Taiwan Independence, an Identity in Process
Sunday June 17, by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.
Many historians try to make much of the fact that the Taiwanese in 1895 or at other times did not have a clear idea of Taiwan independence. They make the common mistake that any nation has a clear idea of its identity and goals at any specific moment in time or that a singular vision and common identity is shared by all levels of its populace at any time. Reality tells us that this is never so. Because of this, we see that the motivation of participants in history is likewise quite often mixed.
We learn by going where we have to go.
Is any individual ever fully conscious of his/her complete identity and full motivation at any moment in time? Multiply this one hundredfold and more for a nation. In a nation, a full understanding of identity and motivation is something in process. At any moment of a nation's history, the participants themselves cannot give one all the answers. Taiwanese are learning by going where they have to go.
Take for example the analogy of a woman who lives in an abusive marriage or relationship. The woman knows she is not happy. She wants out. What she really wants is a divorce and to be her own boss. Perhaps however her culture does not allow divorce or have a term for it; perhaps divorced women have been chauvinistically given a derogatory reputation in her culture; perhaps that option has no precedent. Perhaps her relatives or other do-gooders pressure her to stay. The woman rebels against her marriage union and eventually after years of resistance comes to the realization that what she had been seeking all along was to control her own destiny and to be independent. Eventually she finds a way and the language to express it.
In a similar vein, if one were to examine the intentions of people in a revolution, these people rarely have a clear vision of their end. They know what they want to escape from; they have a general idea of where they want to go as a goal, but they cannot predict or express its exact form. Thus, for the many Taiwanese who resisted union with Japan in 1895, their motivations were as mixed and various as were their numbers.
Some were the Qing bureaucrats and their mercenaries; their motivation was where their bread was buttered; they had loyalty to those who paid their salaries and gave them status and position. Others were businessmen who watched to see which side would be most beneficial to their business. There were still many other Taiwanese, however, who resisted union with Japan just as they had consistently resisted union with Qing China. They wanted out, both of their bad marriage to the Qing and of a coming bad marriage to Japan. These latter may not have been able to spell out in full detail their vision of their hoped for republic. They did know they did not want to return to China or be a vassal state to China.
When the American Revolution happened, we see the majority of Americans did not envisage the United States of America as it is now. Many did not necessarily want to even break free of England; they had no clear concept of an independent identity; this had no precedent.
The people did know that they were being taxed without representation. They did know that they were abused and exploited. They did know that being on their own was as good as (if not better than) being under oppression.
Some did have a vision and goal, but many others were reluctantly drawn into the revolution. As they fought, however, they began to discover a new identity; it was an identity that had been forming through years of oppression and resistance. They found that to control their own destiny was what they really wanted.
It was only after the Americans had gained their independence that they began to settle down to hammering out how the thirteen colonies could find a form of government that they all could unite under. This did not happen overnight; it was and continues to be an ongoing process.
That American identity was shaped as the country expanded across the continent; it was shaped as the country had to absorb continuous waves of immigration. It is still being shaped today as the country continues to question and discover the true meaning of the words all men are created equal and that these words apply not only to a landed gentry but also to former slaves, to women, to all races, to all immigrants and on and on. The identity of America is an identity that is still in process.
This is the common mistake of many historians in talking of Taiwan. They fail to realize that the identity of Taiwan is also one in process. It is similar to the mistake of historians who claim that simply because Taiwan did not have a clearly expressed and focused vision of a Constitutional Republic in 1895; it did not have an idea of wanting to be on its own, to be independent.
Identity is knowing one's past as well as one's present and having a vision of where one wants to go. Past, present, and future must be continually integrated. Taiwan's past is that it has consistently and always resisted outside influence, dominance and exploitation. Whether the outsiders were the Qing, the Japanese (the first ones to control the whole island), the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the next lascivious suitor in the wings, Taiwan's identity is separate from all of the above; it learns by going where it has to go.
After three forced and unhappy marriages is there anyone naïve or stupid enough to think that Taiwan would desire to change its current independent democracy for a forced marriage with the next ugliest and most oppressive of suitors, the People's Republic of China (PRC)? Whatever platitudes, fabricated historical claims of ownership and/or trumped up obligations to ancestors may be presented, the answer is "Been there, done that. Thanks, but no thanks."