Beyond Nationalism

Beyond Nationalism
China Post Editorial
by Bevin Chu
May 19, 2009

Politics on Taiwan today is all about Blue vs. Green.

Being Blue means one affirms the legitimacy of the Republic of China, and wants to preserve it. Being Green means one denies the legitimacy of the Republic of China and wants to replace it with a "Republic of Taiwan" or "Nation of Taiwan."

The Blue vs. Green debate is a competition between nationalisms, between Chinese nationalism and "Taiwanese" nationalism, between reaffirming a Chinese national identity, and concocting a "Taiwanese" national identity.

But many members of the public on Taiwan are unspeakably weary of Blue vs. Green politics. When interviewed they say they merely wish to live their lives in peace, free from all political interference.

Guess what? They're right.

At the most fundamental level, what truly matters is not this nationalism or that nationalism, but individualism. What truly matters is not national identity, but individual identity. What truly matters is not whether one "belongs" to Nation X, or to Nation Y, but whether one belongs to oneself. In other words, whether one is free to live one's life in peace, free from political interference by any political authority.

We in the modern world tend to assume that a world comprised of nation states is the way the world has always been. We tend to forget that nationalism is a relatively recent phenomenon. A world comprised of nation states is not the way the world has always been. And luckily for mankind, it is not the way the world will be centuries from now.

Nationalism is a form of collectivism. Nationalism emphasizes the individual's membership, often involuntary, in a collective known as the nation state. Nationalism originated in 18th century Europe. Since then it has become the most potent force in human history, and not for the better. Nationalism was the direct cause of World War I and World War II, the two most horrific bloodbaths mankind has ever experienced.

Does that mean that the Blue Camp's Chinese nationalism is no better than the Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism? Does that mean that the Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism is no less valid than the Blue Camp's Chinese nationalism?

No, it does not. Nationalism subordinates the individual to the collective. Therefore there are no good nationalisms. But there are bad nationalisms, and there are worse nationalisms. The Blue Camp's Chinese nationalism may be bad nationalism. But the Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism is far worse nationalism.

Chinese nationalism, to its credit, was purely defensive in nature. It was a defensive reaction to western and Japanese colonialism and imperialism, specifically Britain's two Opium Wars, and Japan's relentless attempts at territorial conquest.

Chinese nationalism, to its credit, is also highly inclusive. Minorities, providing they do not agitate for political secession, have been treated comparatively well by both the KMT and CCP governments.

The Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism however, is a horse of a different color. The Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism pays ritual lip service to Taiwanese "dignity, sovereignty, and independence." But such clarion calls apply only to the Chinese mainland. They do not apply to either the US hegemon or former colonial oppressor Japan.

During the May 7 "Denounce Ma, Defend Taiwan" protest march, Green Camp protesters actually waved altered American flags showing Taiwan as America's 51st state.

Previously, Green Camp "Taiwanese" nationalists have attempted to curry favor with Japan by giving away the Taiwanese island of Diaoyutai.

In real world practice, Green Camp "Taiwanese" nationalists are unseemingly eager tools of US hegemonism and Japanese colonialism.

Paradoxically, the Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism is also among the more virulent forms of nationalism, one that places an inordinate stress on ethnic identity.

Joyce Huang, a prominent Taiwanese liberal reformer, is an outspoken critic of KMT authoritarianism and "Taiwanese" nationalism. Huang accurately characterized the Green Camp's "Taiwanese" nationalism as "Hoklo Chauvinism" or "Hoklo Fascism." She compared "Taiwanese" nationalism to German Nazism.

Most people have forgotten, but former DPP Vice President Annette Lu once proposed that Taiwan's Aborigines be "resettled" in Central and South America. In other words, the Green Camp's "Nation of Taiwan" would be ethnically cleansed of "Non-Taiwanese." Not a single Green Camp political leader raised an objection to her proposal.

So where does that leave us?

It leaves us pondering whether there is something beyond either bad Chinese nationalism, or far worse "Taiwanese" nationalism. It leaves us pondering how to liberate the individual human being from all forms of collectivism. It leaves us pondering not how to ensure "Taiwan's sovereignty," or even the "Republic of China's soveignty," but the individual's sovereignty.