《芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程 (1965-2010)》

全文

(1)國立台灣師範大學的應用華語文學系碩士班. 碩士論文. 《芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程 (1965-2010)》 The Chicago Metropolitan Area’s Taiwanese Immigrants’ Identity Formation and Transformation Process (1965-2010). 指導老師 : 楊聰榮 Advisor: Edwin Tsung-Rong Yang 學生：貝華龍 Student: Beatty, Steven Crawford. 中華民國一零五年七月初.

(2) 論文摘要「你是『中國人』還是『台灣人』」？美國的 2010 年人口普查顯示美國當年有大概 17,941,286 個亞裔美國人，其中 3,794,673 個美國人認定自己是「中國人」，而 230,382 個美國人認定自己是「台灣人」。雖然前者比後者比較多，但後者的官方數字自從 1980 年以來至少每十年增長。根據美國的 1980 年人口普查的數據，有華人血統的人口占 2 億 2 千多萬人，而只有 16,390 在「祖先」的欄位填上了「台灣人」；1990 年人口普查顯示了官方數字增加到近 7 萬 5 千人；2000 年人口普查顯示了官方數字增加到近 14 萬 5 千人；2010 年人口普查顯示了官方數字增加到超過 23 萬人。至於個人動機，筆者自小便投入台灣歷史和社會的相關研究，於 2013 年被國立台灣師範大學的應用華語文學系碩士班錄取後，便開始反思該寫什麼論文題目，花了大概一年的時間，研究關於不同海外華人的地區，逐漸了解到東南亞地區的研究並不興趣。因為筆者是台美混血兒，故想做美國華人的相關研究。至於學術動機，筆者想要研究為什麼只有 16,390 位美國公民在美國的 1980 年人口普查認定自己是「台灣人」，但三十年後這個數字成長到 230,382 位美國公民。至於研究目的，本論文特別地探討下列問題：1) 台灣、美國及中國的事件和政策，如何影響到芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民認同形成和轉變之過程；2) 有多少芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民認定自己是「台灣人」或「中國人」；3) 共多少芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民，覺得台灣需要維持兩岸分治、海峽兩岸由中華人民共和國政府管轄、海峽兩岸由中華民國政府管轄或台灣宣稱獨立。本論文的主要問題如下：1) 您本來覺得您是「中國人」還是「台灣人」？現在呢？2) 至少每十年的美國人口普查顯示越來越多人認為自己是「台灣人」的原因為何？3) 至於台灣問題，請告訴筆者您的想法。至於「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」大部分會員從頭到尾認定自己是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」，而其他會員本來認定自己是「中國人」，但後來認為自己是「台灣人」。很多於 1990 年代之前離開台灣而移民到美國的會員參加了某個台灣同胞或台獨協會之後，才終於學到很多在台灣發生的被中國國民黨政府掩埋的事件，因此順便認為自己是「台灣 I.

(3) 人」，而不是「中國人」。除了之外，也有很多會員在台灣自己耳聞目睹很多事件。隨著時間的推移，很多台灣同胞協會的會員說服越來越來自台灣的移民者及其後裔改變自己的認同而推動其歷史和文化。由於這個協會的百分之百會員認為自己是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」，大部分的會員卻支持台灣政府宣稱獨立而成為一個新的主權國家。至於「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」，其大部分會員從頭到尾認定自己是「中國人」，而不是「台灣人」。根據其會員對於美國人口普查的現象，大部分會員未提出意見或者未知道。雖然其大部分會員從頭到尾認定自己是「中國人」，而不是「台灣人」，但他們卻支持台灣政府繼續維持兩岸分治的現狀。本論文有一些限制。數量而言，只能找到了 67 個被訪者，但後來發現 22 個被訪者的答案和問卷並未適合本論文的研究。筆者只能深入訪談三個人。另外，「大芝加哥地區中國和平統一促進會」的社長並未信任筆者，但由電子郵件寄給筆者很多資料。大體上，「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」和「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」缺乏很多一手和二手資料。因此，筆者推薦下個研究在美台灣移民或台裔美國人的學者達成三個目標：第一，研究一個更多來自台灣移民或台裔美國人居住的地方；第二，如果學者找到一些台美協會的話，那麼他可以花比較多時間提早跟這些協會的會員聯絡而安排時間見面；第三，學者應該要花更多時間使這些協會的會員信任他。筆者寫到這裡終於發現了本論文的下列重點：第一，雖然本論文未涉及百分之百芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民之答案，但是本論文卻涉及到該地區的兩個重要台灣同胞協會；第二，雖然該地區並未任何事件或法律政策影響到在美台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程，但有很多在台灣、美國的其他城市及中國發生的事件和法律政策卻影響到在美台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程；第三，不管誰自覺自己是「台灣人」或「中國人」，芝加哥大都市區並沒有一位台灣移民支持中國及台灣由中華人民共和國政府管轄。. 關鍵字：芝加哥大都市區，台灣移民、認同、形成和轉變之過程、中國人、台灣人. II.

(4) Abstract of Thesis “Are you ‘Chinese’ or ‘Taiwanese’”? The 2010 U.S. Census Bureau reports that there were approximately 17,941,286 Asian-Americans, among them were 3,794,673 American citizens who self-identified themselves as “Chinese”, whereas 230,372 American citizens who self-identified themselves as “Taiwanese”. Although the former is more than the latter, the latter’s official number has grown every 10 years ever since 1980. According to the 1980 U.S. Census Bureau, there were 2.2 million American citizens who were of Chinese descent, though only 16,390 people under the category “ancestors” wrote down “Taiwanese”; the 1990 U.S. Census Bureau showed that this number increased to nearly 75,000 people; the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau illustrated that this number increased to nearly 145,000 people; the 2010 U.S. Census Bureau showed that this number increased to well over 230,000 people. In regards to my personal motive, ever since I was little I have always delved into the research concerning Taiwanese history and society. After being accepted into National Taiwan Normal University’s Department of Applied Chinese Language and Literature’s Graduate Studies in 2013, I began spending about a year thinking over what topic I am going to write for my thesis. During that time, I researched topics concerning numerous overseas-Chinese areas throughout Southeast Asia. Overtime, I realized that these areas were of little interest to me. Given that I am half Taiwanese and half white, I eventually decided to research a topic relative to Chinese-Americans. In regards to my academic motive, I started wondering why the 1980 U.S. Census Bureau only recorded 16,390 Taiwanese-Americans, yet this number increased to 230,382 TaiwaneseAmericans 30 years later. In regards to the purpose of my research, this thesis specifically analyzes the following questions: 1) How the incidents and policies of Taiwan, the United States and China affected the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese immigrants’ identity formation and transformation process; 2) the number of Taiwanese immigrants in the Chicago metropolitan area who view themselves as either “Taiwanese” or “Chinese”; 3) the total number of Taiwanese immigrants in the Chicago metropolitan area who feel that Taiwan needs to maintain the status quo, that both sides of the strait should be governed by the government of the People’s Republic of China, that both sides of the III.

(5) strait should be governed by the government of the Republic of China or that Taiwan should declare independence. This thesis had its limitations. In terms of numbers, I only found 67 respondents, yet discovered that 22 respondents’ answers and questionnaires were not suitable with my research. I only found 3 people to whom I could conduct in-depth interviews. In addition, although the president of the “Chinese American Alliance for China’s Peaceful Reunification” did not trust me, he did send me a lot of information via email. Overall, both the “Taiwanese Association of America, The Greater Chicago Chapter” and the “Taiwan Benevolent Association of America of Chicago” lacked a lot of 1st and 2nd hand sources and information. Hence, I suggest that the next scholar who decides to research Taiwanese-American immigrants or Taiwanese Americans achieve 3 goals: first, research an area that consists of more Taiwanese-American immigrants or Taiwanese Americans; second, if a scholar finds several Taiwanese-American associations, then he/she should quickly take the initiative to contact and schedule a time/place to meet with its members; third, he/she should spend more time to allow these associations to trust him/her. At this point, I have finally concluded the following main points of my thesis: first, although this thesis did not include 100% of the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese-American immigrants’ answers, this thesis at least included two important Taiwanese-compatriot associations; second, although the area I researched did not have one important event or policy that impacted its Taiwanese-American immigrants’ identity formation and transformation process, I did find many events and policies occurring in Taiwan, other cities in the United States and China that, in fact, did affect it; third, whether someone identified themselves as “Taiwanese” or “Chinese”, the area I researched did not have one Taiwanese-American immigrant that supported both Taiwan and China to be ruled by the People’s Republic of China’s government.. Keywords: Chicago metropolitan area, Taiwanese immigrants, identity, formation and transformation process, Chinese, Taiwanese. IV.

(6) 論文概述「你是『中國人』還是『台灣人』」？對一般台灣人而言，這是一個長久以來，不容易回答的問題。台灣的 2016 年調查顯示幾近於零的 1980 年後出生的台灣人認定自己是「中國人」，而高達七十趴則認定自己是「台灣人」。美國的 2010 年人口普查顯示美國當年有大概 17,941,286 個亞裔美國人，其中 3,794,673 個美國人認定自己是「中國人」，而 230,382 個美國人認定自己是「台灣人」。雖然前者比後者比較多，但後者的官方數字自從 1980 年以來至少每十年增長。根據美國的 1980 年人口普查的數據，有華人血統的人口占 2 億 2 千多萬人，而只有 16,390 在「祖先」的欄位填上了「台灣人」；1990 年人口普查顯示了官方數字增加到近 7 萬 5 千人；2000 年人口普查顯示了官方數字增加到近 14 萬 5 千人；2010 年人口普查顯示了官方數字增加到超過 23 萬人。至於個人動機，筆者自小便投入台灣歷史和社會的相關研究，於 2013 年被國立台灣師範大學的應用華語文學系碩士班錄取後，便開始反思該寫什麼論文題目，花了大概一年的時間，研究關於不同海外華人的地區，逐漸了解到東南亞地區的研究並不興趣。因為筆者是台美混血兒，故想做美國華人的相關研究。至於學術動機，筆者想要研究為什麼只有 16,390 位美國公民在美國的 1980 年人口普查認定自己是「台灣人」，但三十年後這個數字成長到 230,382 位美國公民。至於研究目的，本論文特別地探討下列問題：1) 台灣、美國及中國的事件和政策，如何影響到芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民認同形成和轉變之過程；2) 有多少芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民認定自己是「台灣人」或「中國人」；3) 共多少芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民，覺得台灣需要維持兩岸分治、海峽兩岸由中華人民共和國政府管轄、海峽兩岸由中華民國政府管轄或台灣宣稱獨立。筆者發現了至今未有學者對於在美台灣移民的認同，或認同的轉變做相關研究。筆者想訪問第一代台灣移民，而非第二代以後的台裔美國人，因為大部分第一代台灣移民對在台灣、美國及中國以前發生的事件，和政策較清楚和熟悉，也不覺得自己是「美國人」，而覺得自己是「台灣人」或「中國人」。反而，大部分第二. V.

(7) 代以上台裔美國人的經歷，與第一代台灣移民的經歷截然不同，而不認定自己是「台灣人」或「中國人」，就認定自己是「土生土長的美國人」。本論文主要從下屬文獻來探討下列相關理論：「蘇氏理論」(種族/文化特徵的發展模式)。這個理論分析某人的種族認同形成和轉變之過程。這個理論提供了五個階段，且反映被壓迫人的掙扎，亦即他們謀求理解自己遭遇時的經歷。這個理論包括下列階段： . 「認肯階段」：反映少數群體的成員傾向於模仿主流文化的價值觀、信仰及觀點。舉例，日本投降而接替先後，一般台灣人本來遵循中華文化的習俗和價值觀，並且認定自己是「中國人」。. . 「反認肯階段」：反映一個特定事件違反少數群體的成員的信仰和價值觀，導致少數群體的成員開始傾向於疑問而挑戰主流文化的價值觀和信仰。一位對自己的文化慚愧的少數民族成員碰到一位對自己的文化驕傲的大民族成員的時候，前者就有可能將被冒犯。舉例，1947 年「二二八事件」和 1949 年中國國民黨政府遷台而宣布戒嚴令發生以後，許多台灣住民開始公開質疑中國國民黨和外省人兩者的意識形態，就不知道為什麼來自中國大陸的勢力想要強迫他們同化。. . 「抵抗和埋頭階段」：這個階段的特點是某人埋頭自己的少數民族文化和對主流文化擁有消極態度。一位少數民族成員有可能將對大民族的鎮壓和種族歧視兩者有憤怒、虧心或羞恥。舉例，很多台灣居民對中國國民黨和外省人兩者的鎮壓和腐敗有憤怒、虧心或羞恥，所以心血來潮離開台灣而移民到國外，亦即美國、加拿大和歐洲。他們移民到國外之後，就反思自己的目的。台灣移民本來或未來認定自己是「台灣人」以後，便建立或加入台灣同胞協會或台獨協會。. . 「內省階段」：反映某人側重於了解本人和自己的文化性群體。這位人致力於更了解自己的群體的意義。此外，某人有可能還在對主流文化擁有消極態度。舉例，在美台灣移民建立或加入台灣同胞協會或台獨協會以後，就謀求推動自己的文化，也謀求聘請其他台灣同胞加入其協會。其主要目的有可能. VI.

(8) 是說服其他國家承認台灣是一個獨立國家，並且引起各個國家和社會承認台灣人的身份。 . 「綜合意識階段」：反映某人表現出來穩定的認同，同時欣賞自己的文化和其他文化的特點。由於這位人終於有安全感，他不但欣賞主流文化和自己的文化，且終於承認了兩者都有正反。舉例，隨著時間的推移，越來越多國家和社會將承認台灣人的身份。因此，越來越多台灣同胞協會和台獨協會的會員將推動兩岸和平與交流。筆者選擇研究芝加哥大都市區，是因故鄉靠近此區域，且從未有人研究過該. 地區或其城市的台灣移民。芝加哥從被建立時到現今是該國最大的工業，也算是該國其中最大的移民城市。隨著芝加哥大學的社會科學部在世界上很著名，芝加哥算是社會學家最流行的題目。差不多一百六十年前，芝加哥的移民人口為大概 50%。從 1880 年至 1914 年期間，芝加哥的移民人口大多是來自歐洲的中部、東部及南部，而最大的族群是來自波蘭。本來，芝加哥的移民人口大多是來自貧窮的地區，且沒受過教育或學到精湛的技巧。與以前相反，該城市的移民者現在都優異。美國的第一潮來自中國大陸的移民者移民到加州。不久以後，很多來自中國大陸的移民者從加州遷移到芝加哥。第一條橫貫大陸鐵路於 1869 年被華人興建之後，更多來自廣東省的中國人遷移到芝加哥。第二次世界大戰結束之後，美國的聯邦政府說服該國國會於 1948 年通過《流離失所者法案》，以便放寬美國《1924 年移民法案》的移民限制。結果，許多來自歐洲西部和東部的移民和難民遷移到美國。美國總統詹森於 1965 年通過《移民和國籍修正法案》之後，美國的移民者大多是來自亞洲和拉丁美洲。隨著時間的推移，芝加哥的移民人口目前為近兩百萬個來自兩百多個地區的人。大概三分之二的移民者於 1979 年以後才移民到美國，而大概 44%的移民者於 1990 年代才移民到美國。根據 2000 年的統計數字，芝加哥城市的移民人口為 21.7%，而芝加哥大都市區的移民人口為 17.5%。根據 2001 年的統計數字，大概 233, 690 個人遷移到芝加哥大都市區，而大概 40%是來自國外。芝加哥當年是美國第二最大的移民城市。. VII.

(9) 華人在下列四個歷史時期上移民到美國：從 1849 年至 1882 年間的開放移民；從 1882 年至 1943 年間的移民限制，除非是商人、學者等等；從 1943 年至 1965 年間的移民配額制度；從 1965 年到現今的《移民和國籍修正法案》的開放移民。 1871 年的「芝加哥大火」發生的時候，芝加哥官員首次記載了該城市的第一個華人私營公司。後來，該城市的官員指揮了很多建商加緊進行施工。當時，芝加哥的官員又記載了該城市的第一個華人私營洗衣店。不久以後，芝加哥的第一個唐人街於 1880 年代被建立。與其他城市的唐人街相反，芝加哥唐人街的第一個非居住中心的民族飛地。不過，芝加哥唐人街提供華人基本生意和需求。由於美國國會於 1882 年頒佈了《排華法案》，大多數美國華人心血來潮地入境隨俗，因此遷移到芝加哥之後，就不想住在唐人街，而且想要住在該城市的郊區。中國共產黨於 1949 年在北京建立中華人民共和國而控制中國地區之後，許多來自中國大陸的居民移民到芝加哥。與來自香港居民相反，許多大陸人的英文程度算流行，因此不想住在唐人街，而且想要住在該城市的郊區。根據美國的 1960 年人口普查，芝加哥有差不多七千個華人，而隨著時間的飛逝，越來越多是在美國出生。自從美國總統詹森於 1965 年通過了《移民和國籍修正法案》，美國政府每年准每個國家派遣兩萬人移民到美國。因此，許多來自中國大陸、台灣、香港及東南亞的移民者每年移民到美國。根據 1970 年的統計數字，芝加哥當年有大概 14,077 個華人，結果當年有美國第四最大的華裔美國人的地方。美國與中華人民共和國於 1979 年 1 月 1 日建立外交關係之後，美國政府從此每年准兩萬個來自中國大陸和兩萬個來自台灣的移民者移民到美國。越南戰爭於 1975 年結束了之後，許多來自越南、柬埔寨、泰國及寮國的華人移民到芝加哥的唐人街和該地區的周圍郊區。美國國會於 1986 年通過了《移民改革和控制法案》之後，美國政府從此每年准 25,000 個來自香港的移民者移民到美國。目前，華裔美國人是美國最大的亞洲族群，而在美國出生的華裔美國人的人口為 57%。雖然如此，該城市的華人人口大多是在國外出生。與全美國的趨勢類似，芝加哥的華人人口算是該城市其中最佳的公民。目前，芝加哥有超過五萬個華僑，而來自中國大陸的移民者為 69%，來自台灣的移民者為 19%，以及來自香港的移民者為 12%。. VIII.

(10) 與台灣的現象相似，大部分駐芝台裔美國人在二十世紀下半葉下支持台灣宣稱獨立，而小部分支持台灣與中國統一。駐芝台裔美國人對中國國民黨戒嚴的反對和抗議終於燈紅酒綠。台灣民主化和民主進步黨的勝利兩者發生之後，更多人從台灣移民到美國。芝加哥大都市區的台灣人與中國人的藩籬來源於社會、經濟和政治之差別。舉例，雖然芝加哥大都市區的台灣人通常講官話和閩南話兩者，但該市區的中國人通常講廣東話。前者的教育和職業兩者程度高於後者，且前者住在該市區的市郊，而後者住在芝加哥唐人街。雖然筆者找不到芝加哥大都市區的任何事件或政策影響到台灣移民或其認同形成和轉變之過程，但筆者卻知道美國牧師、社會運動者、人權主義者和非裔美國人民權運動領袖小馬丁·路德·金恩不但啟發了階級覺悟，且引起了全美國的少數民族，尤其非裔美國人，以同侵害公民權利的行為作鬥爭。除了之外，金恩先生說服美國國會於 1964 年通過《1964 年民權法案》，以便廢除了種族隔離，以及對黑人、少數民族與婦女的歧視性。不過，金恩先生於 1968 年 4 月 4 日在美國田納西州孟菲斯旅館內遭槍擊亡故之後，芝加哥、巴爾的摩及華盛頓哥倫比亞特區經歷了大暴動。一共 39 個美國公民過世了，而其中 34 個為非裔美國人。至於芝加哥的死傷， 11 個老百姓過世了、48 個老百姓和 90 個警察們受傷了、2,150 個老百姓被警察逮捕了。因此，金恩先生的確對全美國和芝加哥的少數民族有產生巨大影響。筆者於 2015 年 12 月中旬筆者回到芝加哥後，便繼續蒐集資料，至春節時期才聯絡到親民主進步黨協會「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」、親台灣與中國統一的協會「大芝加哥地區中國和平統一促進會」及親中國國民黨協會「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」。為了以免偏頗，本論文重視了一個偏向「台灣人」認同而兩個偏向「中國人」認同的協會，是因為筆者預測比較多芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民將認定自己是「台灣人」，而比較少將認定自己是「中國人」。筆者將在這個特定的日期聯絡到這些協會，是因為這些協會在春節時將舉辦大型活動，故筆者可藉由參加活動時，發放問卷和訪問主要會員。畢竟筆者需要很多時間閱讀本人蒐集的參考文獻。目的不但是發放問卷和訪問每個協會的主要會員，而且是蒐集每個協會的一手和二手資料。. IX.

(11) 本論文重視從 1895 年至 1979 年間在台灣發生的事件，以及台灣人的認同形成和轉變之過程。1895 年指由日本當年到頭來中國與中國簽署《馬關條約》，而統治台灣，所以台灣人的認同開始形成和轉變，而 1979 年指美國與中華民國斷交外交關係。另外，本論文分析從 1982 年至 2010 年間台灣、美國、中國的事件和政策如何影響到台灣和在美台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程。1982 年指「台灣人公共事務會」的建立，而 2010 年指美國的最新人口普查。雖然如此，本論文將提到兩者的歷史背景和認同形成和轉變之過程，是因為兩者的研究互為因果。筆者研究兩者才能徹底地了解芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程。反而，本論文所題目的日期是從 1965 年開始，是因為當年美國總統詹森通過了《移民和國籍修正法案》，所以從此一大堆台灣人移民到美國和芝加哥城市和其都市區。 1945 年台灣光復的時候，台灣人心振奮，就以為台灣人民將恢復自由與平等。大部分的台灣人民當時屬於「蘇氏理論」的第一個階段「認肯階段」，就是認定自己是「中國人」或者「台灣人」，雖然比較多認定自己為前者。「白色恐怖時期」致使了許多台灣人民被警察逮捕，而至少三萬多個學生、人權鬥士、房東及商人死亡了。台灣白色恐怖時期意味著許多台灣人民所認同開始轉變。隨著時間的推移，蔣介石和其兒子蔣經國推動了「中國化」的運動，而禁止「台灣化」的運動。. 從此，. 越來越多台灣人民的認同屬於「蘇氏理論」的第二個階段「反認肯階段」，就是一個特定事件違反少數群體的成員的信仰和價值觀，導致少數群體的成員開始傾向於疑問而挑戰主流文化的價值觀和信仰。在台灣省戒嚴令下，台灣警備總司令部負責逮捕並處罰威脅該地區的保安和社會秩序的公民。一萬多名公民被軍方法院判刑。此外，該地區政府指揮了許多警方打擊其人民。舉例，警察於 1963 年花了兩個月時間逮捕超過九百名公民，然後把他們送到很小的沿海島嶼。雖然這些人只是向政府抗議，但該地區的報紙上標題說明，這些人都是該地區的流氓、賭客及叛逆者。這個所謂罪行的判刑有可能是無期徒刑或死刑。很多台灣人民的認同當時屬於「蘇氏理論」的第二個階段「反認肯階段」。反而，很多台灣人民因台灣法律政策和教育制度而不敢挑戰該地區政府的「中國化」綱領，就安靜地認定自己是「台灣人」；而剩下部分當時屬於「蘇氏理論」的第一個階段「認肯階段」。 X.

(12) 1979 年第二個「中美聯合公報」包含下列內容：1) 美國與中華人民共和國於 1979 年 1 月 1 日同意互相承認，並且建立外交關係；2) 雖然美國承認世界上只有一個中國，台灣是中國的一部份，中華人民共和國政府是中國的唯一合法政府，但美國人民將繼續與台灣人民維持文化、商業及其他非正式關係；3) 美國與中華人民共和國重申第一個「中美聯合公報」之原則。反而，美國總統卡特和美國國會於同年 4 月通過了《台灣關係法》。從此越來越多台灣人民對其地區和政府兩者失望，所以想要去國外定居。這些人達到國外以後，就開始進入了「蘇氏理論」的第三個階段「抵抗和埋頭階段」，就是他們本來或未來認定自己是「台灣人」以後，就建立或加入台灣同胞協會或台獨協會。根據美國的 1980 年人口普查的數據，有華人血統的人口占 2 億 2 千多萬人，而只有 16,390 個美國公民在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」。但隨著美國對台灣比較寬鬆的政策，1990 年的美國人口普查顯示了近 7 萬 5 千個美國公民在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」。下列台灣、美國、中國的事件和政策順次影響到這個數字：「台灣人公共事務會」的建立、劉宜良暗殺身亡、「233 個國會同期決議」被通過、民主進步黨的建立、台灣省戒嚴令的解除及「天安門廣場屠殺」。至於這些事件和政策的上下排行，筆者認為如下：第一是「天安門廣場屠殺」，第二是「台灣人公共事務會」的建立，第三是民主進步黨的建立，第四是台灣省戒嚴令的解除，第五是劉宜良暗殺身亡，第六是「233 個國會同期決議」被通過。因此，這些在台灣、美國、中國的事件和政策的確影響到了在美台灣移民和其後裔的認同形成和轉變之過程。反而，由於台裔美國人當時還沒舉辦很重要的「台灣意識」示威運動或示威遊行，以及越來越多美國公民剛開始認為自己是「台灣人」，因此台裔美國人當時還留在「蘇氏理論」的第三個階段「抵抗和埋頭階段」。隨著美國對台灣比較寬鬆的政策，1990 年的美國人口普查顯示了近 7 萬 5 千個美國公民在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」。筆者認為下列台灣、美國、中國的事件和政策順次影響到這個數字：「台灣人公共事務會」的建立、劉宜良暗殺身亡、「233 個國會同期決議」被通過、民主進步黨的建立、台灣省戒嚴令的解除及「天安門廣場屠殺」。至於這些事件和政策的上下排行，筆者認為如下：第一是「天安門廣場屠殺」，第二是「台灣人公共事務會」的建立，第三是民主進 XI.

(13) 步黨的建立，第四是台灣省戒嚴令的解除，第五是劉宜良暗殺身亡，第六是「233 個國會同期決議」被通過。因此，這些在台灣、美國、中國的事件和政策的確影響到了在美台灣移民和其後裔的認同形成和轉變之過程。反而，由於台裔美國人當時還沒舉辦很重要的「台灣意識」示威運動或示威遊行，以及越來越多美國公民開始認為自己是「台灣人」，因此台裔美國人當時還留在「「蘇氏理論」的第三個階段「抵抗和埋頭階段」。 2000 年的美國人口普查顯示了近 14 萬 5 千個美國公民在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」。下列的重要事件影響到這個數字，以及影響到海外台灣僑民和台灣人民舉辦示威遊行和示威運動：李登輝總統於 1992 年 7 月 31 日廢止台灣警備總司令部、中華人民共和國政府經常堅稱台灣的名稱確定為「中華臺北」、美國國會議員和美國參議員經常通過對台灣所國家狀態和保安的決議、「千島湖事件」、民主進步黨候選人的權威騰達、台灣的盟邦偶爾嘗試說服聯合國會員承認台灣是一個獨立國家，「台灣海峽飛彈危機」、柯林頓總統宣布的「三不」政策、台灣被「世界衛生組織」接納、《拔河：台灣的故事》的紀錄片、李登輝總統宣布了其政府廢除「一個中國」的政策，且宣佈了中華民國與中華人民共和國之間關係從此將被其政府通稱「兩個不同而平等國家」或「特殊兩國論」及 2000 年中華民國總統選舉的結果。由於這些事件和政策的影響力很類似，因此這些事件和政策的上下排行不可思議。在美台灣移民當時達到了「蘇氏理論」的第三個階段「抵抗和埋頭階段」和第四個階段「內省階段」之間的邊境。這個人口普查顯示了從十年前到現在，幾乎兩倍美國公民在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」。此外，在十年以內，在美台灣移民和其後裔在美國華盛頓和其他地方以台灣、美國、中國的事件和政策舉辦示威運動和示威遊行。 2010 年的美國人口普查被美國商務部經濟和統計管理局進行之前，六個非營利的組織主辦了一個台美運動。這些組織提出，最近的預估預計美國有超過一百萬個台灣僑民和其後裔，但 2000 年的美國人口普查顯示了近 14 萬 5 千個美國公民在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」而已。為了其族群在美國被承認，台美民協會推動了全美台灣僑民和其後裔在「祖先」這個欄位填上了「台灣人」。結果，依據人口普查局的統計數字，在全美國 50 州的亞洲人或混有一種以上血統的人口中， XII.

(14) 自認為是「台灣人」的總人數是 23 萬 429 人，其中人數最多的州依序是加州的 11 萬，紐約州的 1 萬 9000，以及與德州的 1 萬 6500 人，台灣人最少的州，是南達科塔州的 40 人。因此，在美台灣移民和其後裔當時終於達到了「蘇氏理論」的第五個階段「綜合意識階段」，就是越來越多美國的台灣僑民和其後裔不但加入了其台美協會和運動，而且越來越多國家和社會將認定台灣住民都是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」。最重要的是，這個族群的確要推動兩岸和平與交流。雖然「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」和「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」兩者會員的答案無虞匱乏，但本論文的主要問題如下：1) 您本來覺得您是「中國人」還是「台灣人」？現在呢？2) 至少每十年的美國人口普查顯示越來越多人認為自己是「台灣人」的原因為何？3) 至於台灣問題，請告訴筆者您的想法。「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」和「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」兩者會員的答案之總結如下： . 「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」：根據其會員的認同形成和改變之過程，大部分會員從頭到尾認定自己是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」，而其他會員本來認定自己是「中國人」，但後來認為自己是「台灣人」。根據其會員對於美國人口普查的現象，很多於 1990 年代之前離開台灣而移民到美國的會員參加了某個台灣同胞或台獨協會之後，才終於學到很多在台灣發生的被中國國民黨政府掩埋的事件，因此順便認為自己是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」。除了之外，也有很多會員在台灣自己耳聞目睹很多事件。隨著時間的推移，很多台灣同胞協會的會員說服越來越來自台灣的移民者及其後裔改變自己的認同而推動其歷史和文化。根據其會員對於兩岸關係的未來，由於這個協會的百分之百會員認為自己是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」，大部分的會員卻支持台灣政府宣稱獨立而成為一個新的主權國家。. . 「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」：根據其會員的認同形成和改變之過程，其大部分會員從頭到尾認定自己是「中國人」，而不是「台灣人」。根據其會員對於美國人口普查的現象，大部分會員未提出意見或者未知道。根據其. XIII.

(15) 會員對於兩岸關係的未來，雖然其大部分會員從頭到尾認定自己是「中國人」，而不是「台灣人」，但他們卻支持台灣政府繼續維持兩岸分治的現狀。筆者分析上列內容以後，才確認了這兩個協會有一些會員經歷了「蘇氏理論」的五個階段。舉例，很多會員本來自覺自己是「中國人」，而不是「台灣人」。他們當時屬於「認肯階段」。不過，他們在台灣經驗過一些事件或在美國學到一些在台灣一字不提的事件之後，才疑問和挑戰中國國民黨和其勢力兩者的意識形態，因此進入了「反認肯階段」。不久以後，他們自覺自己是「台灣人」，而不是「中國人」，因此在美國建立或加入台灣同胞協會。當時，他們屬於「抵抗和埋頭階段」。很多自覺自己是「台灣人」會員的目的是說服其他國家承認台灣是一個獨立國家、引起各個國家和社會承認台灣人的身分及啟發其後裔推動台灣意識。他們當時進入了「內省階段」。隨著時間的推移，大部分的會員，不管自己的認同，終於想要推動兩岸和平與交流。他們終於進入了「綜合意識階段」。本論文的重點是大部分的在美台灣移民，包括芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民，來到美國之後，才耳聞目睹很多在台灣發生的事件，所以影響到其認同形成和轉變的過程。除了之外，本論文有一些限制。數量而言，只能找到了 67 個被訪者，但後來發現 22 個被訪者的答案和問卷並未適合本論文的研究。筆者只能深入訪談三個人。另外，「大芝加哥地區中國和平統一促進會」的社長並未信任筆者，但由電子郵件寄給筆者很多資料。大體上，「全美台灣同鄉會芝加哥分會」和「芝加哥區全美台灣同鄉聯誼會」缺乏很多一手和二手資料。因此，筆者推薦下個研究在美台灣移民或台裔美國人的學者達成三個目標：第一，研究一個更多來自台灣移民或台裔美國人居住的地方；第二，如果學者找到一些台美協會的話，那麼他可以花比較多時間提早跟這些協會的會員聯絡而安排時間見面；第三，學者應該要花更多時間使這些協會的會員信任他。筆者寫到這裡終於發現了本論文的下列重點：第一，雖然本論文未涉及百分之百芝加哥大都市區的台灣移民之答案，但是本論文卻涉及到該地區的兩個重要台灣同胞協會；第二，雖然該地區並未任何事件或法律政策影響到在美台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程，但有很多在台灣、美國的其他城市及中國發生的事件和法律政策卻影響到在美台灣移民的認同形成和轉變之過程；第三，. XIV.

(16) 不管誰自覺自己是「台灣人」或「中國人」，芝加哥大都市區並沒有一位台灣移民支持中國及台灣由中華人民共和國政府管轄。. XV.

(17) Summary of Thesis “Are you ‘Chinese’ or ‘Taiwanese’”? According to the general population of Taiwan, this difficult question traces back many years ago. A 2016 poll conducted in Taiwan shows that nearly 0% of Taiwanese born after 1980 self-identify themselves as “Chinese”, while 70% of Taiwanese born during the same period view themselves as “Taiwanese”. The 2010 U.S. Census Bureau reports that there were approximately 17,941,286 Asian-Americans, among them were 3,794,673 American citizens who selfidentified themselves as “Chinese”, whereas 230,372 American citizens who selfidentified themselves as “Taiwanese”. Although the former is more than the latter, the latter’s official number has grown every 10 years ever since 1980. According to the 1980 U.S. Census Bureau, there were 2.2 million American citizens who were of Chinese descent, though only 16,390 people under the category “ancestors” wrote down “Taiwanese”; the 1990 U.S. Census Bureau showed that this number increased to nearly 75,000 people; the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau illustrated that this number increased to nearly 145,000 people; the 2010 U.S. Census Bureau showed that this number increased to well over 230,000 people. In regards to my personal motive, ever since I was little I have always delved into the research concerning Taiwanese history and society. After being accepted into National Taiwan Normal University’s Department of Applied Chinese Language and Literature’s Graduate Studies in 2013, I began spending about a year thinking over what topic I am going to write for my thesis. During that time, I researched topics concerning numerous overseas-Chinese areas throughout Southeast Asia. Overtime, I realized that these areas were of little interest to me. Given that I am half Taiwanese and half white, I eventually decided to research a topic relative to Chinese-Americans. In regards to my academic motive, I started wondering why the 1980 U.S. Census Bureau only recorded 16,390 Taiwanese-Americans, yet this number increased to 230,382 TaiwaneseAmericans 30 years later. In regards to the purpose of my research, this thesis specifically analyzes the following questions: 1) How the incidents and policies of Taiwan, the United States and China affected the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese immigrants’ identity formation and transformation process; 2) the number of Taiwanese immigrants in XVI.

(18) the Chicago metropolitan area who view themselves as either “Taiwanese” or “Chinese”; 3) the total number of Taiwanese immigrants in the Chicago metropolitan area who feel that Taiwan needs to maintain the status quo, that both sides of the strait should be governed by the government of the People’s Republic of China, that both sides of the strait should be governed by the government of the Republic of China or that Taiwan should declare independence. I have discovered that until now, not one scholar has ever conducted research in regards to Taiwanese-American immigrants’ identity formation or transformation. Hence, I attempt to only interview first-generation Taiwanese Americans and exclude secondgeneration-and-above Taiwanese Americans given that the majority of the former are not only more familiar and clear with past incidents and policies that occurred in Taiwan, the United States and China, but identify oneself as either being “Taiwanese” or “Chinese” and not American. On the contrary, second-generation-and-above Taiwanese Americans are the complete opposite. The thesis mainly uses the following theory to analyze the literature mentioned below: “Sue and Sue’s Theory” (Racial/Cultural Identity Development Model). This theory is used to analyze one’s ethnic identity formation and transformation process. This theory provides five stages and reflects repressed individuals’ identity confliction, namely their attempt in understanding what they encounter and undergo. The stages of this theory are as follows: . “Conformity stage”: reflects members of a minority group that are more inclined with identifying with the values, beliefs and perspectives shared by members of the dominant or mainstream culture. For example, before-and-after the surrender and disintegration of the Empire of Japan, the average person born and raised in Taiwan abided by the cultural customs and values set by Chinese civilization, hence viewed themselves as being “Chinese”.. . “Dissonance stage”: reflects a specific event that violates the values and beliefs held by members of the minority group, subsequently resulting in them starting to question and challenge the values and beliefs held by members of the dominant group. When a minority group member who is ashamed of his/her own culture encounters a dominant group member who is proud of his/her culture, the former, XVII.

(19) during this stage, becomes offended. For example, after both the “228 Incident” of 1947 and evacuation of the Nationalist Party government to Taiwan and subsequent proclamation of martial law, many people living in Taiwan began questioning both the Nationalist Party government and mainlanders’ ideology, specifically questioning as to why these forces are forcing them to assimilate into their society. . “Resistance and immersion stage”: this stage’s characteristic involves a minority group member who delves into his/her own culture and shows a negative attitude towards the dominant group’s culture. A minority group member most likely is ashamed or angry of living under the dominant group’s oppression and discrimination. For example, many people living in Taiwan began feeling ashamed or disgusted towards both the Nationalist Party government and mainlanders’ oppression and discrimination, hence began immigrating to other countries, such as the United States, Canada and European countries. After arriving in these countries, many began evaluating their own goals. Many of them originally or later on began viewing themselves as “Taiwanese”, hence begun establishing or joining Taiwanese-compatriot or Taiwanese pro-independence associations.. . “Introspection stage”: reflects an individual who devotes time to understand his/her own minority group, and especially devotes time to better understand the meaning of his/her own minority group. Moreover, this person more than likely shows a negative attitude towards the dominant group. For example, after Taiwanese-American immigrants established or joined Taiwanese-compatriot or Taiwanese pro-independence associations, they strive to promote their own culture, as well as encourage other compatriots to join their associations. Their main goal is most likely to persuade other countries to recognize the independent status of Taiwan, as well as for them to acknowledge the identity of the Taiwanese people.. . “Integrative awareness stage”: reflects one who is comfortable with his/her own stable identity, while also appreciating his/her own culture’s characteristics and qualities. Given that this person is finally secure with his/her own stable identity, XVIII.

(20) he/she not only appreciates the characteristics/qualities of both the dominant culture and his/her own culture, but also finally acknowledges that both groups have pros and cons. For example, more and more countries will eventually acknowledge the identity of the Taiwanese people with the passage of time. Hence, more and more members of both Taiwanese- compatriot and Taiwanese pro-independence associations will eventually promote cross strait relations and dialogue. I selected to research the Chicago metropolitan area, not only because my hometown is near this region, but also there has not been one person who has researched the Taiwanese immigrants of this area or area’s city. From the establishment of Chicago till now, this city has not only held the title as the United States’ largest industrial city, but has also been one of the country’s largest immigrant cities. Given that the University of Chicago’s sociology department is world famous, Chicago has been the most popular topic among sociologists. About 160 years ago, Chicago’s immigration population was approximately 50%. From 1880 until 1914, the majority of Chicago’s immigration population was from eastern, central and southern Europe, with the largest group from Poland. Originally, most of Chicago’s immigrants arrived from poor areas and most either were not highly educated or had any viable skills. In contrast, this city’s immigrants are very exceptional. The United States’ first wave of immigrants arrived to California from China; afterwards, many migrated from California to Chicago. After the First Transcontinental Railroad was completed in 1869, many Chinese immigrants from Guangdong province migrated to Chicago. Following WWII, the federal government of the United States persuaded congress in 1948 to pass the “Displaced Persons Act”, which relaxed the immigration limits set by this country’s “Immigration Act of 1924”. As a result, many immigrants and refugees from western and eastern Europe migrated to the United States. After President Johnson passed the “Immigration and Nationality Act” in 1965, most immigrants began arriving in the United States from Asia and Latin America. With the passing of time, Chicago’s immigrant population is currently comprised of nearly 2 million people from over 200 countries. Approximately two thirds of immigrants arrived to the United States after 1979, of which approximately 44% arrived during the 1990s. According to statistics gathered in 2000, Chicago’s immigrant population is XIX.

(21) approximately 21.7% of this city’s population, while 17.5% make up the metropolitan area’s population. According to statistics gathered in 2001, approximately 233,690 people migrated to Chicago’s metropolitan area, of which approximately 40% arrived from other countries. That year, Chicago was the United States’ second largest immigrant city. Chinese immigrants over the following four periods immigrated to the United States: 1) from 1849 until 1882 when there were relaxed immigration laws in place; 2) from 1882 until 1943 when there were strict immigration laws in place that restricted the number of immigrants, with the exception of businessmen, students, etc.; from 1943 until 1965 when there were immigration quotas in place; from 1965 to the present after the “Immigration and Nationality Act” was passed which allowed many immigrants to immigrate to the United States annually. When “the Great Chicago Fire” occurred in 1871, the officials of Chicago for the first time recorded this city’s Chinese-owned private business. Afterwards, this city’s officials ordered many construction companies to speed up the construction and repairs of this city. At the time, this city’s officials recorded the first Chinese-owned laundry business. Not long after, Chicago’s first Chinatown was established in 1880. In contrast with other cities’ Chinatowns, Chicago's Chinatown is the United States’ first non-residential ethnic enclave. However, Chicago’s Chinatown provided Chinese Americans with basic business and needs. Given the passing of the “Chinese Exclusion Act” of 1882, the majority of Americans of Chinese descent began desperately finding ways to assimilate. Hence, after many migrated to Chicago, most chose not to reside in Chinatown, but instead chose to reside in the neighboring suburbs. After the Chinese Communist Party proclaimed the People’s Republic of China in 1949, many mainland Chinese immigrants began immigrating to Chicago. In contrast with immigrants from Hong Kong, many mainland Chinese immigrants spoke fluent English, hence chose not to reside in Chinatown, but instead chose to reside in the neighboring suburbs. According to the 1960 U.S. Census Bureau, Chicago had roughly 7,000 residents of Chinese descent. With the passage of time, more and more residents of Chinese descent were born in the United States. Ever since President Johnson passed the “Immigration and Nationality Act” in 1965, the United States government every year allows 20,000 immigrants from each XX.

(22) country. Hence, there have been many immigrants from China, Hong Kong and Southeast Asia arriving every year in the United States. According to statistics gathered in 1970, Chicago had approximately 14,077 residents of Chinese descent, resulting in the city being recognized as having this country’s fourth largest Chinese population. After to the United States officially established full diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China on January 1, 1979, the United States government has granted 20,000 immigrants from China and Taiwan, respectfully, to immigrate to the United States annually. After the ending of the Vietnam War in 1975, many Chinese from Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos have migrated to Chicago’s Chinatown and neighboring suburbs. After the United States Congress passed the “Immigration Reform and Control Act” in 1986, the United States government has allowed 25,000 immigrants from Hong Kong to immigrate to the United States annually. Currently, Chinese-Americans are this country’s largest Asian-American ethnic group, with 57% being born in the United States. Nonetheless, the majority of this city’s Chinese-American population was born abroad. Similar with the trend in the United States, the Chinese-American population is considered to be this city’s most phenomenal and successful ethnic group. Currently, Chicago’s Chinese-American population is well over 50,000 people, with 69% arriving from China, 19% arriving from Taiwan and 12% arriving from Hong Kong. Similar with the phenomenon in Taiwan, most Taiwanese Americans in Chicago have supported Taiwan declaring independence during the latter half of the twentieth century. Many of these Taiwanese Americans’ opposition towards the KMT Party were eventually heard everywhere. After the achievements of both Taiwanese democracy and the victory of the Democratic Progressive Party, more Taiwanese began immigrating to the United States. The Chicago metropolitan area’s Chinese and Taiwanese barrier derives from social, economic and political differences. For example, although the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese population constantly speaks Mandarin or Hokkien, this area’s Chinese population constantly speaks Cantonese. The former’s both educational and occupational levels are higher than the latter’s; the former lives in the suburbs of this area, while the latter resides in Chicago’s Chinatown. Although I did not find any incident or policy that affected the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese immigrants or their identity formation and transformation XXI.

(23) process, I, nonetheless, understand that an American pastor, social activist, human rights activist and African-American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. not only aroused class consciousness, but also initiated minorities, especially African Americans, across the country fight against any infringement of the rights of citizens. Aside from that, Dr. King persuaded the United States Congress in 1964 to pass the “Civil Rights Act of 1964”, subsequently abolishing racial segregation, as well as racial and gender discrimination. However, after Dr. King was assassinated on April 4th, 1968 at a hotel in Memphis, Tennessee, riots erupted in Chicago, Baltimore and Washington, D.C. A total of 39 American citizens died, among them 34 were African-American. In regards to the casualties in Chicago, 11 civilians died, 48 civilians and 90 police officers were wounded, and 2,150 civilians were arrested by police. Hence, I believe that Dr. King did indeed greatly affect minorities across the entire United States, as well as Chicago. After heading back to Chicago in mid-December of 2015, I continued to collect information. It was not until spring time of 2016 that I began contacting the following associations: the pro-Democratic Progressive Party association “Taiwanese Association of America, The Greater Chicago Chapter”; the pro-unification association “Chinese American Alliance for China’s Peaceful Reunification”; and the pro-KMT association “Taiwan Benevolent Association of America of Chicago”. In order to eliminate potential bias, I chose to select one “Taiwanese” association and two “Chinese” associations, since I predicted that there would be more residents in Chicago who would view themselves as “Taiwanese” rather than “Chinese”. I chose this particular time to contact these associations since I knew that these associations would host sever large activities and events in which I could attend and distribute questionnaires, as well as interview several important members. Besides, I need time to read over the reference material that I collected before I contacted these associations. My primary goal was to not only distribute questionnaires and conduct interviews, but to also gather booth first and second-hand material from each association. This thesis focuses on events that occurred in Taiwan between 1895 and 1979, as well as the Taiwanese’ identity formation and transformation process during this period. The year 1895 signifies the year in which Japan and China signed the “Treaty of Shimonoseki”, subsequently permitting Japan to rule over the Taiwanese people and XXII.

(24) affect their identity formation and transformation process. In addition, this thesis analyzes how events and policies that took place between 1982 and 2010 in Taiwan, the United States and China affected both Taiwanese and Taiwanese-American immigrants’ identity formation and transformation process. The year 1982 signifies the year in which “Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA)” was established, while the year 2010 signifies the most recent U.S. Census Bureau. Nonetheless, this thesis mentions both Taiwanese and Taiwanese-American immigrants’ historical background and identity formation and transformation process since both interact as both cause and effect. In doing so, I am better able to understand the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese immigrants’ identity formation and transformation process. However, this specific date of my thesis starts from 1965, when President Johnson passed the “Immigration and Nationality Act”, subsequently allowing many Taiwanese to immigrate to the United States, as well as the city and metropolitan area of Chicago. When Taiwan reunited with China in 1945, many Taiwanese people were jubilant and excited, believing that there would be a restoration of freedom and equality. During this time, most Taiwanese belonged to the “conformity stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory” given that most identified themselves as either “Chinese” or “Taiwanese”, with the majority preferring the former. The “White Terror” period resulted in many Taiwanese citizens being arrested by police officers, as well as the deaths of over 30,000 students, human rights activists, landlords and businessmen. Taiwan’s White Terror period signifies the event in that resulted in many Taiwanese beginning to transform their identity. As time went on, Chiang Kai-shek and his son Chiang Ching-kuo promoted the “Sinicization” movement, while simultaneously prohibiting the “Taiwanization” movement. Ever since then, more and more Taiwanese began entering the “Dissonance stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory” given that a specific event violated the minority group members’ beliefs and values, subsequently leading to them beginning to question and challenge the beliefs and values held by the dominant group’s members. Under martial law, the Taiwan Garrison Command was responsible for arresting and prosecuting those who were a threat to Taiwan’s safety and public order. Over 10,000 Taiwanese were prosecuted and sentenced by the High Military Court. Moreover, the government of Taiwan ordered the police to attack its citizens. For example, the XXIII.

(25) police in 1963 spent two months arresting over 900 Taiwanese citizens and sent them to a very small coastal island. Although these people were simply protesting the government, the newspapers all over Taiwan branded these people as traitors, gamblers and traitors. Based on the perspectives of the KMT Party politicians, the crimes committed by these citizens were leading a Taiwanese independence demonstration, which was in violation of their authority. These so-called criminals were most likely sentenced to life in prison or death. During this period, many people living in Taiwan still lingered in the “Dissonance stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”. However, given Taiwan’s government policies and educational system during that time, most did not dare to speak out against the government’s “Sinicization” program and quietly viewed themselves as being “Taiwanese”; the rest of those who viewed themselves as “Chinese” remained in the “conformity stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”. The content of the 2nd “Joint Communique” are as follows: 1) The United States and the People’s Republic of China since January 1st, 1979, have agreed in joint recognition and to establish diplomatic relations; 2) although the United States recognizes that there is only one China, that Taiwan is a part of it and that the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government, the United States will nonetheless maintain cultural, business and other non-official exchanges; the United States and the People’s Republic of China have reaffirmed the principles of the 1st “Joint Communique”. However, U.S. President Carter and the U.S. Congress April, 1979 passed the “Taiwan Relations Act”. Ever since then, more and more Taiwanese citizens have lost faith in both their region and government; hence have decided to migrate abroad. After they have reached their destination, they have begun to enter the “resistance and immersion stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”, given that either they have originally or subsequently after viewed themselves as “Taiwanese”, they have either established or joined Taiwanese-compatriot and pro-Taiwan independence associations. According to the figures of the 1980 U.S. Census Bureau, there were 2.2 million citizens of Chinese descent, yet only 16,390 American citizens identified themselves as “Taiwanese” under the category “ancestors”. However, given the passing of relaxing policies towards Taiwan by the United States government, the 1990 U.S. Census Bureau illustrated that there were nearly 75,000 American citizens who identified themselves as XXIV.

(26) “Taiwanese” under the category “ancestors”. The following incidents and policies that occurred in Taiwan, the United States and China affected, in succession, the number of Americans who did so: the establishment of FAPA, the assassination of Henry Liu, the passing of “House Concurrent Resolution 233”, the establishment of the Democratic Progressive Party, the end of martial law in Taiwan and the “Tiananmen Square Massacre”. In regards to the ranking of severity (from top to bottom) among these incidents, I believe as follows: 1) the “Tiananmen Square Massacre”; 2) the establishment of FAPA; 3) the establishment of the Democratic Progressive Party; 4) the end of martial law; 5) the assassination of Henry Liu; 6) the passing of “House Concurrent Resolution 233”. Hence, the aforementioned incidents and policies did indeed affect both Taiwanese-American immigrants’ and their children’s identity formation and transformation process. However, since Taiwanese Americans have not only yet to conduct any very significant “Taiwan consciousness” rally or demonstration, along with more and more American citizens just beginning to recognize themselves as “Taiwanese”, Taiwanese Americans belong to the “resistance and immersion stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”. The 2000 U.S. Census Bureau shows that nearly 145,000 American citizens identified themselves as “Taiwanese” under the category “ancestors”. The following important incidents affected the number of Americans who did so, as well as the overseas Taiwanese and Taiwanese citizens who conducted rallies and demonstrations: the abolishment of the Taiwan Garrison Command by President Lee Tung-hui on July 31st, 1992, the People’s Republic of China government’s adamancy that Taiwan’s official name is “Chinese Taipei”, the constant legislation of Taiwan security resolutions by U.S. congressmen and senators, the “Qiandao Lake Incident”, the soaring authority of the Democratic Progressive Party’s presumptive candidates, the occasional attempts by Taiwan’s allies to persuade the United Nations to recognize Taiwan as an independent country, the “Third Taiwan Strait Crisis”, the proclamation of the “Three-Noes Policy” by President Clinton, Taiwan being admitted by the “World Health Organization”, “Tug of War: the Story of Taiwan” documentary, President Lee Tung-hui proclaiming that his government would abolish its “One China Policy” and his recognition of the relationship between the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China as being "two XXV.

(27) different, but equal states” or “special state-to-state relations” and the results of the 2000 Republic of China presidential election. Given the similar impact these incidents and policies have, their top-to-bottom ranking is unimaginable. At this point, the TaiwaneseAmerican immigrants have reached the border of the “resistance and immersion stage” and the “introspection stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”. This U.S. Census Bureau indicates that the number of American citizens who wrote down “Taiwanese” under the category “ancestors is twice as much as ten years prior. In addition, Taiwanese-American immigrants, along with their children, went to Washington D.C. and other regions to conduct rallies and demonstrations in regards to incidents and policies occurring in Taiwan, the United States and China. Before the 2010 U.S. Census Bureau was carried out by the United States Department of Commerce’s Economics and Statistics Administration, there were 6 nonprofit organizations held a Taiwanese-American movement. These organizations point out, although recent forecasts predict that the United States has over 1 million 1st and 2nd generation Taiwanese Americans, the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau showed that only about 145,000 American citizens wrote down they were “Taiwanese” under the category “ancestors”. For the purpose of this ethnic group being recognized by the United States, Taiwanese-American associations have proposed that the entire U.S. TaiwaneseAmerican population identify themselves as “Taiwanese” under the category “ancestors”. As a result, in accordance with the figures of the U.S. Census Bureau, taking into account of the entire Asian-American and multiracial population across all 50 states, there were approximately 230,429 people who identified themselves as being “Taiwanese”. The top 3 states with the largest Taiwanese-American population were California, New York and Texas with about 110,000, 19,000 and 16,500, respectfully, while the state with the smallest Taiwanese American population was South Dakota, with approximately 40 people. Hence, both 1st and 2nd generation Taiwanese Americans have finally entered the “integrative awareness stage” of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”, that is not only have more and more 1st and 2nd generation Taiwanese Americans joined the Taiwanese-American associations and movements, there are more and more countries and societies that acknowledge the citizens of Taiwan are “Taiwanese” and not “Chinese”. Most importantly, this ethnic group indeed seeks to promote cross-strait peace and dialogue. XXVI.

(28) Although the members of both the “Taiwanese Association of America, The Greater Chicago Chapter” and the “Taiwan Benevolent Association of America of Chicago” gave long answers, this thesis mainly focused on the following questions: 1) did you originally think you were “Chinese” or “Taiwanese”? How about now? 2) What is the reason(s) behind more and more people recognizing themselves as “Taiwanese” every 10 years the U.S. Census Bureau is conducted? 3) In regards to the political status of Taiwan, please tell me your thoughts. A summarization of both the “Taiwanese Association of America, The Greater Chicago Chapter” and the “Taiwan Benevolent Association of America of Chicago” are as follows: . “Taiwanese Association of America, The Greater Chicago Chapter”: In accordance with the members’ identity formation and transformation process, although most members have always viewed themselves as “Taiwanese” and not “Chinese”, there were other members who originally thought of themselves as “Chinese”, but then later identified themselves as “Taiwanese”. In accordance with the members’ thoughts toward the phenomenon of the U.S. Census Bureau, after many members, who left Taiwan for the United States before 1990, joined Taiwanese-compatriot or pro-Taiwan independence associations, they eventually learned about many incidents happening in Taiwan that were censored by the KMT government, subsequently causing many to view themselves as “Taiwanese” and not “Chinese”. In addition, many members themselves heard about or witnessed events that happened in Taiwan. Overtime, many members of Taiwanese-compatriot associations persuaded more and more Taiwanese immigrants, as well as their children, to not only change their identity, but to also propagate their history and culture. According to members’ thoughts toward the political status of Taiwan, given that 100% of members identify themselves as “Taiwanese” and not “Chinese”, most support the government of Taiwan to declare independence and allow Taiwan to become a sovereign nation.. . “Taiwan Benevolent Association of America of Chicago”: In accordance with the members’ identity formation and transformation process, most members have always viewed themselves as “Chinese” and not “Taiwanese”. In accordance with the members’ thoughts toward the phenomenon of the U.S. Census Bureau, most XXVII.

(29) members either did not comment or did not know. According to members’ thoughts toward the political status of Taiwan, although most members have always viewed themselves as “Chinese” and not “Taiwanese”, most of them supported the government of Taiwan to maintain the status quo. After analyzing the aforementioned content, I have finally concluded that there are several members from these two associations that have undergone the 5 stages of “Sue and Sue’s Theory”. For example, there are many members who originally identified themselves as “Chinese” and not “Taiwanese”. During this time, they belonged to the “conformity stage”. Yet, after they have either in Taiwan personally experienced several incidents or heard about several of these incidents when they arrived in the United States, they begun to question or challenge both the KMT Party and its forces’ ideology, hence have entered the “dissonance stage”. Not long after, they started identifying themselves as being “Taiwanese” and not “Chinese”, hence subsequently established or joined Taiwanese-compatriot associations. During this time, they belonged to the “resistance and immersion stage”. Many of these members’ goals were to persuade other countries to recognize Taiwan as an independent country, arouse every country and society to acknowledge the Taiwanese peoples’ identity, and to inspire their children to promote Taiwanization. During this point, they have entered the “introspection stage”. With the passing of time, most members, no matter what the member identifies him/herself as being, eventually promote cross strait relations and dialogue. They have finally reached the “integrative awareness stage”. The main point of this thesis is that, after most Taiwanese-American immigrants, including the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese immigrants, came to the United States, they began learning about incidents that happened in Taiwan, which ultimately affected their identity formation and transformation process. Aside from that, this thesis had its limitations. In terms of numbers, I only found 67 respondents, yet discovered that 22 respondents’ answers and questionnaires were not suitable with my research. I only found 3 people to whom I could conduct in-depth interviews. In addition, although the president of the “Chinese American Alliance for China’s Peaceful Reunification” did not trust me, he did send me a lot of information via email. Overall, both the “Taiwanese Association of America, The Greater Chicago Chapter” and the “Taiwan Benevolent XXVIII.

(30) Association of America of Chicago” lacked a lot of 1st and 2nd hand sources and information. Hence, I suggest that the next scholar who decides to research TaiwaneseAmerican immigrants or Taiwanese Americans achieve 3 goals: first, research an area that consists of more Taiwanese-American immigrants or Taiwanese Americans; second, if a scholar finds several Taiwanese-American associations, then he/she should quickly take the initiative to contact and schedule a time/place to meet with its members; third, he/she should spend more time to allow these associations to trust him/her. At this point, I have finally concluded the following main points of my thesis: first, although this thesis did not include 100% of the Chicago metropolitan area’s Taiwanese-American immigrants’ answers, this thesis at least included two important Taiwanese-compatriot associations; second, although the area I researched did not have one important event or policy that impacted its Taiwanese-American immigrants’ identity formation and transformation process, I did find many events and policies occurring in Taiwan, other cities in the United States and China that, in fact, did affect it; third, whether someone identified themselves as “Taiwanese” or “Chinese”, the area I researched did not have one Taiwanese-American immigrant that supported both Taiwan and China to be ruled by the People’s Republic of China’s government.. XXIX.