《南方快報》南方論壇 首頁 《南方快報》南方論壇

 
 常見問題常見問題   搜尋搜尋   會員列表會員列表   會員群組會員群組   會員註冊會員註冊 
 個人資料個人資料   登入檢查您的私人訊息登入檢查您的私人訊息   登入登入 

Dr. Jerome F Keating 專欄 (新漢譯)
前往頁面 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  下一頁
 
發表新主題   回覆主題    《南方快報》南方論壇 首頁 -> Formosa Connection
上一篇主題 :: 下一篇主題  
發表人 內容
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:32 pm    文章主題: Dr. Jerome F Keating 專欄 (新漢譯) 引言回覆

經過北美洲教授協會的介紹, 和 Dr. Keating 連上線, 取得 Dr Keating 的許可將他所寫的文章和南方網友分享. Keating 博士是一位愛台灣關心台灣的美國人. 他現在住在台灣. 上 google 或是 yahoo 搜尋一下 Dr. Keating 的大名, 您會發現他和台灣有多密切.

希望藉著外國友人的友誼和聲音, 台灣能夠更引起更多外國媒體的注意
歡迎 Dr. Keating (Welcome to news100, Dr. Keating)


Jerome F. Keating Ph.D Bio. 生平介紹

Jerome F. Keating is an educator, trainer, consultant and writer who currently lives in Taipei Taiwan. With diverse degrees and certificates from universities such as Michigan, Notre Dame, and Syracuse, he has worked as a professor, human resource specialist, technology transfer manager on the Taipei and Kaohsiung Mass Rapid Transit Projects, and author. Though recently retired from National Taipei University, he is still active in many fields.

His co-authored book, Island in the Stream, a Quick Case Study of Taiwan's Complex History is now in its 4th edition (2008). A second work, Taiwan the Struggles of a Democracy was published in 2006; it has a Chinese translation. A third book Taiwan the Search for Identity came out in early 2008 and is in a bi-lingual format. Likewise he has had numerous articles published on the many aspects of Taiwan's political and international status.

In his writings, Keating is pro-democracy and uses the African proverb, Until lions have their historians, the tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter, which he applies to the history of Taiwan. As Taiwan is buffeted about by the desires, whims and greed of the hegemonic powers surrounding it, the world has never asked the Taiwanese what they want for their country and their lives.

Keating speaks regularly to Taiwanese groups in the United States and participates in conferences. In October 2007, he visited seven European capitals, Brussels, Paris, Prague, Warsaw, Budapest, Berlin and London with four other scholars. They met with members of parliaments, think-tanks, university professors and students and discussed the need of the twenty-three million people of Taiwan to have space and recognition in the world.

取自於: http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome/bio
http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome/ ( Dr Keating 的個人網站)


sunshine 在 星期三 九月 30, 2009 8:10 am 作了第 1 次修改
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:35 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

A Kafkaesque System of Justice: the Plight of the Poor in China

By:Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

When you live in an authoritarian state where corrupt courts reign supreme and judges are often feted by wealthy, local magistrates, what chance does the little man have? In China local justice is rarely available so what happens? In the imperial past, the little man could petition the emperor if he felt he did not get justice locally. This practice has continued into the Communist era in China but now such petitioners are either beaten by thugs or placed in mental institutions. This follows a recent article in China Newsweek written by Sun Dongdong an associate professor of law. He declared them mentally ill. Is this the fault of the poor? And what are the yearly numbers of these petitioners?

The government says between 3 and 4 million come yearly; rights groups disagree and make that in the tens of millions. Whatever the case, a heck of a lot of people yearly come to Beijing to petition for justice; but few if any get justice so why do they come? The answer lies not in them, but in the Kafkaesque scenario created by an authoritarian state that lacks rule by law.

In a way Professor Sun can be seen as right; these people have mental problems if they expect justice. But the problem must be seen in the proper perspective. When one constantly suffers injustice and has no recourse, what choices are left? One could despair; one could commit suicide; one could say it is fate. Or one could seek some way to alleviate the pain inside, a way that might not bring justice but would at least alleviate the pain. Thus such people partake in the trials of petitioning.

That in effect is what the millions of petitioners in China are doing, seeking to alleviate the pain of injustice. Does that make them mentally ill? Not in my books. Such actions are about the only way left for those suffering with no recourse. It is Kafkaesque to be sure, but such Kafkaesque situations are often created by authoritarian states.

In comparison, Taiwan has rule by law and there are no petitioners to the imperial powers. Despite this, many in Taiwan ironically want to unify with China. Who then has the mental problem? Or perhaps do the unification proponents feel that they will be among the privileged elite who won’t have to worry about justice? You decide.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:37 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

Corruption Taiwan Style: It Depends on Who You Know
By: Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Yu Wen, Ma Ying-jeou’s secretary from the days when Ma was Mayor of Taipei has just gotten out of jail. Yu had embezzled nearly a half million dollars (US$) from the Taipei Mayor’s fund and put it into Ma’s account. Yu denied any charges of corruption, “I did not take one cent.” OK, fine but that leads to the next questions. If you did not take a single cent, then why did you do it? And why are you the only one that went to jail for this? And further, do you always act alone and put money in other people’s accounts? Some things defy logic or do they?

Yu was sentenced to 14 months but got out in 9 months. The Presidential Office said that it would be happy to assist Yu in finding a job. I do think that is the least they could do. President Ma’s office was also sorry that Yu had not originally gotten a probationary sentence since it was his first offense and “just a receipt problem.” Receipt problem, ah yes, but for whom? For Yu or the one that benefited from Yu’s generosity?

Yes, you have to love this place; it certainly depends not so much on what you know as on whom you know and of course how much money you can get your hands on. So in closing, let me say this, that if there is anyone out there who would like to put a half million dollars (US$) or more into my bank account (no questions asked) you are welcome to do it. And if for some reason you would be put in jail for that, I will both come and visit you and even help you find a job afterwards. Heck, I may even use some of that money to hire you in one capacity or other.


Other writings can be found at: http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:38 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

Kinmen and Matsu, Where Do They Belong? Taiwan or China?

By: Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

In my posting (http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome) of March 7, “Taiwan Was Never Part of China’s Civil Wars, Part II,” and (on February 5) “Taiwan, Samoa, US Passports for All? Who Knows?” I mentioned the recent case of Lin/Hartzell before the US Court of Appeals in Washington DC. Well the Court of Appeals issued its verdict yesterday; while it denied Lin/Hartzell’s cause, it opened up a different Pandora’s Box on Taiwan’s sovereignty, status, and rights. Point blank, it admitted that the US policy of ambiguity for over the past sixty years had trapped the citizens of Taiwan in “political purgatory.”

The Lin/Hartzell case had argued that after the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty (SPFT) the US as the chief occupying power after World War II still enjoyed sovereign authority over Taiwan. Why? The SPFT stated that Japan had to relinquish control over Taiwan and Penghu, but it never said to whom. With that answer still in limbo, Lin/Hartzell have argued that the US by default or right still remains the principal occupying power of the island and maintains control. This then raises among other things, the tantalizing question as to whether the US should issue the citizens of Taiwan, US passports.

The Court said that it could not rule in such matters since it would be impinging on the rights of the US Executive Branch which has “deliberately” remained silent. Tell me about it. I have repeatedly written on this and how the US has in effect played Taiwan as a pawn. Certainly after sixty years it is time for the US to make a stronger and clearer decision on supporting Taiwan’s hard-won democracy.

Right now because of monetary pressure from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), only 23 countries recognize Taiwan as a nation. Likewise Taiwan still cannot gain entry into the United Nations (UN), WHO etc. This is despite the fact that with its population of 23 million people it is larger than 75 per cent of the countries in the UN and economically, Taiwan ranks around number 15 of all countries in the world.

Lin/Hartzell will appeal and cite examples like Guam, Puerto Rico etc. and so while this case is far from over, I want to raise a different issue. What about Kinmen and Matsu? The SFPT states that Japan will give up Taiwan and Penghu which were part of its colony. But Kinmen and Matsu were never part of Japan’s colony, and Kinmen and Matsu have also never been under the PRC. So where do they belong? Are they in the limbo of limbo, the purgatory of purgatory? Maybe they constitute the ROC. If China’s Civil War is over, then they belong to China and perhaps Taiwan should give them back to the PRC.

Another consideration is that perhaps Taiwan should let all of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members like Kuo Kuan-ying who want to unify with China, move to those two islands. That would clear the riff-raff out of Taiwan and let the rest of the people get about the business of strengthening Taiwan’s democracy. The majority of the population on Kinmen and Matsu identify more with China than with Taiwan anyway. Any thoughts?

金門與馬祖隸屬台灣還是中國? (Jerome F. Keating)
譯者:藍唯文

我三月二十七日在 《極光電子報》 發表的 〈台灣從不是中國內戰的一部份(下)〉,和二月五日登載於我的網誌 (http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome)的另一篇文章 〈台灣、薩摩亞,美國都可以發給護照嗎?誰曉得?〉 提到林志昇與何瑞元最近向美國華府高等法院上訴的案件。四月七日法院的判決雖然否決了林、何兩人的理由,卻為台灣主權、地位和權利開啟了另一個潘朵拉的盒子 (原意:開啟時散佈一切災禍罪惡,盒裡僅存希望)。此判決直截了當的指出,美國過去六十多年來的模糊政策一直將台灣人民困在 「政治煉獄」 中。



林何案的聲明辯稱,1952 年舊金山和平條約訂約之後,美國是二次世界大戰後仍享有台灣統治權的主要國家。為甚麼呢?因為舊金山和平條約陳述,日本必須放棄對台灣與澎湖的統治,但從來沒有說要放棄給誰。懸案未決,林、何兩人於是辯稱,美國在法理上仍是台灣島既定的正當接管者,可統治台灣。這一髮牽動全身,其中引發了另一個大家想要知道的問題,就是美國是否應該發美國護照給台灣人民。

美國法院認定他們不能裁決這樣的案件,因為這會衝擊到美國行政部門對此問題有意保持沉默的決定。這還用說嗎?我一直都在寫這方面的文章,一再說明美國如何把台灣當籌碼的事實。當然在六十年後的今天,該是美國應更清楚堅定支持台灣以無上代價爭取到的民主的時候了。

目前由於中華人民共和國的金錢壓力,全世界只有 23 個國家承認台灣是一個國家。即使台灣有兩千三百萬的人口,比聯合國 75 % 的國家的人口還要多,而且台灣的經濟力排名全世界第 15 前後,台灣還是被拒於聯合國、世界衛生等等國際組織門外。

林、何將引用關島、波多黎各等例子再行上訴。所以,當這個案子還不會那麼快就結束的時候,我想提出另一個議題,是有關金門與馬祖的隸屬問題。舊金山和平條約申明日本要放棄屬於日本殖民領土的台灣與澎湖,但金門與馬祖從不是日本殖民地的一部份,也從不曾隸屬於中華人民共和國,所以他們是屬於誰的呢?難道他們是被遺忘的邊緣外的邊緣,煉獄中的煉獄嗎?或許他們是組成中華民國的二個小島。如果中國的內戰結束,那他們就屬於中國,也許台灣現在就應該要把他們還給中華人民共和國才是。

另一種想法是,也許台灣應該叫中國黨像郭冠英那種想跟中國統一的黨員搬到那兩個小島上去。讓這些聲名狼藉的人離開台灣,其他的人更能專心強化台灣的民主。畢竟,金門與馬祖大部份的居民較認同的是中國,而不是台灣。讀者諸君,尊意如何?

(譯者為 The University of Texas at Arlington 語言學系博士班學生, 原文請見 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome


sunshine 在 星期一 十月 05, 2009 9:56 am 作了第 1 次修改
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:39 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan Needs Resistance Art: Taiwanese Artists Where Are You?

By: Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

If you ask a dozen people what the purpose of art is, you will get a dozen answers. For some art should stand for something, for others it communicates feelings, ideas, thoughts, expressions etc. Still for others it is there to inspire, to pacify, to heal, to make us think, to give us experience, to memorialize, to symbolize, to beautify etc. etc. You get my drift. But the subject I want to raise today is a more narrow type of art; an art that I believe Taiwan is in dire need of. Taiwan needs Resistance Art.

Taiwan is an island nation that in 1996 finally achieved a hard won democracy when the people got the right to publicly elect their president. To achieve this, the people had to overcome some fifty years of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Leninist one-party state, they had to endure and survive one of the longest periods of White Terror and Martial Law in history. To do this, they had to resist; they did and they won. But democracy once won, must still be protected and honored, and to do this, the people of Taiwan need resistance art.

When I say resistance art, I mean more than memorials. Taiwan has many of those like the 2/28 museum, Green Island museum, the 2-28 Monument and other shrine like places to memorialize those who suffered and survived. Resistance art is different; it is art that captures the spirit of resistance; the refusal of a people to bow to the dictator, the passionate desire to not let their human rights be abused. In Taiwan’s case, it should certainly capture the people’s unswerving spirit and desire to fight and fight on and on until they won their democracy.

Taiwan needs an art that says it will always resist the invader from without and the traitor within no matter who or what sheep’s clothing and traditions such wolves try to put on. It is an art that says Taiwan treasures its freedom. This kind of art will establish Taiwan’s true identity. If one truly and realistically supports Taiwan’s democracy and freedom, whether one is blue or green they will support this art. Weasels with ulterior motives will not. Taiwan is for Taiwan.

Pictures speak louder than words; let me give you a few examples of resistance art that I have seen. First and foremost is an unusual but powerful statue I saw in Warsaw, Poland, the “Monument to a Child Soldier" or "Little Insurgent" (Pomnik Malego Powstanca). It speaks of the Polish resistance to Nazi imperialism and the duty of all to join in. It reprimands any that hold back. If a child can resist, why can’t you? The citizens of Poland understand this and put fresh flowers before the statue every day.

The Clenched Fist from the 1968 Olympics and the Civil Rights struggles in America is another symbol of resistance and called on blacks to continue resisting against the biased and unjust system until their full rights were won.

The “Don’t Tread on Me” Gadsden Flag from the American Revolution speaks of how the early Americans felt. It warns outside oppressors to respect American Independence
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:41 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

Leeches Part IV, Taiwan’s Uncle Toms Perpetuate the KMT Superiority Complex

Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Are there so many Taiwanese that remain brain-washed? Is this the result of nearly a half century of Martial Law, White Terror and forced education? Such questions can and must be asked. Where is Taiwanese pride? Why do the Taiwanese, a majority population, allow the belittling and exploitative behavior of the minority Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) exemplified by people like Kuo Kuan-ying, Diane Lee etc. to still flourish. Bottom line, why are so many Taiwanese “Uncle Toms?”

During the Civil Rights struggles in America, one of the worst things a black person could be called was an “Uncle Tom.” That name was given to blacks who accepted or excused the superior attitudes of whites; they were humiliatingly subservient and/or deferential to them and never stood up for their own rights. They openly accepted the biased debasement of the black character by white supremacists and so undermined black efforts to gain equality. Fortunately other blacks did stand up. Thus even though those of African descent were always a minority population of 10 to 12 per cent there, America today has its first minority black president.

In Taiwan however, the Taiwanese have always had a near 80 per cent majority. In 1949 when Chiang Kai-shek was driven from China and as a colonizer took refuge on Taiwan, he brought with him his army and KMT followers. Face it; they were losers, not the elite they pretend to be. The only way a loser minority controls a majority is first by using force; then to continue its control and justify it, it must belittle and denigrate the host culture

The majority Taiwanese had shaken off the colonizer Japan but they found the new colonizers were even worse. The initial many educated elite who knew better were therefore eliminated by the KMT after 2-28. The remaining Taiwanese then had to bow and accept the Uncle Tom character debasement and stereotypes of the KMT. With Martial Law and White Terror, the minority KMT ruled the Taiwanese majority; that minority tortured, killed and imprisoned all who questioned them. This was followed with the indoctrination, and the Sinicization of the Taiwanese culture.

For the minority black Americans, with a history of being brought to America as slaves, Uncle Tomism might be easier to understand. For the majority Taiwanese many of whom came to the island of their own free will for a better opportunity here and intermarried with the aborigines it is more difficult. Blacks overcame their subservience; why did not so many Taiwanese?

Over time, some Taiwanese did stand up along with some Mainlanders who had never accepted Chiang Kai-shek’s glorification of the one-party KMT entitlement. Taiwan finally got democracy and the right to choose. But the Uncle Tom attitude has continued among many, why? Some deep soul searching is in order here.
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 16, 2009 6:43 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

Ma Ying-jeou, EFCA, MBPP and Taiwan, Wake Up Taiwan
By: Jerome F. Keating Ph.D

The horse still does not know how long his face is, and Ma Ying-jeou continues to live in his own little world. True when he was elected President a year ago, with overblown and outrageous campaign promises he got 58 per cent of the vote. However, once he took office and failed to live up to those promises, reality finally began to set in for many Taiwanese. Ma’s popularity has since plummeted to as low as 23 per cent and for the last several months it has remained below 30 per cent. Instead of facing this, Ma fantasizes and postulates that the solution is for people to give him a blank check in drawing up his latest fly-by the-seat-of-your-pants brainstorm an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (EFCA) with China.

Costly pie-in-the-sky brainstorms have been standard fare for anyone who cares to look closely at Ma’s management track record. Among the highlights of such from his Taipei Mayor days were the disastrous and costly revamping of the Jiancheng Circle on Nanking West Road, the mishandling of the SARS epidemic (2003) and the city flooding in 2004. The latest brainstorm fiasco was the Maokong Gondola. All of these have unfortunately pointed to the fact that Ma’s management style is not Management by Walking Around (MBWA); it remains Management by Posing and Platitudes (MBPP) and saying “trust me.”

Trust what? An unexplained skeleton of a different type that highlighted Ma’s lack of management by walking around remains of course the suicide of a KMT loyalist jumping off the roof of Ma’s City Hall. That a KMT loyalist would choose to jump to her death from Ma’s city headquarters is something even his best spin-doctors would not touch and it may have been simply coincidental. The crunch came however from the fact that the dead body decomposed on a city hall balcony for over six months. Apparently Ma’s staff also did not believe in management by walking around.

Ma’s costly brainstorms have continued on into his presidency and are no doubt the reason for his low ratings. The 6-3-3 campaign promise, we won’t even talk about that pipe dream. The 3000 a-day Chinese tourists that were supposed to pump money into Taiwan’s economy? Another unfulfilled dream. Even with the recent Amway influx, the numbers are no where near their quotas. Then there has been the panda dream. Tens of millions of US$ have been spent on getting pandas. With the national economy dropping like a stone, Ma’s motivation to spend millions on revamping a zoo building and budgeting some five and a half US$ million dollars a year for the next five years to do panda research remains a mystery. How this helps Taiwan’s economy is anyone’s guess. Even there the projected increased numbers of zoo visitors has never materialized causing the zoo director to lament. We hope he doesn’t choose suicide.

This is why the business and academic communities have reacted with horror when Ma says he wants people to let him ink an EFCA agreement with China without giving any details.

This is not about Ma’s questionable loyalty to Taiwan. No one is against doing business with China; the whole world does business with China despite often getting pollution and poison in return. But what sticks in everyone’s craw is that Ma in his typical fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants style has not even thought of or he refuses to give the details. It is MBPP once again with Ma saying “trust me, while I make something up.” No the horse does not know how long his face is. What is more important, however, is whether Taiwanese are finally waking up and facing this. Wake up Taiwan! December approaches.

Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期六 四月 18, 2009 9:31 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

The Blood of Taiwan’s Patriots: Dang Nylon (鄭南榕)--One of Many

By: Jerome F. Keating Ph.D

Thomas Jefferson is known for the quote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” In Taiwan’s quest for liberty and democracy, too many of its patriots have shed their blood for it but not enough of its tyrants. And it is high time that we honored those patriots who shed their blood as well as stopped praising the tyrants who did not.

This past April 7th, Taiwan celebrated the anniversary of the death of one such patriot, Cheng Nan-jung (1947—1989). Cheng (aka Deng Nan-jung and Dang Nylon) was a man who broke taboo after taboo that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) had tried to impose on Taiwanese. With a father from China and a mother from Taiwan, he is famous for making statements like “I am Dang Nylon; my ancestors are Chinese, but I support Taiwan independence.”

In 1984, Cheng began the magazine Freedom Era Weekly to advocate freedom of speech under the KMT one-party state. Though consistently shut down by the KMT he managed to publish some 270 issues. In 1986, he also began a green ribbon campaign against Martial Law on Taiwan. One of the longest periods of martial law in any nation, Taiwan’s Martial Law had officially begun in 1949, but in reality the KMT had imposed it in 1947 after 2-28. Martial law was lifted in 1987.

Cheng died by self immolation on April 7, 1989. He had set himself on fire after 71 days of self-imposed isolation in his magazine’s office. He had been charged with sedition for the anti-government views expressed in his magazine and refused to appear in court. He also had printed a Constitution for the Republic of Taiwan drawn up by pro-independence author, Hsu Shih-kai. Cheng had said, “The KMT will never catch me; they will only find my dead body.” His words could not have been more prophetic.

A man who deeply loved Taiwan, his country, Dang Nylon expressed sentiments like, “If I could only live in one place in the world, that place would be Taiwan. If I had to choose one place where I would die; that place would be Taiwan.”

On Cheng’s funeral day (May 19, 1989)--also the first memorial date of the imposition of Martial Law on Taiwan--another patriot Chan I-hua set himself on fire in front of the Presidential Palace.

Again this past year, Liu Po-yen, an 80 year old retired teacher and a long time KMT member set himself on fire at Liberty Square on Nov. 11 over President Ma Ying-jeou’s handling of the protests of the visit of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) Chen Yulin. Liu hoped that his spirit would protect the Wild Strawberries encamped in Liberty Square as well as the Spirit of Taiwan.

Taiwan needs to remember its patriots even though Ma Ying-jeou wants to remember its tyrants as he seeks to rename Liberty Square to Chiang Kai-shek Memorial. Ma also recently commemorated Chiang Ching-kuo, who came near to being assassinated in 1970 as a tyrant. Perhaps that is what made Chiang Ching-kuo begin to think that he should start to democratize Taiwan.

In reality, Taiwanese need to ask themselves this question, “When has Ma Ying-jeou ever commemorated the blood of those patriots who died resisting and protesting the authoritarian one-party state of the KMT and so brought about Taiwan’s democracy?” Ma does not want to touch that one and you know why. Where then does Ma really stand on Taiwan’s democracy as opposed to its unification with another authoritarian state?

A commemorative painting of Dang Nylon can be found in the Protest Art section on the left of my posting on my website.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期一 四月 20, 2009 9:48 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

sunshine 寫到:
Leeches Part IV, Taiwan’s Uncle Toms Perpetuate the KMT Superiority Complex

Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

.


In February, it is the Black History month in the US. I have worked in a city where 90% of the population is black American. I know to them, Uncle Tom is the ultimate insult to their black heritage. I remember seeing Dr Martin Luther King's speech over and over on TV. And I remember saying to myself, though Obama is now the first Black President, but the Black Americans are still very verbal about their rights, and always stick together to make sure their presentation is visible. WHY is that on this island we call Taiwan, majority of the residents are Taiwanese; and yet, they want to conform to Chinese culture, and many of the "Taiwanese uncle Toms" look down to their own heritage.

I think the difference is that the Black Americans live in a mature democratic society, so their values of what liberty and rights are not skewed. However, many of the Taiwanese people refuse to think out of a box. Years of brain wash kind of guide them to believe what the media presents is the "truth". I believe the word "democracy" is still in infancy in Taiwan. Many Taiwanese people do not understand, Freedom is NOT free. Especially those who grew up after the white terror and martial law.

台灣的 「馬屁精」 是中國黨優越情結的傳承者 (Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.)譯者:藍唯文

真的有那麼多台灣人仍被洗腦嗎?這是近半世紀戒嚴、白色恐怖、和強制教育的結果嗎?我們必須詰問這些問題。台灣人的尊嚴在哪裡?為甚麼佔多數的台灣人,仍然縱容佔少數的中國黨人,讓如郭冠英李慶安之流藐視操控台灣人?探究根源,問題就是:為甚麼台灣有這麼多美國的湯姆叔叔 (馬屁精)?



在美國內戰時期,湯姆叔叔 (馬屁精) 是黑人最差的稱號之一。這個名稱是用來叫那些接受並寬恕白種人優越感的黑人。他們自慚形穢,恭順白人,從不挺身爭取自己的權利。他們公開接受有強烈種族偏見而且霸氣十足的白人對黑人的貶低歧視,以是破壞了黑人自己追求平等的努力。幸好,有其他黑人站出來。所以,非洲族群雖然是少數,只佔美國總人口的 10 ~ 12 %,美國今天出現了第一位黑人總統。

然而台灣情形不同;台灣人一直佔總人口近80 % 的多數。1949 年蔣介石被逐出中國,以殖民統治者的姿態到台灣避難,他帶來他的軍隊和跟隨中國黨逃難的人。說實在的,他們是戰敗者,不是他們自以為是的菁英。一個戰敗的少數族群要控制多數族群的唯一方法,首先就是用武力,然後利用貶低繼而毀壞這些多數主體文化,繼續控制並合理化他們的政權。

當時多數的台灣人已經擺脫日本殖民統治,但他們發現新來的殖民者更差。最初意識到這個情況的知識份子,在 228 事件後被中國黨剷除。其
餘的台灣人只好卑躬屈膝,接受 「馬屁精」型自我貶低的人格,也接受中國黨自我吹噓的刻版觀念。藉著戒嚴與白色恐怖,少數的中國黨人統治多數的台灣人,並折磨、殺害並囚禁所有質疑他們的人。他們還接著推行制式的教育,並灌輸台灣文化是中國文化的想法。

美國少數黑人,因為黑人的歷史背景是被賣到美國當奴隸,我們比較容易理解為什麼他們會變成阿諛奉承的湯姆叔叔。多數的台灣人,因為他們大部分是為了追求更好的生活機會,自願來到這個島上,並與原住民通婚,為甚麼會變成 「馬屁精」,實在難予理解。黑人能夠克服他們阿諛奉承的態度,台灣人為甚麼不能?

至今確實有一些台灣人,和一些從不接受蔣介石褒揚寵慣的中國黨一黨獨大的大陸人,勇敢站了出來。台灣終於邁向民主,也有權利選擇。但是 「馬屁精」 的情結仍然存在許多人心中,為什麼會這樣呢?這就要從心靈層面講起了。

是甚麼因素造成台灣人的 「馬屁精」 情結呢?許多台灣人會說,是遭受中國黨制式教育使然,因為在那個教育制度下,不准使用台灣的語言,他們要死背中國的歷史地理,不必理會自己島國的歷史地理。其他的人是因為害怕,有些人甚至就索性接受強制教育下儒家階級思想的命運。

還有其他的台灣人,像聖經裡的以掃一樣,為了一碗濃湯出賣了他們與生具來的民族自決權利。中國黨把台灣人分割成各有不同特權的群體,收買了很多人,包括深知少數族群痛苦的客家人和原住民。還有公務員,教師和軍人,也都用目前無法維持的 18.5 % 退休金利息甜頭收買。他們接受了這一碗濃湯,完全不知道中國黨除了同享如此厚利以外,還瓜分政府所有最好的職位、財產與權力。

魚鈎一直是用來吸引台灣人,讓他們吃了誘餌就可交換到一些象徵性的特權,以是自認為 「受感染的族類」。他們必須這樣被感染,才能跟高級的大陸人相提並論。其實,這些大陸人是戰敗者,若韓戰不爆發,他們早就被徹底殲滅了。是的,現在的確是需要好好思考心靈層面問題的時候了。

台灣人要反躬自省,問問自己有何認同。台灣人當中,有從馬達加斯加島到紐西蘭,夏威夷,遍及復活節島這麼一大片海洋群島的原住民兒女,也有航行半個地球到亞洲做生意和建立殖民地的歐洲人子女,當然還有向外發展的日本人的後裔,以及滅亡的滿州帝國和那些戰敗被趕出大陸的中國黨人兒女。台灣必須要徹底認識自己的根,而從那裡找回自尊。我們的自尊一定更要建立在現在,而不是過去,更要建立在家庭和個人的價值上。要完全擺脫 「馬屁精」 的情結。

最後,認識這個多元群族與文化的事實後,台灣人要再問問自己,為甚麼台灣不曾有過轉型正義。為甚麼中國黨一個黨,挾著他們優越的大陸人心態,還在掌控國家的財產?為甚麼當今所有其他政黨的黨產加起來還不到十億,中國黨承認他們大約有兩百七十億台幣的黨產,還需要每年二十億的預算?

醒悟吧,台灣!自我貶低的 「馬屁精」 情結還到處可見。睜開雙眼,看清誰是真正的輸家。找回你的自尊吧。

(譯者為 The University of Texas at Arlington 語言係博士班學生,原文請見 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome


sunshine 在 星期日 十月 11, 2009 10:00 pm 作了第 1 次修改
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
楚劍



註冊時間: 2007-03-27
文章: 6962

發表發表於: 星期一 四月 20, 2009 2:21 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

sunshine 寫到:
Taiwan Needs Resistance Art: Taiwanese Artists Where Are You?....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z21sJMXj0Mk

THE GREAT IVORY WALL 象牙牆
---------------------------------------------------------
The whole world needs more Anti-Chink's Art ! 全世界需要更多的反支那藝術!
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
cw
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-03-25
文章: 6108

發表發表於: 星期二 四月 21, 2009 11:57 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

sunshine 寫到:
[b]...

In comparison, Taiwan has rule by law and there are no petitioners to the imperial powers. Despite this, many in Taiwan ironically want to unify with China. Who then has the mental problem? Or perhaps do the unification proponents feel that they will be among the privileged elite who won’t have to worry about justice? You decide.

Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome


Those Taiwanese who want to unify with China are not really Taiwanese. They declare themselves as Chinese, not Taiwanese. And they are shame of being Taiwanese. Ironically most of them sent their children to the west to enjoy freedom and democracy.
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期三 四月 22, 2009 6:08 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Jackie Chan and the Utter Failure of Confucianism

Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Speaking at the annual Boao Forum from the Middle Kingdom of Pollution, Poison and Propaganda, Jackie Chan presented some unusual alleged personal insights. In reality they were statements in support of the authoritarian rule/dictatorship in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Chan declared “We Chinese need to be controlled.” And further “If you’re too free, you’re like the way Hong Kong is now. It’s very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic.” Chan’s remarks drew applause from the “fat cat” businessmen attending for obvious reasons. And though Chan has since been raked over the coals by many for his words, ironically if one goes deeper between the lines, what he did was actually highlight the utter failure of Confucianism as a way of life in Chinese history.

At issue is the age-old argument between the Confucianism and the Legalist tradition of China. And by attempting to show that democracy would not work in China, Chan championed the Legalist tradition that justifies and supports strong control from a paternalistic central power like Beijing and the Chinese Communist Party’s Politburo. However, the unspoken and implied viewpoint that Beijing did not want to be revealed but which is between the lines is that despite 5000 years of culture, and some near 3000 years of Confucianism Chinese need to be controlled. Why? Though no one wants to come out and say it, the bitter and inevitable conclusion is because they are “too dumb, too stupid, and too selfish to rule themselves democratically.”

Too dumb, too stupid and too selfish to rule themselves. That is a bitter statement indeed but it is the unfortunate bottom line of what Chan is saying. Despite 5000 years of Chinese culture and despite nearly 3000 years of harmony-seeking Confucianism, the end result remains that Chinese cannot be trusted with self-rule. That does not say much for the old sage, but as Chan put it, “We Chinese need to be controlled.”

Surprisingly these remarks of Chan drew applause from the Chinese businessmen and government officials in the audience, but here again one must look at the Chinese psyche and the Legalist justification for power and control. When those on top in China say the people are too dumb, too stupid and too selfish to rule themselves, they are not talking about their own selves. They are referring to all “the other Chinese,” the common masses, the ugly Chinese as Bo Yang liked to speak of them. Most businessmen and government officials see themselves in a different light; they are the “enlightened and magnanimous exceptions.” They are the one’s who must take the heavy burden of rule; it is Colonialism with a capital C in one’s own country.

In their rule, the “enlightened despots” then insist on a minimum of three requirements. First, there must never be transparency; it would only confuse the masses. Second, rule of law must be foregone; enlightened despots need to have the necessary freedom to operate without restraints. Third, a questioning free press must also not be allowed, the dumb must not be allowed to question the enlightened for obvious reasons.

Taiwan’s experience of course has been different, but then Taiwanese are different from Chinese; they live on the “chaotic” side of life. Taiwanese have discovered that they are not too dumb, too stupid and too selfish to rule themselves. This doesn’t mean that they are perfect by any means but they have been freely electing their rulers since 1996 and operating with transparency, rule of law, and a free press. So where do you stand? Do you agree with Chan, or do you see the Taiwan experience as valid and the way of the future?

Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期三 四月 29, 2009 7:58 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan, You Gotta Love This Place

Jerome F. Keating Ph.D

Taiwan, you gotta love this place! Have you ever wondered why Taiwan’s economy under President Ma Ying-jeou continues to be in the doldrums? Well it seems that Ma’s minister without portfolio and chief economic advisor, Chu Yun-peng, often cuts out during work hours to go on dates with his girlfriend. Just what Taiwan needs? Caught on different occasions by Next magazine, Chu has been forced to resign. His excuses, however, proved to the most interesting part of this escapade.

Chu stated that the reason he goes out on dates with his girlfriend during work hours is that he often has to work late at night and sometimes on weekends. Say what? Now there is the perfect excuse to feed your boss. Perhaps Chu will start a trend, allowing anyone who works overtime or on weekends the perfect bon mots to explain his/her actions. One is tempted to ask Chu, why don’t you just work full time during the day and then you will be free to go out on weekends with your girl like everyone else, but let’s not go there.

What next? Well, Chu said that he would continue his teaching career at National Central University. After all it will be much easier for him to date during school hours, there, he only needs to get a graduate student to step in and cover his classes. And President Ma, he will have to get another minister without portfolio and economic advisor.

Other writings found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 四月 30, 2009 9:25 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

ONLY IN TAIWAN, this kind of BS excuse will fly with the voters. Does any other job in the world will allow a worker to goof off during regular business hour, just because he/she put extra hours in at off hours?

As an IT person, we are on call 24/7 and on weekends (when there is a need). But try to use this kind of excuse at the next review, see what kind of response you will get from your boss.
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期六 五月 02, 2009 9:12 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Dumb and Dumber, the Naming of Chinese Taipei (中國台北) and its Acceptance

Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Chinese Taipei, now that is really a dumb name. I don’t know whose brainchild it was but if you really analyze it, it is insulting and misleading. How many countries would want to suffer a similar degrading nomenclature? Such an imposition represents the residue of the last colonial ethnic group to seize that land and that last colonial group’s language. Spain had ruled a lot of countries. Imagine the chaos and confusion if we named those countries the same way. We would have Spanish Manila (西班牙馬尼拉), Spanish Santiago, Spanish Buenos Aires, Spanish Lima etc. the list would go on and on. In South America, the only different neighbor would be Portuguese Brasilia. Bizarre to say the least.

Cross over to Europe if you want to better see the insult imposed. Do you think the people of Ireland would cotton to the name of English Dublin? Would the Scots buy English Edinburgh? It has a nice alliterative ring but no way. English Cardiff? No chance with the Welsh as well. So why does Taiwan have to be saddled with Chinese Taipei?

Chinese Taipei (中國台北), such a name declares that all the aborigines (原住民) and previous colonial groups don’t count. Or should the name change each time the ruling colonial power changes? That might make history clearer. In Taiwan we could tell its history by the country’s changing names. There would be Dutch Anping (荷蘭安平), Spanish Tamsui, Manchu Tainan (滿卅台南), Japanese Taipei (日本台北) and finally Chinese Taipei (中國台北). Hey we might have something there, but let’s face it. The only reason we use Chinese Taipei is to placate the greedy bully across the Taiwan Strait. Isn’t it time to grow up and move on? Taiwan is Taiwan and that’s it. (台灣就是台灣, 如此而已)



Other writings and commentary are found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome

愚蠢加一等 —「中華台北」 之命名與承認 (Jerome F. Keating)
譯者 / 劉怡君

中華台北現在看來確實是愚蠢的名字。我不知道這是那一個人想出來的。如果你真的好好分析,這其實是一個侮辱台灣和誤導世人的名稱。請問,有多少國家願意承受類似如此降低國格的名稱?這樣強行命名,顯示末代殖民地族群佔領土地及掌握其語言的遺毒。西班牙以前統治過許多國家,如果以同樣方式命名,我們可以想像得到,這些國家的名稱將會何其混亂和令人困惑:我們會有 「西班牙馬尼拉」,「西班牙聖地亞哥」,「西班牙布宜諾斯艾利斯」,「西班牙利馬」 等等,名單數不清。怪哉沿用如此命名,至少可以這麼說,今天在南美洲,唯一不同的鄰國,就只會有 「葡萄牙巴西」。



如果你想更一步地看到強行侮辱的命名,跨過歐洲可有更多例子:你覺得愛爾蘭人民會喜歡 「英格蘭都柏林」 這樣的國名嗎?蘇格蘭會同意 「英格蘭愛丁堡」 嗎?「英 English、愛 Edinburgh」 幾乎相近的起頭聲韻雖然悅耳,但是行不通的。「英格蘭威爾斯」 呢?也不可能。那麼,為什麼台灣要背負 「中華台北」 的名稱呢?

中華台北這樣的名字,顯然把所有原住民和前殖民地的族群通通排除在外。或者台灣的國名應該每次隨著殖民政權改變?這樣做或可分清歷史沿革:在台灣我們可以藉由國家的名稱分辨其歷史,這包含過去的 「荷蘭安平」,「西班牙淡水」,「滿清台南」,「大和台北」,最後「中華台北」。讀者諸君,我們或可鑽鑽牛角尖,找出一些自圓其說的理由,但是讓我們面對現實吧!使用中華台北的唯一理由是,為了安撫台灣海峽對岸貪婪鴨霸的中國。這該是台灣成長邁進的時候了吧?台灣就是台灣,事實就是如此。

(譯者為美國德州農工大學英語教育學系博士班學生,英文原文請見 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome


sunshine 在 星期一 十月 05, 2009 5:54 am 作了第 2 次修改
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
從之前的文章開始顯示:   
發表新主題   回覆主題    《南方快報》南方論壇 首頁 -> Formosa Connection 所有的時間均為 台灣時間 (GMT + 8 小時)
前往頁面 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  下一頁
1頁(共8頁)

 
前往:  
無法 在這個版面發表文章
無法 在這個版面回覆文章
無法 在這個版面編輯文章
無法 在這個版面刪除文章
無法 在這個版面進行投票


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
正體中文語系由 phpbb-tw 維護製作