國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2.3 The politics of identity in Taiwan
Defining indigenous peoples in Taiwan is often intermeshed with politics. Taiwan's status as a nation is contested and national identity is very much a political
battleground. During the 1990s President Lee Teng-hui promoted Taiwanese
consciousness and localisation. This was a counter to the Chinese nationalism that had been a part of the authoritarianism during the years of Martial Law. Localisation was further promoted during the eight years that Chen Shui-bian was President. After Ma Ying-jeou became President in 2008 he again sought to return to a form of Chinese nationalism through the idea of Taiwanese being part of the Zhonghua Minzu (Greater Chinese Ethnic Nation). However, in spite of this numerous opinion polls show that the people of Taiwan still increasingly identify as Taiwanese rather than Chinese.
Democracy and the hostile attitude of the People's Republic of China (PRC) towards Taiwan ensure that this trend is not something that will easily be reversed.
Taiwan's indigenous peoples are in many ways marginalised by this debate. They are the original peoples of the island and were here for thousands of years before the Dutch, Chinese and others started to settle on the island. The debate is largely a contest between the Hoklo-speaking peoples who trace their roots on Taiwan back four hundred years and the Chinese who arrived with the KMT after 1945 and became the ruling elite of the Republic of China on Taiwan, imposing their Chinese
nationalism on the Taiwanese people through the education system. The efforts to assimilate indigenous peoples through the education system and teaching of Mandarin taught them a form of Chinese culture that was divorced from the Chinese cultural practices of the Hoklo and Hakka speaking peoples in Taiwan (Harrison, 2001: 69, 73). In the 1950s indigenous peoples realised that the Japanese or indigenous identities that had once been useful had become a political liability. Different
communities chose to adopt the “Chinese” identity being promoted by the Nationalist (KMT) government because it was politically advantageous (ibid.: 74-75).
Hence the indigenous peoples found themselves better accommodated by the politics of the KMT rather than the DPP which is often linked to a Hoklo-Taiwanese
nationalism. In addition there is not the same history of conflict between indigenous peoples and the Chinese who arrived after 1945 as there is with the Hoklo-speaking peoples. With regard to the latter there has been 400 years of fighting over access to
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
land. This is further complicated by the fact that the Hoklo-speaking people
intermarried with the Pingpu (plains peoples) (Brown, 2004). The indigenous groups that remain today are the peoples who have resisted assimilation with the Chinese-speaking settlers on Taiwan for 400 years.
There are several competing theories on the origins of Taiwan's indigenous peoples.
These theories may also be used to support certain political views or agendas. The southern origin theory, that the peoples migrated from the Philippines or Malaysia is used to distance Taiwan from China. It highlights the non-Chineseness of Taiwan, emphasising the uniqueness of Taiwan's peoples and negating the claims of the ROC and PRC to Taiwan (Stainton, 1999a: 29-32). The northern origin theory, that the peoples migrated to Taiwan from the area that is now southern China, is used to show the connections between Taiwan and China with China as the motherland (ibid.: 32-37). Finally, the Austronesian Homeland theory is that Taiwan was the place of origin of the Austronesian languages. This theory is a refinement of the northern origin theory suggesting early neolithic migrations from continental Asia followed by
independent development in Taiwan. This theory places Taiwan at the centre and links indigenous identity with Taiwan identity (ibid.: 37-41).
Current evidence and academic discourse gives greatest support to the Austronesian Homeland theory. This is based on analysis of linguistic and archaeological evidence from Taiwan and the many islands of the Indian and Pacific oceans where
Austronesian-speaking peoples are found (Bellwood, 2009). The idea of Austronesian is primarily a lingustic one. Bellwood's hypothesis is largely based on the linguistic view of Blust and supported by archaeological evidence (Paz, 1999: 151-152).
Blundell (2008) suggests the “idea of an ethnic continuum as a value deserving protection as an endangered heritage.” The Formosan-language speaking peoples of Taiwan represent a continuum from the origins of a language family extending back 6,000 years that now spans the Indian and Pacific Oceans. That the culture and knowledge of indigenous peoples has value as heritage implies that it is valuable not only to the peoples themselves, but as a living resource for the whole world to learn from.
The historical position of Taiwan's indigenous peoples is one of a gradual loss of
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
sovereignty and rights as a result of European, Chinese and Japanese settlement and colonisation over four centuries. Hsieh (1994a: 404-406) divides the history of
Taiwan's indigenous people into several periods according to their status. In the period up to 1624 they were the “only masters” as the only people living in Taiwan during this period were the indigenous Austronesian speaking peoples. From 1624 to 1661 they were “mostly masters”. The plains peoples who came under the rule of the Dutch and Spanish lost their superior position, but peoples in the other regions of Taiwan were unaffected. From 1661 to 1875, under the rule of Koxinga and the Qing
(Manchu) dynasty, they were “half masters”. Indigenous peoples in the mountain areas and east coast retained their position of master while the plains peoples were
assimilated into the dominant culture. From 1875 to 1930 they were “masters in fewer areas”. In 1875 the Qing government began to extend its power into the mountain areas and then in 1895 the Japanese occupied Taiwan and gradually established control over the entire island. Indigenous people resisted rule by foreign powers, but were still eventually conquered. The Wushe Rebellion in 1930 marked the final major act of resistance, after which the indigenous people were completely conquered. The final period from 1930 to the present is “lost position of master completely”.
The succession of colonial regimes on Taiwan have shaped the identity and position of Taiwan's indigenous peoples today. For the Atayal and other peoples that lived in the high mountains it was not until the Japanese era that their position underwent a massive change. External forces have tried to change the identities of these peoples first to become Japanese and then to become Chinese.
Indigenous memories of the Japanese era are mixed. Many express admiration for the Japanese while simultaneously remembering the oppression that they suffered. Simon (2006) contrasts the memories of the Truku people in Hualien with those of the
“Native Taiwanese” (Hoklo and Hakka speakers). For indigenous people the Japanese era was important for identity formation because it positioned them as resisters against colonialism. The Native Taiwanese lived through the Japanese colonial period unlike those Chinese who arrived with the KMT after 1945. Memories of the Japanese era are central to their ethnic identity. They see the Japanese period as a symbol of modernity and Japanese education as a sign of higher levels of development than China at that time.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
In the late 1940s and 1950s when Taiwan was under the rule of the Chinese KMT indigenous identity was in a state of flux. Harrison (2001: 51) argues that indigenous peoples didn't necessarily have Chinese identities forcefully imposed on them, but chose their identity to suit the circumstances. In the 1950s villages chose a “Chinese”
identity because of the perceived political and social advantages. Harrison looks at the case of Ma Zhili. Ma was the son of a Fujianese man who fled to a Puyuma
community in the hills to escape trouble with the government. Ma Zhili grew up speaking Hoklo and Puyuma. He attended a Japanese school where he became fluent in Japanese. He married the daughter of a Puyuma elite and became a “chief”. Ma was able to skillfully adopt these different identities for personal and political advantage under both the Japanese and Chinese regimes (ibid.: 62-63).
In the current era, democratisation and the indigenous rights movement have allowed indigenous peoples to have more opportunity to define themselves on their own terms.
The “nine tribes” model was based on the work of Japanese anthropologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It was an external imposition and previous self-identification was based at the village level. The indigenous identities that
subsequently came to exist were a result of the anthropological research that classified them (ibid.: 55-56). The “nine tribes” model has been abandoned since 2000 and there are now fourteen officially recognised groups. Indigenous peoples in Taiwan are no longer forced to accept the labels imposed on them by outsiders. Instead they are increasingly able to self-identify and classification is now based on an emic viewpoint.
Blundell (2001) interviews a member of the Toda group. The Toda are a group of about 1,000 people in Hualien County and are classified as Atayal or Seediq. This member of the group asserts their right to recognition as a distinct group based on their self-identification. Achieving such recognition depends on the strength of the case that the people can make to the central government. The group needs evidence of its cultural heritage as well as a claim over territory. The latter is complicated by the fact many peoples were moved around during the Japanese era and may no longer inhabit their ancestral villages. There is also the need for some consensus or
agreement within the group and the interviewee in this case acknowledges this is not entirely accepted by the group.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Identity is not something which is static, but changes due to both internal and external influences. Tradition varies from generation to generation. For example, the
documentary film Amis Hip Hop (Tsai, 2005a) shows the age-set ceremonies in the Amis speaking community of Dulan in Taidong County. The young men use the latest pop music as part of their ceremony. They are not attempting to faithfully copy the dances of the older generations, but instead to prove themselves by being more
outrageous than the previous age-set. However, they are still maintaining an important tradition even if the outward forms are different. Tradition essentially means to pass on knowledge and culture. It is rooted in what bonds together the community, while the outward expressions of those bonds adapt to the time and circumstances.
Amis Hip Hop shows that identity is fluid rather than fixed; it reflects both continuity and change. It is like the water in a river. Although the water at the source of the river is not the same as that at the river's mouth, it is part of a continuous unbroken flow.
Similarly the cultures of Taiwan's indigenous peoples that we observe today should be considered in the same way. Traditional customs and contemporary knowledge
overlap in present day Taiwan. The age-set ceremonies in Dulan show this as do the people of Smangus who draw upon both the gaga (Atayal traditional law) and modern technology and ideas.
Christianity is also linked to indigenous identity in Taiwan. In indigenous villages throughout Taiwan the church usually occupies a prominent position. This is often a marker that distinguishes indigenous towns and villages from those of the Chinese-speaking mainstream in Taiwan. Christianity first came to Taiwan with the Dutch and Spanish in the seventeenth century. The Pingpu converted to Christianity whole villages at a time in the 1860s and 1870s. They sought to ally themselves with foreign powers who they perceived as more powerful than the Qing regime (Brown, 2004: 51-52). Mountain villages converted to Christianity on a large scale in the 1950s
(Harrison, 2001: 76). Christianity is now seen as “a universal symbol of pan-Taiwan aboriginalism.” Indigenous peoples have appropriated Christianity as a symbol of power introduced from the West to help cope with the impacts of Chinese
colonisation. It has become a symbol distinguishing indigenous people from those of Chinese heritage in Taiwan (Hsieh, 1994b: 194-195).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Stainton (2002) describes the role that the Presbyterian Church has played in the support of indigenous peoples and their rights. Unlike their Catholic counterparts, all indigenous Presbyterian Churches have indigenous people serving as ministers. They preach a Christianity that is indigenised and incorporates many of the structures and functions of traditional culture. For many indigenous people religious and ethnic identity are overlapping constructs. Conversion was a means of deepening rather than changing identity. In the 1970s the Presbyterian Church began to preach about and promote the rights of both Hoklo-speaking Taiwanese and indigenous people against the KMT rule. The church resisted oppressive government policies by denouncing them as violations of God-given human rights.