ‘let a portion of people get rich’, now we are seeing the emphasis on how ‘everyone should get rich’; before it was only the mentioning of ‘effectiveness’, and no mentioning of ‘equity’; before the economy was GDP and GDP only, now there is an emphasis of ‘placing people first’. Hu Jintao’s noting of a ‘harmonious society’ and ‘scientific development’, all of these sorts of concepts, expresses that the mainland is already beginning to correct and rectify the issues and problems that have been caused by the importation of capitalistic production methods.
I think the way in which we have narrated the concept of ‘One Country Two Systems’ is incorrect. It assumes that there is this kind of dichotomy, that the mainland is a socialist society and that Taiwan is a capitalist society, and so that under unification both parties can still do their own things. Actually, in my view, I think the current stage of development in the mainland is close to what Lenin said as the ‘special transition period’; it is the necessary step before socialism of ‘state capitalism’. This is led by a Communist Party, to unleash the productive forces, to use the capitalistic productive forces to one’s own advantage, in order to realise the final aim of socialism, though right now we are still not yet at this stage yet. A lot of my Taiwan left-unification comrades do not understand this. Lenin said, ‘Socialism in the Federation of Soviet Socialist Republics, is not about immediately realising socialism, but rather an expression that we must continue to walk the socialist path with the aim of socialism.’ China’s revolution can be split into two periods; one is the New Democracy period, and the other is the socialist period. It is because that China did not possess the material and cultural conditions for socialism that China must experience the period of New Democracy, to develop the conditions that allow the realisation of socialism, and after, fully entering the era of socialism.
Q: China’s revolutionary history is quite complex. There has been the Cultural Revolution and Reform and Open Up. These two events have great differences. What is your view on this?
Mr. Chen: This is such a good question. I would like to first speak about my own personal experience. 1976, not long after I was arrested for the second time, the Cultural Revolution had ended. I read the ‘Central Daily’ [46], and their ‘exposing’ of the ‘truth’. At first, I didn’t really believe it, and thought it was the KMT making things up. But then I found some of the ‘scar literature’ [47] that we published in the paper, and realised that it was all real. I became very pained. If a revolution were to become like this, were my contributions to the revolution worthless? I had been through so much hardship, as long as the revolution can be realised it doesn’t matter. But if the revolution is done wrong, was all of this just done in vain? It was this point that pained me for a long time.
I went back and forth on this problem, and I gradually organised my thoughts together. In this particular issue I agree with Liu Shaoqi, in that I am a two-stage revolutionist. I think that a country needs to unleash the capitalist productive forces in order to rapidly modernise, but always with the fundamental aim of socialism; similar to what Deng Xiaoping said with ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics.’ Without capitalistic productive forces, one just can’t modernise, and it can’t let the Chinese people have wealth, and it would be impossible for China to truly strengthen itself. If we were to be like this, then socialism will be impossible.
Q. The mainland has had numerous ‘rights-protection’ (维权) movements. They are not anti-government, but rather a protest against the inequality and unjust elements that have been brought in with the capitalistic elements. In regards to these movements by the more vulnerable people, to the pro-unification people choose to not speak of this? Or do they have different perspectives on this? [48]
Mr. Chen: In reality, I must admit, many of the pro-unification people in Taiwan don’t really understand the mainland as well. But this is not really their fault, but rather how that there is a barrier and lack of information. Like let’s say if Phoenix TV was allowed to enter Taiwan, then perhaps Taiwanese people would have a better grasp on the actual realities of the mainland – but they aren’t. So, to be frank, it’s not that we are not willing to speak on these sorts of matters, but rather it’s that we do not fully understand them. There is not enough resources, platforms or information that allows to have a cohesive and fruitful discussion. We can only just view these situations at a distance. But obviously we would never go along with Western media or Taiwanese media and their false reporting’s, that is certain. We really do care about the mainland, but the way we care about it is different.
In the recent Seventeenth National Congress, ‘Party Democracy’ is already being implemented. We can see that the mainland is serious about political reforms. But to be honest we do not really know what the long-term plan is. To never reform the system would be silly, we all care about these issues, but we really shouldn’t reduce ourselves to calibre of Western media.
Regardless of how deep hostilities are, it can always be reconciled
Q: During these two years, pan-green figures have constantly talked about so-called ‘transformative justice’(转型正义/轉型正義). You yourself have experienced ‘February 28th’, the White Terror, and have been arrested by the KMT so many times and for so long, and in addition to having been tortured during your time in prison – truly, after all these troubles and hardships, it’s miracle that you have still managed to live to see today. What do you think that after having been essentially a direct victim of these hardships and oppression, do you think that requesting the perpetrators to fully reveal the ‘truth’, is a good method?
Mr. Chen: What sort of ‘transformative justice’? Even if it’s just settling the leftover trauma, it must be done thoroughly! I think truly the DPP does not have any political knowledge or wisdom at all. The DPP now suddenly wants to settle the leftovers; all of the Waisheng people are uneasy now -- how would they work together with the DPP now to push for Taiwan separatism? Is Taiwan separatism really just a fraud? I think these sorts of things that are being pushed by the DPP is just manipulating provincial conflict, which is absolutely hopeless.
I was imprisoned by the KMT for 21 years. My wife for 10. My uncle was executed. To speak of hostility, well I certainly think that for me personally, it’s definitely as deep as the sea! A couple of years ago at the ‘February 28th’ Memorial Event, the KMT invited me to their Central Party Headquarters to do a speech. I went and I told them,
‘Today I am not trying to settle leftover scars with the KMT. During the Civil War, we were sympathetic towards the Communists, and the KMT ruined our lives and our families. It should be said simply that the Civil War caused a lot of suffering for many people. But the thing is, today, the times are different now. The two Parties should really begin to reconcile and re-approach. You two should not bring in innocent civilians into a conflict that arose due to Party or ideological differences. If we were able to do what I had just said, then the suffering of us people have not been in vain. I will emphasise to you Lian Zhan (连战/連戰) [49], the separation between the two straits is the greatest historical tragedy leftover by the Civil War and the Cold War! But decades have gone past, and even the deepest and worst of hostilities can be reconciled through dialogue and mutual understanding. Not to mention it is because of the disagreements over the question of how China would be a modern power that the Civil War would happen in the first place! To speak simply, the bell ends need to be tied, [50] therefore, as the General Secretary of the KMT, you have the responsibility and duty to go engage talks with the mainland and the Communist Party.’
After listening to my speech, Lian Zhan was very emotional and moved. Originally, he was rather hesitant and indecisive on whether to go to the mainland or not. But after my speech, he had finally come to the decision that he will go to the mainland, as the Chairman of the KMT, to engage in talks with the CPC. The CPC was very friendly and welcoming towards him. When I went to the party headquarters of the KMT, my friend -- who was also a victim of the KMT’s White Terror -- was not very understanding. After that, he never spoke to me anymore. During the first time I was in prison, when my sentence was already served, the KMT still wouldn’t let me go, and even said they would send me to the Little Liuqiu. [51] During those times, my health was also very bad. I was suffering from a long-term lung illness and was very skinny. That friend of mine thought I would die if I were to be sent to Little Liuqiu. He was a saving grace to me. And him not wanting to talk to me now; I feel great deal of sorrow. But I think I have done no wrong. I am speaking on behalf of all Taiwanese people, including Waisheng people.
So-called ‘Transformative Justice’ – does the DPP really think that it can hold the banner of ‘justice’ now? If this is not sheer ignorance, then it’s just pure shamelessness. Do they not know that it is because how the KMT upon being reassured by the U.S that it will protect it, that they turned into a profusely unpopular regime, to let the island descend into complete chaos, arresting people for no reason, and begin killing people en masse? The U.S has and is always acting on its own interests, to encircle China, and wanting to strangulate China; it for twenty years didn’t recognise New China; it chose to protect a regime that should have already been destroyed, and let it massacre all the people that did support New China, and even a huge amount of innocent people. Who really is ‘unjust’? Shouldn’t that be the U.S? At the same time, the U.S supported Syngman Rhee in South Korea, supported Ngo Dinh Diem in Vietnam, and let them massacre all the left-wing and nationalists in South Korea and Vietnam. For the U.S to do such things, is to completely cast aside and ignore the interests of people inhabiting the very states that they say they are supposedly ‘protecting’. The 40-brutal years of martial law in Taiwan, was this not because of the U.S? Why doesn’t the DPP settle these matters with the U.S? Why don’t they choose to seek for ‘transformative justice’ with the U.S?
To speak again, it is because of the massacres of the 1950s that led the Taiwanese people to have hostilities against the KMT and that the DPP would have its existence today. Would it be the fact that it is the DPP that has stepped on the blood of all the left-wing and innocent civilians that it would advance to the degree of influence and power it has today? Has the DPP expressed any inch of respect for the Taiwanese Left that have scarified their lives? The truth of the matter is that the DPP only listens to the one that had perpetrated these crimes in the first place – the words of the U.S. How dare you have the audacity and face to speak of ‘justice’?
Nevertheless, I also do wish that my Waisheng friends to understand history – primarily to stop deifying the Two Jiangs (Chiangs). Many Taiwanese families today were victims of ‘February 28th’ and the White Terror, and to this day they cannot forgive the Two Jiangs (Chiangs). I personally do not like the Two Jiangs (Chiangs), and I think the merits and problems of the Two Jiangs (Chiang) and the things they have done in Taiwan should be let for history to judge. But right now, the DPP is trying to bring out old scores, and at the same time the KMT is trying to hold up the Two Jiangs (Chiangs); for this to continue on, the situation will only get worse and worse. And I do wish that all my Waisheng friends to understand in the future to not senselessly bring out the Two Jiang (Chiang) ‘god’ cards.
And like what we said before, during the era of Japanese occupation, ‘Huangmin Consciousness’ [52] was not that entrenched amongst the Taiwanese people, at least during its early periods. Yet when the KMT arrived, Taiwanese people naturally would try to compare the two regimes, and it was only after this comparison that this misleading nostalgia towards Japanese occupation would come back, and that ‘Huangmin Consciousness’ would resurge. Some Waisheng people do not understand these sorts of situations, and naturally they would accuse Taiwanese people of being traitors. I, of course, absolutely despise these Huangmin people, like Lee Teng-hui. But we should (especially the Waisheng people) understand the reasons that of which these situations may arise, and to not just automatically and reflexively point fingers at Taiwanese people.
I fundamentally think that this despicable struggle between blue and green is due to how both do not view themselves as Chinese. If everyone were to recognise themselves as Chinese, then we would be celebrating in unison of China’s rise; everyone would be full of hope; for what reason would we have these empty and pointless struggles? If blue and green, both sides, just simply accepted this basic fact that they are Chinese, then everyone would be much closer; the contradictions and conflict between the two would then be internal. Just like my conversation with Professor Lu, we are both Taiwanese people (Bensheng people), and you (pointing at second interviewer Chen Yizhong), a wealthy and well off Waisheng ren, may have differing views from us. But we should not be in opposition. Right now, both the blue and green view each other as some kind of anathema, as completely different people; both are perpetually chastising each other, and even viewing each other as enmities. If ideally both viewed themselves as Chinese, then this would never happen. This why I think the ‘One China Principle’ would not only reconcile the differences held between the two straits, but would also repair the provincial divisions within Taiwan itself.
To remember history is to take its lessons; to not repeat its mistakes. The DPP’s so-called ‘remembrance’ of history is really just about settling old scores, and this ‘score’ is not actually based on the historical facts, but rather things that a construed for their own interests. This would only further deepen the scars and traumas of Taiwan, along with being utterly useless. It should be said that the things that have happened in Taiwan for the past decades is due to many things (of course, this would obviously make everyone think about the Japanese invasion, the Civil War, and the U.S’ concerted efforts to create a Cold War). We must use our eyes to look at the grand picture of history; we should not be myopic and just look at Taiwan and Taiwan only. Look at the current world, the U.S and Japan seem to be on the steep head downwards; whereas China is thriving. We must look forward; and we must find the path for the future of Taiwan. If Taiwan still remains asleep and chooses to not open its eyes, then we will be perpetually stuck in this state of staticity; stuck in this quagmire of completely futile and pointless struggle. If everyone were to open our hearts, to return back to China, then our path would be as wider than ever; what would we struggle about? Ultimately, Taiwan’s ruling elites, to not forgive either side, to not look into the future, to continue this endless and despicable struggle, Taiwan most definitely will have no future to hold. And these sorts of situations, is something that we pro-unification people cannot stand for.
[1] ‘Guangfu Day’ （光复日）, 25 October 1945, literally meaning ‘Day of Recovery/Recovery Day’, was the day when the Japanese occupiers had officially surrendered, removed its presence in Taiwan and returned the island back to China.
[2] The February 28th Incident, which occurred in from February 27th to February 28th, 1947, was an uprising in Taiwan against the KMT. The thing that sparked the uprising is still under debate. But generally, the generally accepted narration is that on 27th February, a KMT police officer right near the ‘Taipei Tianma Tea House’, while investigating cases of cigarette smuggling, had found a person named Lin Jiangman (林江迈) who was caught by the officer for having smuggled cigarettes. Lin ended up being violently beat up by the officer. Passers-by begun to watch the situation, and the officer pulled out a gun to drive away the building crowd, but had ended up accidentally firing on a local, Chen Wenxi (陈文奚/陳文奚). Chen passed away on the same day. The next day, Taipei locals went on strike and protested against the events that took place, demanding that the offending officer to be dismissed. However, the KMT then unleashed a mass crackdown on the protesters, and as such a mass uprising ensued in Taiwan. February 28th was one of the main precursors to the 38-year long martial law in Taiwan. The further significance of this event to modern Taiwanese history (though as well as the modern-day distortion of this event by insidious actors like the DPP) will be explained by Mr. Chen.
[3] One of the main leading contingents of the February 28th Uprising in Taiwan.
[4] Xie Xuehong (谢雪红/謝雪紅), born in Taiwan in 1901, became a member of the CPC in 1925, and established the ‘Taiwan Democratic Autonomous Federation’ (台湾民主自主同盟/台灣民主自主同盟) in Hong Kong in November 1947. She was one of the main figureheads of the February 28th Uprising in 1947, as noted by Mr. Chen. She had also participated in the Founding Ceremony of the People’s Republic of China on October 1 1949. After 1949, she was the head of the All-China Women’s Federation (全国妇联执委), the Vice-Chairwoman of the All-China Youth Federation （全国青联副主席）, a member of the Political and Legal Committee of the State Council (政务院政法委员会委员) and a member of the East China Military and Political Commission (华东军政委员会委员). She passed away in 1970.
[5] Officially, the KMT’s White Terror – or ‘The April 12th Incident’ – was a counterrevolution that begun in Shanghai on April 12th, 1927 with the mass crackdowns on underground Communist organisations, labour unions and the left-faction or Communist-sympathetic faction within the KMT itself. Within the first three days of the crackdowns, approximately 300 were killed, 500 were arrested, and 5000 people went missing. The ensuing White Terror in Taiwan was a continuation of this.
[6] A part of the broader movement for the protection of the Diaoyu Islands that arose in 1970 across mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau and amongst Chinese diaspora communities outside of China. It was in protest against the U.S’ support of Japan’s claims over the Diaoyu Islands under the ‘Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security Between the United States and Japan’. This was once again one of the few times where all Chinese people, regardless of what political affiliation or sympathies one held, were united together against Japan’s provocations against China.
[7] An important figure in the ‘left pro-unification’ bloc in Taiwan as noted below. Born in Madou Town of Tainan County, Taiwan in 1926, Mr. Lin was born into the ancient ‘Madoulin’ (麻豆林) household which is one of the three ‘Big Lin’ households of Taiwan that was given during the Qing era. Mr. Lin’s family was the fourth generation of this household. In 1937, when Japan begun its full official invasion of China, Mr. Lin had resisted Japanese education in Taiwan. He had secretly studied the works of ‘The New Literature Association’ (新文协) (October 1927-January 1931, which was a split organisation of the later-to-be mentioned Taiwan Culture Association that proposed not only Taiwan’s own cultural resistance towards Japanese cultural occupation, but proposed that there be a united class struggle against Japanese occupation). In 1945, when Japan was defeated, Mr. Lin had participated in the ‘Return to China Association’ (还中会) and studied the theories of New Democratic Revolution (新民主主义革命/新民主主義革命) and other Communist theory. On May 31 1950, Mr. Lin was secretly arrested by the KMT, being accused of attempting to establish a CPC ‘Madou Branch’ (麻豆支部). Mr. Lin and a few others that were also arrested by the KMT were sentenced to indefinite imprisonment. It was only until December 17 1984 that Mr. Lin would be released from prison. After being released, Mr. Lin begun to write works and outlines for a left-unification movement in Taiwan, to uphold patriotism and give full support towards the goal of unification. In 1987, Mr. Lin begun a magazine called ‘Front’ (前方) which served as a propaganda instrument for him and other left-unification figures to publish and express their views to the general public. In 1988, as mentioned here, Mr. Lin and Mr. Chen established ‘The China Unification Federation’ and was elected as part of the Executive Committee. And again, in March 1988, the ‘Labour Party’ was established, which based its principals around ‘committing to the struggle for labour rights and interests’, ‘support for socialism and promotion for social justice’, and ‘expects that the through the means of political participation that the lives and welfare of workers can be improved.’ In 1992, Mr. Lin was elected as the Fifth President of ‘The China Unification Federation’. In 1992, Mr. Lin had organised an international ‘All Asia Alliance Against the U.S-Japan Military Alliance the Stationing of Japanese Overseas Movement Alliance’ (全亚洲反对每日军事同盟及日本派兵海外运动联盟/全亞洲反對美日軍事同盟及日本派兵海外運動聯盟) which was in response to the U.S’ support of Japan to dispatch or station Japanese military presence outside of Japan. Later the organisation was renamed to ‘All Asia Alliance Against U.S-Japanese Aggression and Domination’ (全亚洲反对美国-日本侵略与宰制运动联盟/全亞洲反對美國-日本侵略與宰制運動聯盟); ‘AWC ‘in short. In 1999, Mr. Lin visited the mainland to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China. In 2001, in protest against the DPP, Mr. Lin and about 200 other members of the ‘The China Unification Federation’ staged a protest in Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung when the DPP was holding it’s Ninth Second Party Congress, holding up signs that said ‘One China; Peace for the Two Straits’ and demanded the DPP is abandon its separatist program. In 2002, Mr. Lin established a 6-year long ‘New Democracy Conference’ (新民主论坛/新民主論壇). In March 21 2005, with an invite by the National Taiwan Federation, Mr. Lin visited the mainland again to participate in the deliberations of the Third Session of the Tenth National Peoples’ Congress, being an active player in the passing of the ‘Anti-Separatism Law’ (反分裂国家法/反國家分裂法). In 2010, Mr. Lin due to illness returned to Beijing for treatment. Sadly, in October 11 2012, Mr. Lin due to the worsening of his illness had passed away in Beijing.
[8] The ‘Left Unification’ movement also has other nicknames such as ‘Red Unification’ (红统/紅統) bloc because, again, it was largely comprised of Taiwanese Communists; ‘red nationalists’/red patriots.
[9] There are important historical contexts to this as Mr. Chen will explain further on. Much of the Communist pro-unification bloc’s resistance against the KMT in Taiwan has been largely buried and essentially wiped off from the mainstream by the pan-Green DPP and separatist bloc, completely distorting this period of Taiwanese history.
[10] Established on October 11 1987.
[11] Established on April 4 1988. They still occasionally appear in protests against the DPP today.
[12] Established on March 29, 1989. A socialist pro-unification party in Taiwan. Initially, they were briefly named the ‘Communist Party of Taiwan’, but due to how anti-communist sentiments were still present in Taiwan even after the end of martial law, the party was renamed to the ‘The Labour Party of Taiwan’ and still remains so.
[13] ‘Qing Slave’ (清国奴/ちゃんころ) was a derogatory insult used by the Japanese specifically against Han Chinese people. The history of this is complicated as it directly concerns as to what is ‘China’, and fundamentally the long historical and civilisational hostilities held between China and Japan, and even the ‘psychology’ so-to speak of Japan and Japanese people. The term first appeared approximately during the late-19th-century to the early-20th-century (the time when the Qing Empire was declining). Japan, ever since the Tang-dynasty, has had this rather absurd and frankly narcissistic fantasy that they themselves as the ‘pure’ inheritors of everything ‘Sino’ so-to speak. Given that the Qing Dynasty was originally established by the Jurchens (later Manchus), an ethnic minority of China, and peoples that were perceived to be of a ‘barbarian’ people, the Japanese gradually during the Tokugawa Period begun to propagate this notion that the inheritors of ‘Sino’ civilisation now rests in Japan. Thus, it also begun propagating this notion that this large empire land empire on the East Asian Continent (China), was not ‘Sino’ anymore, but ‘Qing’ and ‘Qing’ only, and thus the insult ‘Qing-Slave’ came into incarnation. Though another narration on the origins of this term is that it comes from the rat-tail hair style used during the Qing era. The Qing compared to other preceding Chinese dynasties was not the most powerful and ‘greatest’, as that was the period (though more specifically the late-Qing post-Opium War period; the early-Qing era and especially the Kang Xi-era was when the Qing was still relatively powerful and prosperous) when China gradually declined and became subjected to encroachment by foreign powers, the Manchu-aristocracy of the Qing were still nevertheless penchant on pushing for ‘汉化漢化’ which means ‘Sino-Assimilation’/’Sinification’. But again, this is another topic, but nevertheless it still showcases Japan’s asinine and moronic understanding on what ‘China’, ‘Sino’ and ‘Chinese civilisation’ respectively mean. Though it may also not necessarily be moronic in the first place, but rather a deliberate and insidious distortion, as ultimately these sorts of derogatory terms such as ‘Qing-Slave’ all played into Japan’s rationalisation for its invasion China and the crimes that it perpetrated on the Chinese people.
When one pairs this up with another thought and ideological trend of Japan during this era, most notably ’脱亚入欧/脫亞入歐’, which literally means ‘Exit-Asia; Enter Europe’, that was conceived by Yukichi Fukuzawa (who is now also on the Japanese 10000 yen note, which basically evidences the fact that this was (and still is) the guiding ideology of the Japanese elite), which in summary called upon Japan to completely abandon its ‘Asiatic’ (rejecting Confucianism and all other traditional Chinese philosophies) past, to engage in complete Westernisation of Japan and to emulate the ways of the West (such as emulating the French, British and Russian empires), the self-perceived notion that Japan is somehow the ‘pure’ and ‘true’ inheritor’ of everything ‘Sino’ completely falls apart. ‘Exit-Asia; Enter Europe’ was all one of the most essential and fundamental ideological rationalisations of Japan’s future invasion and desire to colonise China and the rest of Asia. And to this day, again, ‘Exit-Asia; Enter Europe’ is still the presiding ideology of Japan, as it directly explains its relationship with the U.S.
[14] Because Japan was the larger colonial ‘core’, and Taiwan – the smaller island -- was a colony of Japan; hence ‘mainland’.
[15] Today Ryukyu is also known as Okinawa. The archipelago sits just North-West of Taiwan island. Historically, Ryukyu was not part of Japan, and was a separate kingdom that paid tribute to China instead. It was on April 4 1879 that Japan had annexed the Ryukyu, established the ‘Okinawa Prefecture’, which marked the end of the Kingdom of Ryukyu (1429-1879).
[16] Provincial identity is the ‘identity politics’ of Taiwan. Provincial identities for Han people in Taiwan are split into two groups; 本省人, Bensheng People, which literally means ‘Original-Province people’ and 外省人, Waisheng people, which literally means ‘Outer/Other-Province People’. Bensheng people refers to the people that were already in Taiwan before 1949. Waisheng people generally refers to the group of people that settled onto Taiwan after 1949. Bensheng people are about 70 percent of Taiwan’s population; Waisheng people are about 15-20 percent of Taiwan’s population; and the rest are the Indigenous people of Taiwan. Bensheng people mainly consist of Hokien and Hakka people (though there are Cantonese people as well) that settled in Taiwan mainly during the Ming and Qing era. For example, Tsai Ying-wen, the current leader pro-separatist DPP leader of Taiwan, her family lineage is traced back to Zhangzhou (漳州), Fujian province. Whereas with Waisheng people, they generally came from all over the place. In Taiwan, the Indigenous people are placed under the blanket term of 原住民 (literally just ‘Indigenous people’), and then split into their respective tribes; on the mainland, the Indigenous people of Taiwan are referred to as 高山族 (Gaoshan ethnicity; literally, it means ‘High Mountain ethnicity/nation’), since majority of Taiwanese Indigenous people live in the mountains. There are also Gaoshan/the same Indigenous peoples in Taiwan on the mainland as well, particularly in Fujian province.
[17] As in the ‘Waisheng people’ were launching a cleansing of the ‘Bensheng people’; again, this is a case of identitarianism in Taiwan, and has been the main propaganda tactic used by the DPP to sow division.
[18] Was leader of Taiwan from 1988-2000. Lee Teng-hui, to put it simply, was the primary force that pushed Taiwan separatism into the mainstream, and is the primary reason why Taiwan is the way it is today. Lee Teng-hui’s Japanese name is Masao Iwasato (岩里政男) which was given during the period of Japanese occupation. To speak frankly, Lee Teng-hui is the epitome of what is called a political opportunist. Born Sanzhi Village (三芝村) on January 15 1923, Lee was born in Tamsui County (淡水县/淡水縣), Taipei into a middle-class family. Officially, Lee is of Haka descent and his lineages trace back to Yongding (永定), Fujian province; but there are speculations and damning evidence that puts Lee’s true ancestry into question, but this will be discussed later. Being middle-class Lee had the opportunity to receive a full-course education. It was in 1941, that due to the implementation of the ‘Huangminhua Movement’ (will be discussed later) that Lee would receive his Japanese name, Masao Iwasato. In 1942, Lee went to study in Taipei Highschool, but not even graduating, Lee was transferred to study at the Kyoto Imperial University in Japan. Due to how those who were from Japanese colonial outposts were not allowed to law or politics in Japanese universities, Lee chose to study agricultural economics. Due to the intensification of the war, many humanities students were also drafted into the Japanese Imperial Army. During this time Lee had written a letter that swore oath to the Empire of Japan and the Emperor of Japan. In 1944, Lee had temporarily halted his studies, returned to Taiwan, and went to enlist in the Chiba City Chiba Anti-Aircraft Artillery Corps as a trainee sergeant in Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung, but was never sent to the front grounds of the war. In August 1945, when Japan had surrendered and Taiwan had its Guangfu, Lee Teng-hui returned to Taiwan in 1946 and went to Taiwan University to continue his studies in agricultural economics. It was during this time that Lee Teng-hui decided to be a member of the Communist Party divisions in Taiwan; specifically, the reading club of the Communist Party divisions in Taiwan. But after the organisation was unearthed and broken up by the KMT. There is speculation and as well as evidence that Lee’s choice to enter the Communist Party in Taiwan was perhaps to serve as a mole; to betray other members of the party and to sell out the party. There is also another narration that he was actually a spy. This will also be discussed later. In 1951, Lee received a scholarship and went to study at the University of Iowa on agricultural issues. In 1953, Lee became a lecturer at the National Taiwan University. In 1954, Lee became the Director of Agriculture and Forestry Department. In 1957, due to support from the ‘Agricultural Rehabilitation Association’, Lee was elevated to be a professor at the National Taiwan University and as well as later at the Zhongxin/Chunghsing University. In 1968, Lee received a PHD at the Cornell University. In 1969, after returning Taiwan, Lee became the agricultural economics team leader of the Agricultural Rehabilitation Association (农复会/農復會).
In August 1971, Lee became a member of the KMT. In 1972, when Jiang Jingguo (Chiang Jing-guo) was the Chief Executive of the KMT, Lee became part of the Political Committee of the KMT, mainly administering over agriculture. At this time, Lee was the youngest person to be part of the Political Committee. In November 1976, Lee became part of the Central Committee of the KMT. In 1978, Lee became mayor of Taipei. In December 1979, Lee became part of the Central Standing Committee of the KMT, which is the core site of power within the KMT. In 1984, Lee became the vice president for the Jiang Jingguo (Chiang Jing-guo) administration. Jiang Jing-guo (Chiang Jing-guo) very clearly wanted Lee Teng-hui to be his successor as Lee always highly diligent. What struck for many outside viewers was that Lee did not have much political experience, yet still managed to quickly climb right to the highest echelons of power within the KMT. In 1986, Lee became a member of ‘The Twelve Reform Team’. In January 13 1988, after Jiang Jing-guo (Chiang Jing-guo) passed away, Lee became the temporary leader of Taiwan. Lee held down Song Meiling (Soong May-ling) (宋美龄/宋美齡) and other established figures from taking power. In July 1988, at the Thirteenth National Congress of the KMT, Lee officially became the party secretary of the KMT. In February 1990, the KMT had the ‘February Political Struggle’ incident; Lee defeated the ‘non-mainstream’ faction within the KMT and strengthened the hold of the KMT. In May 1990, Lee was re-elected as the eighth ‘president’. In April 30 1991, ended martial law in Taiwan. Lee had also revised the constitution. In 1993, Lee had unleashed another purge of the ‘non-mainstream’ figures within KMT, which led to a split and the establishment of the ‘New KMT’ (which was later changed to the ‘New Party’). After fully purging the KMT of the ‘non-mainstream’ faction, Lee effectively attained full power over the KMT. In 1996, Lee Teng-hui and Lian Zhan partnered together and won 54.0 percent of the votes and was re-elected. In 1997, Lee once again revised the constitution, creating ‘Refinements’, which opened the gates for ‘Taiwanaisation’ (‘localisation’). The opportunism that was spoken about in the beginning was the fact that before the mid-late 1990s, Lee had always publicly supported unification. However, in July 9 1999, Lee Teng-hui in an interview with Deutschewelle completely overthrew what was said before and stated propagating that the relationship between Taiwan and mainland China is a so-called ‘Country-to-Country relationship’, and begun to propagate the ‘Two Country’ narrative. In 1999, a year before Lee’s resignation, Lee had published a book called ‘Taiwan’s Position’, which essentially proposed to break up China into pieces. This book was especially welcomed by the Japanese Right Wing. In 2000, at the tenth ‘presidential’ election in Taiwan, the KMT lost and the DPP’s Chen Shui-bian became leader of Taiwan. This caused outcry within the KMT, with mass calls for Lee’s resignation and that it was Lee that was the primary culprit in causing the splits within the KMT for the past 10 years, and that Lee was also secretly supporting the DPP and Chen Shui-bian. In September 2000, Lee officially resigned from the KMT. After resignation, Lee begun to intensify his Taiwan separatist sentiments. In July 2001, Lee had established the ‘Taiwan Solidarity Union’ which is a pro-separatist party. In January 2007, Lee in an interview changed his words again and rejected the label of being the ‘Father of Taiwan Independence’; saying:
‘I am not pro-Taiwan separatism and I never supported Taiwan separatism.’
‘我不是台独，也从来没有主张过台独./我不是台獨, 也從來沒有主張過台獨.’
In June 7 2007, Lee went to the Yasukuni Shrine in Japan to pay respect to his brother, Lee Teng-qin (李登钦/李登欽). On June 9, at Haneda Airport, Lee was attacked by two bottles by a mainland Chinese person. In March 30 2008, Lee during the Taiwan elections voiced his support for the DPP’s Xie Chang-ting （谢长廷/謝長廷）, another infamous Taiwan separatist figure. In September 4 2008, Lee in his trip at Okinawa, said that the Diaoyu Islands belong to Japan. These statements even made pro-separatist figures Taiwan (whom are all pro-Japan) such as Lu Xiulan (吕秀莲/呂秀蓮) to condemn Lee’s words. In March 2011, Lee had suggested to implement a ‘Taiwan Constitution’ to replace the Republic of China constitution. In June 30 2011, Lee was suspected for corruption and bribery. In October 2013, Lee once again propagated the ‘Two Country’ narrative and re-asserted that the relationship with mainland China and Taiwan is a so-called ‘Country-to-Country relationship’. In November 15 2013, the Taipei District Court found Lee not guilty. In January 2014 Lee begun to criticise the DPP for not being ‘united’. In 2020 Lee passed away at the age of 97. During his state funeral, a woman threw red-paint on a portrait of Lee, saying ‘The Father of Taiwan Separatism; Dead for Nothing.’ (台独之父、死有余辜/台獨之父 死有餘辜)
Firstly, with the aforementioned question of Lee’s ancestry. Officially, Lee is full Hakka Chinese; but there have been speculations that Lee is actually half-Japanese and half-Chinese instead. This mainly rests in how if Lee Jinlong (李金龙/李金龍) was Lee Teng-hui’s biological father, then how would Lee be able to receive the surname Iwasato (岩里)? Iwasato is a surname that is only used within the Japanese nobility. Especially considering the fact that Taiwanese people during the period of Japanese occupation were viewed as second class citizens – or as complete pariah citizens (贱民/ 賤民) during the period of Japanese occupation. Another site of question is how Lee Teng-hui was so easily able to enrol into Kyoto Imperial University, which was (and still is) Japan’s most elite universities. And the fact that during Lee’s return to Taiwan, that merely having accepted the orders of the Emperor of Japan to participate in the artillery front that he was able to be swiftly elevated from a trainee to a second lieutenant within less than a year. If a Taiwanese person did enlist into the Japanese Imperial Army, the only ranks that was allowed would be a soldier or the highest being a non-commissioned officer. The fundamental question of this is that without a special background, how would Lee climb so high and so quickly within the miliary ranks of the Imperial Japanese Army? The conclusion of this speculation is that Lee’s biological father was a high-ranking Japanese military officer and that Lee’s mother side was a maid. And it was Lee Jinlong that became Lee Teng-hui’s foster father, therefore, making Lee Teng-hui in actuality half-Chinese and half-Japanese instead.
Secondly, that Lee Teng-hui’s sudden choice to join the Communist party divisions in Taiwan was actually for the purpose to undermine and ultimately destroy it in Taiwan. This was actually an investigation conducted by Li’ao (李敖), who was the most prolific pro-unification and anti-U.S voice for both the mainland and Taiwan. In total Lee Teng-hui joined the Communist Party twice (September 1946 and June-July 1947) and left twice (August 1947 and 1948) respectively. Li’ao’s article in the ‘Raven Review’ (乌鸦评论/烏鴉評論) that was called ‘Official Evidence of Lee Teng-hui’s Betrayal of Party members within the Communist Party’ (共产党李登辉出卖同志的官方证据/共產黨李登輝出賣通知的官方證據), published in October 3 1988 details this. Li’ao cites that within the archived documents of the ‘Compilation of ‘Bandit Cases’ Handled Over the Years’ (历年办理 ‘匪案 ‘汇编/歷年辦理 ‘匪案’彙編) within the intelligence bureau of Taiwan, which in between pages 186 to 190 detailed the cases of the CPC divisions at the Taiwan National University being destroyed, party members which included 15 others were all arrested by the KMT; within the 15, Ye Chengsong (叶城松), Zhang Pikun (张璧坤), Hu Canglin (胡沧霖), Lan Zhengliang (赖正亮) and Wu Yucheng (吴玉成) these 5 people were all executed by the KMT; and Cai Yaojing (菜耀景), Li Xianzhang (李显章) and 10 others were sentenced to both definite and indefinite time imprisonment. And within this, specifically with the case of Branch Secretary Ye Chengsong was precisely by introduced by Lee Teng-hui, entering the party in October 1947. And after these mass arrests that took place in August 1949, Lee Teng-hui remained completely safe and sound. Li’ao also laid the fact that Lee Teng-hui was a delibarete traitor through three other reasons; one that Lee Teng-hui later personally told Jiang Jing-guo (Chiang Jing-guo) how he joined the Communist Party in Taiwan, and most definitely leaked out sensitive information to the KMT, and most definitely having reported certain names to the KMT. The second is that as Jiang Jing-guo (Chiang Jing-guo) knew that Lee Teng-hui joined the Communist Party, the KMT security apparatus would most definitely shown the members that Lee Teng-hui had betrayed to Jiang Jing-guo (Chiang Jing-guo). The third is that if Lee Teng-hui did not sell-out any members, he most definitely would not have passed the KMT’s security test (when Lee joined the KMT).
Lee Teng-hui, the epitome of what political opportunism is; a history of betraying for his own self-interests. Let’s see what he has to say. It was in Lee’s book that the mask fell off, saying:
‘I at that time put a lot of efforts to deceive these Waisheng people, and to deceive the KMT, with things such as including the ‘1992 Consensus’, the ‘National Unification Outline’ – all of these were necessary things used to deceive them.’
‘我当时为了骗那些 ‘外省人 ‘，骗国民党我下了多少功夫，包括九二共识，包括’国家统一纲领 ‘，都是要拿来骗他们的. /我當時為了騙那些’外省人’, 騙國民黨我下了多少功夫, 包括九二共識, 包括 ‘國家統一綱領, 都是要拿來騙他們的.’
[19] The Seventh Fleet entered the Taiwan strait in February 1950 and left in January 1979.
[20] Now known as one of the greatest traitors. Born in 1908 In Zhanghua County, Huatan Township, Taiwan. Was the only Taiwanese person that participated in the Long March and had participated in the establishment of the Taiwan division of the Communist Party. Was the Secretary of the Working Committee of the CPC for Taiwan Province. In February 2 1950, Cai was arrested and quickly committed mutiny. After within about a week Cai had provided all the names and documents of underground CPC members to the KMT, betraying the number of people as Mr. Chen mentions.
[21] Established in 1946.
[22] Was very close with the fathers of Taiwan separatism (Peng Mingmin, Wei Yanchao etc.). Part of the DPP. Was arrested in 1964 for writing ‘台湾人自救宣言/台灣人自救宣言’ (The Manifesto for the Self-Rescue of Taiwanese People). The manifesto spread to the U.S. During the same, the University of Wisconsin-Madison held the ‘留美台湾同胞结盟会/留美台灣同胞結盟會’ (‘The Taiwanese Diaspora Alliance Assembly’). and leading to many other Taiwan separatist organisations to pop up such as ‘台湾独立联盟/台灣獨立聯盟’ (‘The Taiwan Independence Federation’) and ‘台湾问题研究会/台灣問題研究會’ (‘The Research Centre on the Taiwan Issue’).
[23] Enacted on April 10 1979 by the Carter Administration. It was fundamentally at this moment that separatist sentiments truly started to gain traction within Taiwan. The main focal point of this act is that the U.S gives itself a way to use its own domestic laws to have quasi-official and military relations with Taiwan. The main problem with this act is that it directly contradicts and violates the initially mutually agreed upon clauses of the Joint Communique of the People’s Republic of China and the United States on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations that was signed on December 16 1978. Specifically:
Article 2. The United States of America recognises the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China. Within this context, the people of the United States will maintain cultural, commercial and other unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan.
Article 7: The Government of the United States of America acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China.
Yet within the ‘Taiwan Relations Act’ these things that not only contradictions towards the joint communique above but is also in self-contradiction within the act itself:
(b) Is the policy of the United States –
(2) to make clear that the United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means;
Within just two lines after, the act outlines it is also the U.S’ policy to continue providing arms sales to Taiwan, that is under so-called ‘defensive character’:
(5) to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; …
The arms that the U.S has sold to Taiwan has not been of so-called ‘defensive character’ but rather offensive character. From 2009 to 2022, 13 years, the U.S has in total effectively sold about 30 billion USD worth of arms. And just on April 7th 2022, the U.S Defence Security Cooperation Agency that it would launch an addition 950 billion USD worth of arms deals to Taiwan. For example, the U.S sold 4 MQ-9 drones to Taiwan which is a primarily offensive airstrike vehicle.
[24] This a Hokkien idiom that is basically used to express hypocrisy. The DPP and the KMT are really engaged in this illusion of opposition, because ultimately both are two sides of the same coin.
[25] Arrested in 1962; released in September 18 1976.
[26] A political figure in Taiwan. Born in September 3 1913 in Taipei. Graduated in Waseda University in 1937 and became an engineer in Japan. Returned in Taiwan in 1947 and became the Director General of the Chamber of Commerce for the Taipei City Government. In 1953 became the Technical Consultant of the 44th Armory of the Joint Logistics of Taiwan and as well as the Mayor of Taipei. Gao became mayor of Taipei without being part of any party. In 1960, participated in the organisation of a ‘China Democratic Party’ in Taiwan. Later served as the Minister of Transportation of Taiwan and an Executive Council Member. Passed away on March 11 2005.
[27] In that the conflict between the DPP and the KMT is purely a conflict of interests and a conflict of interest only. Everything else is a farce.
[28] ‘老蒋’ (Old Jiang (Chiang)) is a nickname given to Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kaishek). In Chinese, ‘老’ which literally means ‘Old’ is often added to a famous figure’s (though usually political) surname as a nickname.
[29] Another key figure that founded the Taiwan separatist movement. Was born in March 1910 into a landlord family in Yunlin County, Taiwan. In 1938 he studies at the University of Nanjing (Nanking)’. In 1932, he went to study a masters at the University of Michigan; and then subsequently received a PHD at The Ohio State University. In 1936, he returned to China and became a professor at the Zhejiang University of Engineering. After the defeat of Japan in 1945, Liao headed the Chief Executive’s Office of the Industrial and Mining Division of Taiwan and the Director of Public Works of the Taiwan City Government. In August 1946, Liao had participated in the KMT party elections for senator; he failed. Two months again, Liao tried again for the Delegate to the Constitutional Assembly; and failed again. In December of 1949, Liao went to Japan. In 1950, Liao had begun to propagate Taiwan separatism propaganda in Kyoto. In 1961, Liao hired an assassin to Taiwan in attempt to assassinate Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kaishek). A delegate was then sent to Japan by the KMT for Liao saying that ‘Only you abandon ‘Taiwan separatism’, then you will be welcomed back to Taiwan’. In March 1965, he dissolved the ‘台湾独立统一战线/台灣獨立統一戰線’ (‘Taiwan Independence United Front’). In May 14 1965, due to Liao’s assets being frozen, he was forced to return to Taiwan. In June, he was specially exonerated by Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kaishek). After this, Liao had abandoned Taiwan separatism. and in December he became the Vice Chairman of the Ceng Wen Reservoir Construction Committee. After Liao had resigned from this position, he participated in the construction of the Taichung Port. Due to being under surveillance, Liao never left the island since and passed away on May 7 1986.
[30] As in Communists/left-wing insurgents.
[31] Another key figurehead of the Taiwan separatist movement. Born in 1924 into a well-off noble family. Went to study in Tokyo Imperial University in 1943. Participated in the February 28th Incident. Wrote Taiwan separatist books such as ‘Taiwan: A History of Suffering’ (‘臺灣：苦悶的歷史’) which was an important manifesto of sorts for the Taiwan separatist bloc. Also propagated so-called ‘Taiwanese language’ (臺语). As Mr. Chen says, Gao also established the Taiwan YMCA in Japan which is essentially a Taiwan separatist lobby/organisation in Japan. Before the Taiwan YMCA was the ‘Japan Formosans’ (日本独盟) which was, as obviously by the name, a pro-colonial and pro-Japan organisation. Passed away on September 9 1985.
[32] The KMT’s land reforms in Taiwan in general was successful at least from the standpoint of production. It was done generally through a three-fold level; the first period was the ‘Three; Seven; Five Rent Reduction’ (三七五减租) where in which the ground rent should not be above 37.5 percent of the annual harvest of the main products which decreased the responsibilities of the tiller. Regulations also protected the interests of the landlords; tenant farmers are to pay the rent on time; and rent that is due for over two years for landlords can dismiss the tenant farmer. The second period was the ‘common collar’. The ‘commons’ (that is land) that were leftover from the Japanese were sold to farmers. The price of the land was 2.5 times the annual harvest amount of the main crops on arable land. And this was amortised equally by the recipient farmers in 20 instalments over 10years without having to bear interest. The third period was the ‘tiller has his own field’. The landlord can keep the amount of land that was legally allowed by the government, and the excess would be requisitioned by the government and resold to the farmers that have not yet acquired land. The land price was calculated by 2.5 times the product that was on the cultivated land, with physical land bonds which accounted for about 70 percent and public enterprise stocks that were 30 percent as compensation. Physical land bonds were issued by the Taiwan Land Bank that entrusted by the KMT, with an annual interest rate of 4 percent, and a principal and interest that is repaid in 20 instalments within 10 years. The shares of the public enterprises that were leftover by the Japanese were the four major companies (cement, paper, agriculture, forestry, industrial and mining) stocks as compensation as mentioned above.
[33] Taiwan has a tropical climate so the ‘two phase rice harvesting season’ system is used, where two crops of rice are grown in the same paddy field and harvested in the same year. There are different cultivation methods that are used, such as double-cropping, intercropping and mixed cropping. The two-phase rice harvesting system is used throughout southern China mainly due to the humid and wet climates.
[34] South-west Taiwan; today it’s under Jiayi/Chiayi Prefecture (嘉义县市/嘉義縣市) and Tainan Prefecture (台南县市/台南縣市). This is the most fertile region of Taiwan.
[35] Born in October 22 1881 in Taizhong/Taichung into a noble family. Was an important political figure in China and who is now viewed as the ‘Father of the Taiwan Parliament’. He was a nationalist and a patriot, despite the positions held in his later life. Due to colonial occupation by the Japanese, Lin had greatly promoted Taiwanese local culture and identity. He refused to speak Japanese, refused to wear Japanese clogs and adhered and emphasised) the Han Chinese traditions and ways of life. Lin throughout his life was active in the resistance against Japanese occupation. However due to having fallen under illness in 1949, he was sent to Japan. Passed away in September 8 1956.
[36] Established in 1921 by Lin Xiantang, Jiang Weishui, Wu Haishui, Li Liming and a few others. The purpose of the committee was to resist against Japanese cultural infiltration into Taiwan, and to reinvigorate Taiwanese local culture (both Han Chinese (Hokkein and Hakka) and Indigenous cultures) in order to resist against Japanese colonialism. It was in direct conjunction to the New Culture Movement (新文化运动/新文化運動) that was taking place in the mainland during this time.
[37] Born in 1924 in Taiwan; immigrated to Japan in 1954. Majority of his life was spent in Japan. Has the nickname of ‘赚钱之神’(‘Money-Making God’) and ‘股票神仙’ (‘Stock Market God’) due to having a huge infamous investor and stock broker. Passed away on May 16 2012.
[38] Was mayor from February 1 to June 24 1954.
[39] As in the government or ‘deep state’ of Taiwan.
[40] Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kaishek), from 1948-1975 and Jiang JIngguo (Chiang Ching-guo) (蒋经国/蔣經國) Jiang Jieshi’s (Chiang Kai-shek’s) son, from 1978-1988.
[41] Located in Daxi Township, Taoyuan City, Taiwan, this is where Jiang Jieshi’s (Chiang Kai-shek’s) tomb is located. Statues of Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kai-shek) are everywhere at this location.
[42] This is very difficult to translate. Literally 皇民化/皇民化 means ‘Imperialised Citizens’ but that doesn’t really express the actual meaning of this ‘movement’. The ‘Huangminhua’ movement is more so this movement that was first forced upon by Japan onto all of its colonial outposts through a wide range of policies to diminish, undermine and ultimately annihilate the local cultures within its colonial outposts. This ‘movement’ reached its heights when Japan officially begun its full invasion of China and the rest of Asia. In the case of Taiwan, the policies were such as banning the usage Chinese, closing down (and even destroying) traditional Chinese temples and other places of worship, banning Taiwanese people from wearing Chinese clothes, banning all forms of displays of Chinese culture in public.
In 1940, it went to the point where any Taiwanese person changed their names to Japanese could enter high-office and receive other special privileges. And evidently the previously mentioned Taiwan Cultural Commission (and the organisations that followed) was precisely established as a direct resistance of Japan’s suppression of Chinese culture. In 1942, the Japanese colonial government in Taiwan set up an army and navy ‘volunteering’ system on the island. In 1944, the volunteering turned into forced conscription, where police and other security forces forced Taiwanese people to fight for the Empire of Japan. In total approximately 300,000 Taiwanese people (youth especially) were forcibly conscripted to fight in China and the rest of Asia.
The second ‘Huangminhua’ movement was the phenomenon that rose during the KMT rule, mainly led by figures such as Lee Teng-hui and the current DPP, where there is a concerted effort to whitewash Japanese colonial rule. While there is an element to the KMT’s own despotism that had caused this phenomenon as Mr. Chen speaks of, another reason is also modern Japanese cultural and ideological infiltration into Taiwan, and as well as the modern comprador bourgeoisie in Taiwan that have been brought out by Japan (primarily within the DPP). One example of this, though ridiculous as it seems, is still nevertheless an demonstration of this continued spiritual colonisation (that of which Mr. Chen also speaks of) in present-day Taiwan by the Japanese, is how in 2022 Taiwan and the DPP was so willing to, let’s say, ‘accept’ Japan’s nuclear waste water and supporting the Japanese governments choice to dump it into the Pacific…
[43] ‘One China’ but have autonomy and the right to self-govern.
[44] Was leader of Taiwan from 2000-2008. This person to say simply, this person is a rather colourful figure, and has been the main icon for the DPP as Chen was the first non-KMT political figure to rule Taiwan. Was born in 1950 in Tainan, Taiwan, with family lineages tracing back to Zhangzhou, Fujian province. Chen is one of the few exceptions to the Taiwan separatist movement in that his family was not of a landlord background but was of tenant famer instead. In 1969, after Chen graduated from the National Tainan First Senior Highschool, he was admitted into Business Administration Group in National Taiwan University, but was absent. In 1970, he was re-admitted into the Judicial Section of the Department of Law at the National Taiwan University. Chen excelled in university, and continuously received scholarships from the KMT, and as well as from the Cement Corporation, farmer associations, and Buddhist and Lions Clubs. In 1973, Chen successfully fulfilled the qualifications of being lawyer in Taiwan, becoming the youngest lawyer in Taiwan at the time. Chen was also a Vice-Chairman of the ‘Straits Exchange Foundation’ (海峡交流基金会).
In 1979, after the Formosa Incident (美丽岛事件/美麗島事件) (or Gaoxiong/Kaohsiung Incident) in December 10 1979 which was essentially a conflict between the KMT and non-KMT organisations, Chen had used this as an opportunity to enter politics. Chen had become an active figure in the incident. After this incident, Chen begun to participate in movements that were outside of the KMT. In 1981, Chen was elected as a representative for the Taipei City Government, gaining the highest number of votes. In 1984, Chen and few other people established Penglai Island Magazine and became President of the outlet. In 1985, Chen had resigned from the Taipei City Government and returned back to Tainan and participated in the Tainan County elections as a non-KMT representative. Chen had lost this election. In 1987, Chen had chosen to become a member of the DPP and was elected as part of the Central Standing Committee of the DPP. In 1989, Chen was elected as an additional legislator for the Legislative Yuan in Taiwan and also became a Secretary for the DPP. In 1992, Chen had successfully become a full legislator. In 1991, during Chen’s time as a legislator and the National Defence Council, Chen was willing to hold a symposium with the mainland defence. So, in July 21-27 1991, Chen had visited Beijing and the military museum in Beijing. Chen also left a photo of his visit to Tiananmen Square. In March, 1992, Chen became the first opposition figure to be a convening member of the Defence Committee in Taiwan. In 1994, when Taipei was elevated to become a municipality, Chen had participated in the Taipei elections again, and received the candidacy to represent the DPP for the Taipei mayor election, and was successfully elected as the Mayor of Taipei. In 1998, Chen was re-elected as the mayor of Taipei. Very quickly Chen was called upon to be leader of Taiwan.
Subsequently in 2000, Chen participated in the Taiwan elections and successfully became leader of Taiwan. After this, pan-green media outlets referred to Chen was the ‘Son of Taiwan’. In May 2008, Chen resigned from leadership and not long after was suspected for corruption. In June 8 2010, during the first-round of trial, the Taipei Municipal Court acquitted Chen. However, in December 7 2010, Chen was subsequently sentenced to 17 years in prison for corruption charges. However, in June 10 2014, Chen was released under medical parole. But in 2015, Chen was once against exposed to having committed bribery. In 2020, Chen begun having an online presence on Facebook. Let’s just say, that the ‘separatism’ of Chen Shui-bian was pure political opportunism than anything else, because in the last two years, Chen has been continuously criticising Tsai-Ying wen, the DPP and Taiwan separatism. To use the words of Li’ao (李敖) was that Chen Shui-bian is ‘too scared’ to actually push for Taiwan separatism – and this is precisely what happened.
[45] Bensheng people.
[46] Central KMT news publication.
[47] ‘伤痕文学’; ‘scar literature’ was essentially this literature movement of sorts that arose around the post-Cultural Revolution era and eventually gained full traction during the mid-late 1980s amongst the Chinese intellectual class. ‘Scar literature’ itself primarily is a ‘reflective’ form of literature so-to speak of the complex and tangled life during the Cultural Revolution era. However, critics of ‘scar literature’ view that various insidious forces have opportunistically used ‘scar literature’ to engage in historical nihilism and distort the realities of this admittedly complex era.
[48] Again, a reminder that this interview took place in 2008. It was a different world back then. The state of development in China was still highly unstable; social contradictions were rife; administrative practices were still highly undeveloped; corruption was pervasive; and inequality was visible. This was, as Mr. Chen cites Lenin, the ‘special transition period’. In contrast, it was also a time of mass experimentation; results were gained but many mistakes were also made. These were the growing pains of China’s reform and open up and the excesses that were brought in by it.
[49] Born in August 1936 in Shanxi province. Family are Fujian Zhangzhou people. Went to Taiwan in 1949. Studied at Chicago University in the U.S in 1959. Received a PHD in 1965. Became a professor in the U.S from 1966 to 1967. Returned to Taiwan in 1968 and became the Director of the Institute of Political Studies at the Taiwan National University. Begun entering politics in 1975, first becoming a diplomat at the Taiwan (ROC) ‘embassy’ in El Salvador. Became the head of the ‘KMT Youth Works Association’, Chairman of the ‘Taiwan Youth Guidance Committee of the Administrative Organisation’, Head of the Transportation Department, the Standing Committee for the KMT, the Executive ‘Vice President’, the Head of the ‘Foreign Affairs Department’, and eventually the Chairman of Taiwan ‘Provincial Government’. In 1993, Lian was elected at the Vice Chairman of the KMT, and became the head of administrating the Taiwan government. In 1996, Lian was elected as the Deputy Leader of Taiwan. In March 2000, Lian participated the Taiwan leadership elections but did not succeed. After Lee Teng-hui resigned from being the chairman of the KMT, Lian Zhan was elected as chairman. In 2001, Lian Zhan was re-elected as chairman of the KMT. In April-May 2005, Lian Zhan visited the mainland, under the name of a ‘Trip for Peace’, and personally met and engaged in talks with then-General Secretary Hu Jintao.
[50] 解铃还需要系铃人; the one who rang the bell unwarranted in the first place should also be the one that ends it; the one who caused the situation in the first place should also be the one that resolves it.
[51] A small island about 15 km off the Southern part of the main Taiwan island.
[52] As in nostalgia for Japanese colonialism; to be an ‘imperial citizen’ of Japan essentially.