Talk:Taiwan (island)

Ethnic identity of 'Native Taiwanese'

Would it be acceptable if the claim that 98 % of the Taiwanese population are ethnic Han Chinese was removed? I ask this because some people argue that the concept of a Han Chinese identity is restricted to 'Mainlanders' and that it can not be applied to 'native Taiwanese'.
Under the alternative model, Han Chinese would, at most, make up just 14 % of Taiwan's population. David873 (talk) 10:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

That 98 % of the Taiwanese population are ethnic Han Chinese is correct. Out of 100% population in Taiwan, only 2% are aborigines who stayed for a few thousand years. Roughly 60% are Hoklo people, which may mean 河洛人(people claiming their ancestry from Yellow River region) or 福佬人 (Fujianese). In either meaning, they are Han people and most are 300 year immigrants, not a long time compared with the stay of aborigines. 25% are Hakka people (客家人, literally meaning guests) who emigrated in the past ~200 years from the border of Fujian and Canton. The newest bunch are the 15% who emigrated to Taiwan ~60 years ago, including an ROC army of six hundred thousand. The term Mainlanders for this group has a diminutive connotation. It would serve all people down there better if the term was to be avoided. What's more, if we call these people Mainlanders, what should we call those who came from China to Taiwan in the past few years?

Han people is a mishmash as a result of thousands of years of mixing. I am not sure if Han can be justified as a race or an ethnic group. - Cooterhu (talk) 22:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I tend to agree that "Han" is an acceptable description of the ancestry and major culture (the culture is a mixture of Han and other influences, but primarily Han) of the majority of Taiwanese. The statement that "mainlander" is diminutive is believable, but what is being proposed as an alternative term for "mainlander"? The majority of Taiwanese whose families have been in Taiwan for hundreds as opposed to thousands of years is a clearly different group from the people who either themselves or their parents or grandparents came from China with Chiang Kai-shek (or even more recently). Readin (talk) 02:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The current grouping, where "mainlander", "Hoklo" and "Hakka" are grouped under Han Chinese misses the importance of the Hoklo-Hakka common identity as "native Taiwanese" as opposed to the mainlander identity as "Chinese". Readin (talk) 02:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

What shall we call these third-wave immigrants who moved to Taiwan 60 years ago? This is indeed a proper question but I have no ready answer. The name should be either what they call themselves or what is agreeable to them. Perhaps time will settle an answer. 'Mainlander' seems so alienating.

While we are at it, let me relate this. One time, anyone who fled to Taiwan after 1949 was called 義胞(righteous comrade) by the ROC authority when it was still a one-party regime. No doubt the term is a highly political one. Newcomers to Taiwan since 1949 are sporadic and have not seemed to form a cultural group yet, most of whom I am aware of are celebrities or at least a high caste. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooterhu (talk • contribs) 21:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Christianity?

On the Taiwanese Aborigines page, it states that roughly 70% of Taiwanese Aborigines are Christian while on this page it says over 64% are. Which one should be changed? Eugeniu B (talk) 20:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• It's quite likely that the two are quoting different sources. Why don't you do some research...? Ling.Nut ^(WP:3IAR) 02:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
• OK I just looked. Both quotes are from Stainton. The one on this page is the older one (2004), and says over 64%; the newer one (2006) says about 70%. I don't think Stainton provides sources for these figures, but I'd bet they're from government statistics somewhere. Ling.Nut ^(WP:3IAR) 02:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

PRC claimed that it was the successor of Qing

I don't think PRC has ever made such a claim. As far as I know, PRC claims that it is the successor of the ROC which no longer existed after the KMT lost the Chinese civil war.

If PRC has ever stated that it has claim over Taiwan because it is the successor of Qing, please quote the source.--Pyl (talk) 16:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

You're right. I've modified sentence to say that PRC succeeded ROC. Readin (talk) 17:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Until the above is verified by credible sources, it will be removed. The ROC is still very much in existance today, and the Chinese Civil War has never officially ended, so based on what is the PRC making its claim?--Huaiwei (talk) 12:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The PRC makes its claim based on "replacement of the old regime by a new one" upon the PRC's proclamation, and the fact that the ROC regime has essentially been confined to Taiwan. So, from the PRC perspective, the ROC regime is only fit to be a local one these days. I just added the source from the PRC white paper to the Political status of Taiwan article.Ngchen (talk) 03:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

In other words, you are expecting a wikipedia article to basically echo the views of the PRC whole-scale, and accepting their POV as fact? The ROC has never accepted itself as a "local authority in Chinese territory", so there is absolutely no nuetrality in attempting to allege that the ROC ceases to exist in any sense.--Huaiwei (talk) 12:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the article clearly notes that the POV in question is from the PRC, and further notes clearly that the PRC does not actually control the island. Stating the PRC's POV when noting its source does not violate NPOV.Ngchen (talk) 23:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for new Taiwanese Wikipedia

Please leave comments at [1].

122.109.171.138 (talk) 04:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)