Talk:Taiwanese localization movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Taiwanese localization movement is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a project to improve all Taiwan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Taiwan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwanese politics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the politics of Taiwan. If you would like to participate, please join the project
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance for this Project's importance scale.


Moved here....

Since accounts vary as to whether Taiwan's political split with the mainland was a secession from a majority Communist state, or was the only remnant of a still-legitimate Nationalist state, it is difficult to say whether there is a parallel to the political situation of Tibet. It remains very polarized, and can only be said to be an example of political de-centralization and localization of government in large states, rather than of secession.

The Taiwanese localization movement really has nothing to do with the political status of Taiwan (now, it did in the 1970's). It's more of a question of local cultural identity.

The other thing is that Taiwanese localization is *not* a particularly divisive issue on Taiwan or for that matter on the PRC. There isn't any major political force in 2003 that I know of that is explicitly against localization.


I changed Min Nan to the more neutral Holo as the language spoken on Taiwan differs from Fujian in accent and vocabulary. Localization is not so much about one culture of ethnic group, but rather all of them. I erased Hu Jin Tao, because his inclusion can give the false impression that his opinion somehow matters in Taiwan's policies. I modified desinicization as the term can not be proven. We are doing some work on that right now to see if the term is valid and if Taiwanese can be considered having been "sinsacized". Localization is rooted to japanese days and I suggest finding a copy of a book called Orphan of Asia or Asia's Orphan, written in 1947, the protagonist is neither accepted as Chinese or Japanese.

Removed based on factual research. I have seen good localization research and I have seen stuff that is wild. --User:Roadrunner

Added Hu Jintao back. Sure most people in Taiwan might not care what he thinks, but it is important that the PRC has stated that they don't oppose localization. -- User:Roadrunner

[edit] Need Perspectives on Early History

The article concentrates too much on things as they stand in the early 21st century. Significant oppositions to the movement existed from 1989 to 1992 and much of the Taiwan localization movement and indeed independence movement is deliberately moving in the "British constitutional evolution model" or "boiling frog recipe" by its proponents in the sense that it is building one step at a time and gradually towards the concept of the Republic of Taiwan. For instance, there was a big uproar in the mid 1990s over the proposal by Tu Cheng-sheng, then a research fellow at the Academia Sinica, of his proposal to teach history in concentric circles in senior high school (Taiwanese history first year, Chinese history second). Most people opposed at the time and it was set aside. A decade later, Tu is now the Minister of Education and he pushes a more radical proposal that only Taiwanese history is regarded as local history and merging Chinese and international history, and this time not even the deepest pan-blue supporter makes any noise for fear of backlesh among the current Taiwanese populatgion. If you recall the policies pushed by the 2007 pan-Green politicians during the early post-martial law years, they sounded exactly like what Ma Yeng-jou proposes today and which the same pan-Green politicians will bash for being too "China-centric". So I think there is a shift in goal posts in a time span over the past 20 years and we need to add more of them here. --203.152.114.104 20:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation

There's a lot of speculation and original research in this article, especially in the Support and opposition section. Things like "I know the PRC says they're not opposed, but they are opposed 'in truth'" need to be supported by reliable sources. Have added "unreferenced" tag. --PalaceGuard008 03:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The problem is there is no real collated and neutral souce on the whole topic. I only found fragments of newspaper editorials scattered throughout the Chinese-speaking world, and even references from the official Chinese Communist authorities are lacking. So I'm afraid demanding "reliable source" may well disappoint you. --JNZ 02:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)