Saturday, June 25, 2011

On Abuse of Power by the Elitists in Power

The following is an essay by a pastor regarding power structures and the abuse of power in the human institution of the church. It is equally applicable to Taiwan's civil government and in particular the R.O.C. regime in power. The article assumes the majority abusing the minority, but in the case of Taiwan, a minority have been able to seize power and oppress a majority population.

The entire article can be found here

Below are some good excerpts helpful especially for those raised in the KMT privilege class. Note also the paragraph on those in the oppressed group who actually try to curry favor and follow those in power. It explains a lot of those who are Taiwanese yet support the Ma regime.

"And, of course, there will be those in the minority who are anxious to curry favor or receive protection from the majority. They envy the power of the powerful and try to emulate them while still being what they are. They are willing to give lip service to the status quo, and validate the perpetuation of power by the majority in exchange for tokens of acceptance by the majority.

They are seen by the majority as the “Good (fill in the blank.)” They know what side their bread is buttered on, and they are enormously useful to the majority to deflect criticism about their treatment of the minority... "


===============================================

A theologically liberal critique of the theological liberals
Written by Brian Carpenter, The Layman
Saturday, 25 June 2011 09:59

... When I was a student at Louisville Seminary I was presented with the critiques of power which are offered by both liberation theology and feminist theology. Those who are in power tend to sinfully use that power to perpetuate the status quo and keep themselves in power. They build power structures which are fundamentally unjust and oppressive....

... One of the key insights of this stream of thought is that those who are the beneficiaries of the unjust power structures seldom recognize the fact that they are the beneficiaries of injustice. They point to the rules to justify their behavior, but of course their group set up those rules in the first place. They claim to be wiser or more fitted for power than those they are oppressing. ...

Sometimes they will claim a special divine warrant for their behavior...

And, of course, there will be those in the minority who are anxious to curry favor or receive protection from the majority. They envy the power of the powerful and try to emulate them while still being what they are. They are willing to give lip service to the status quo, and validate the perpetuation of power by the majority in exchange for tokens of acceptance by the majority.

They are seen by the majority as the “Good (fill in the blank.)” They know what side their bread is buttered on, and they are enormously useful to the majority to deflect criticism about their treatment of the minority. They are also usually hated by those members of their own group who are not willing to compromise their identity. This phenomenon rears its ugly head wherever there is longstanding conflict between groups of unequal power.


...And an ecclesiastical structure has a dominant culture, just as a nation or a corporation does. It sets up rules which tend to benefit those who are members of the dominant culture and which tend to perpetuate their tenure of power.

It also has its benighted minorities, those who are “different” or “other.” Those who, for whatever reason, are at odds with the dominant culture and power structure.


... You have systematically ratcheted up the pressure on the minority for a long time, until now it is to the point of causing even those traditionalists who have been quiescent and compliant for years to consider leaving. But they do not want to leave in dribs and drabs, like those of us who have left before. They want to leave as a cohesive group, with mutual support and care for the hazards of the journey. They want to envision a new future for themselves and build it.

And they want to take the property and resources they paid for with their own blood, sweat and tears with them. And you extort them and take them to court to prevent it. You point to the rules you wrote to perpetuate your tenure in power and say “See, it’s the right thing to do.”...

...You betray your very deep loathing and hatred of the other in your midst by what you do to them. You say what every abuser says to the one he abuses, “You are mine to do with what I wish, and if you try to leave me I will hurt you.” ...

Now that I confront you with this, will you shrug your shoulders and say what those members of the majority who have been complicit by their silence often say, “It’s just the way things are and I can’t do anything about it.” Where is your passion for justice then?

...Have done with this sickening behavior. Please, for the sake of some kind of integrity with your own principles, let my people go.


Brian Carpenter is a Teaching Elder in the Presbyterian Church in America. He serves as pastor of the Foothills Community Church (PCA), Sturgis, S.D. This article was written for and first appeared at The Layman online and is used with the author’s permission.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

No privacy or freedom from gov't intrusion where China holds sway

Annexation of Taiwan would result in ever increasing loss of freedom caused by the brutal, repressive Chinese communist dictatorship. Witness what is happening in Hong Kong.

Monday, June 13, 2011

Standing Against China's Territorial Bullying

Vietnam is standing up to China's maritime bullying. If you have ever seen maps where China (whether the communists or the Chinese nationalists) claims jurisdiction, you will note that China claims the South China Sea all the way up almost to the very shores of Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines. It is as if Taiwan were to claim as its sovereign territory the Taiwan Strait all the way to the shores of Fujian Province, China. Will China claim the Yellow Sea up to the shores of Korea?



It is time all of the nations of the world stand up to China's territorial aggression.

-----

U.S. Senator Jim Webb also took a stand on the issue, criticizing the "weak" Obama administration's lack of action.

Walter Lohman of the Heritage Foundation writes on priorities for the U.S.A.

-----
For further reading, take a look at Michael Turton's South China Sea roundup
-----

Take a look a China's land grabs and attempted land grabs:

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Freddy Lim on Hoklo Taiwanese Language

我反對把台語(Holo話)稱為閩南語

Freddy. 2011/05/27

語言是一直不斷發展、變化的,台語(另一種在地的稱呼是holo話)雖然源自福建南部(閩南語),但在台灣在地化、多元發展,融合平埔族與日語,早已不等於閩南語。要表現在地語言的獨特性,本來就該以在地稱呼來定名,用這個語言源自哪裡來定名,根本就是要消滅該語言的歷史脈絡與在地特性。



若因為台語源自福建南部就稱呼台語為閩南語,難道要稱呼英語為西日耳曼語?稱呼丹麥語、瑞典語、挪威語為北日耳曼語?或統稱為斯堪地那維亞語,而忽略這三種語言的在地個性與特色?



當然,如果因為台灣有廿幾種語言,慣稱holo話為台語恐打壓其他語言,這我同意,且稱呼其為holo語,本來就是自然發展出來的台灣在地稱呼,存在已久。只是與其爭辯holo語應寫作河洛語、鶴佬語還是福佬語,莫衷一是,我選擇直接寫為holo語。當然,這些討論都跟「閩南語」無關。



提醒抱持這個思維而不願把holo話稱為台語的朋友,也應該相同標準,避免稱呼Mandarin(北京官話)為中國話、中國語或中文(Chinese),因為在中國(中華人民共和國)有千百種語言,獨稱Mandarin為中文也有打壓其他語言之嫌,請不要再稱Mandarin為中文或Chinese。



同樣的,也不該稱呼Mandarin(北京官話)為國語,因為不管在中國、台灣或新加坡,這些常用Mandarin的國家,也都還有很多種語言,稱呼Mandarin為國語,一樣是打壓其他語言。

--
Email: info@FreddyLim.com
Blog: www.FreddyLim.com

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Tsai Ing-Wen with Jerome Keating





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXQV2T372Ok

Here's her website that you can examine:
http://www.twimi.net/

Is America Meeting Taiwan's Self-Defense Needs? check out the meeting Wednesday in Washington D.C.

OUR QUESTION FOR THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Please aim for more balance in your symposiums: do not only get the Ma Administration folks, but instead seek some pro-Taiwan representatives to partake discussions?

OUR POINT: Taiwan needs to be strong to cause others to think it not worth invading.

===================

HERITAGE FOUNDATION HOSTS:

Is America Meeting
Taiwan's Self-Defense Needs?


==============================
Speakers:
Keynote Remarks by
Andrew Nien-Dzu Yang --- Vice Minister for Policy, Ministry of National Defense, Republic of China (Taiwan)

And a Panel Discussion with -- Randall Schriver -- President and CEO, Project 2049 Institute

Gary J. Schmitt
Resident Scholar and Director of Advanced Strategic Studies, American Enterprise Institute


Host:
Walter Lohman
Director, Asian Studies Center, The Heritage Foundation


Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Time: 2:00 PM - 3:30 PM
Location: The Heritage Foundation's Lehrman Auditorium



or call (202) 675-1752

News media inquiries, please call (202) 675-1761

All events can be viewed live at heritage.org.

Guests are subject to Terms and Conditions of Attendance,
which can be read at heritage.org/Events/Terms-and-Conditions-of-Attendance.



Congress is bracing for a fight over Taiwan policy. The number of academics and former officials calling for a reconsideration of America's commitment to Taiwan's defense are growing bolder. Meanwhile, continued delay on delivery of a full DIA assessment of Taiwan's airpower and five years of inaction on Taiwan's repeated requests for F-16s raise fundamental questions about whether that commitment is currently being met. Taiwan's Vice Minister for National Defense Andrew Yang will speak to Taiwan's defense policy and the threats it seeks to address, and a distinguished panel of experts will assess what must be done to fulfill America's legal obligations to (in the words of the Taiwan Relations Act) "enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability."


214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, D.C. 20002-4999
ph 202 546 4400 | fax 202 546 8328
heritage.org