Formosa Ambassadors

2007-10-12T06:28:00.000+08:00

2007-09-21T05:36:00.000+08:00

The Aisa Connect (a free weekly e-magazine) this week spotlights an interview of me and the Formosa Foundation. The spot has been re-posted by several bloggers and whose readers are writing me emails to express their support for Taiwan.

Never good at self-promotion, I did the interview with the original intention of promoting the Formosa Foundation and its missions, with the hope that more people will become aware of Taiwan's issues.

Here is the link to the interview. Your comments are welcome. http://www.theculturalconnect.com/new/2007/09/20/amy-lin-asia/

2006-11-08T00:57:00.000+08:00

The Economist has a "briefing" about Chen's situation: "Trouble in Taiwan." It doesn't have much new information, but there is some decent analysis. And it's interesting to see the "outside" perspective.

2006-11-05T21:31:00.000+08:00

Taiwan's undemocratic referendums
by Chris

Traditionally, when someone threatens to recall the president or publicly considers a no-confidence vote against the premier, thoughtful pundits first decry the possibility of either motion succeeding, then go on to explain what success would actually entail.

In light of today's news, I'm going to go straight to the second one.¹

Both the KMT and PFP have indicated that a recall—rather than impeachment or a no-confidence vote²—will be the weapon of choice. That means that Taiwan may actually face a referendum on whether to recall its president (an impeachment vote would send Chen's case to the Council of Grand Justices).

On the face of it, a referendum is the truest and most intuitive form of democracy. It was, in fact, what the word democracy was coined to describe. But the structure of Taiwan's referendums effectively disenfranchises much of the electorate.

Most referendums, including a recall motion, need only a simple majority to pass, but they need a majority of eligible voters to show up at the polls in order to be declared "valid"—that is where the problem lies.

Because it's much easier to convince people to stay home than to go vote, opposition to Taiwan's referendums tends to take the form of boycotts. Theoretically, this means that all votes in the referendum will be "yes" votes—"no" voters will simply not vote. If 50.1% of the people show up and votes "yes," the referendum passes; if only 49.9% show up and votes "yes," the referendum fails, even though in both cases it had 100% support among those who actually voted.

One troubling aspect of this is that it makes it far easier to vote "no" than to vote "yes." It is sometimes argued that this ought to be the case. If people really want to change the status quo, the argument goes, they ought to get up off their caboose and vote. The problem is that votes are supposed to reflect the collective opinion of the electorate. The practice of making it easier for opponents to vote (by staying at home) than for supporters gives disproportionate voice to a select group—exactly the opposite of what a referendum is supposed to do.

How to vote with your backside—whether you want to or not
Tactics used in America's "Jim Crow" laws of the past, which sought to make it difficult for newly enfranchised blacks to vote, were more malicious in execution but similar in effect. In the 2004 US presidential election, election organizers in Ohio were accused of deliberately setting up polling places near people who were likely to vote Republican, making Democrats have to travel farther to vote.³

Voter turnout is a big deal. In most elections, "turning out the vote" (convincing supporters to spend the time and effort to go vote) is as important as getting people to agree with you.

This is especially problematic since Taiwan does not offer absentee ballots. In order to vote, supporters of a referendum must travel back to their home districts, sometimes from abroad, which is always expensive and sometimes impossible. In the 2004 presidential election, which also featured a referendum, the LA Times estimated that 7,000 returned to Taiwan from Los Angeles alone. That was a presidential election, so the burden may have been placed more-or-less equally on both sides; if there is a referendum to recall Chen, supporters from abroad will face huge hurdles before they can vote. Opponents need do nothing to have their voice count.

It gets much worse. By using a boycott strategy, the "no" camp converts all non-votes into "no" votes (and, ironically, "no" votes into "yes" votes—more on that later). Not only do supports have a harder time voting, but those who do not vote end up effectively voting for the other side. Opponents of the referendum automatically have a higher turnout, plus they get all the votes that supporters fail to produce.

Then there are those who do not vote because they don't want to: they may not feel well-enough informed, they may be disgusted with whole process, they may simply not care—or they may feel that abstaining best reflects their feelings. In any case, the choice not to vote is one that ought to be available. Under the current system is it not.

To sum up:

yes = yes
no = yes
staying at home and watching TV = no

The (not very) bright side
Two factors mitigate these problems (except the last) to some degree. One is that Taiwan has a very high voter turnout. In the 2004 presidential election, turnout was around 80%. The greater the turnout among the "yes" camp, the less the unfair advantage of the boycott strategy. But even if 100% of referendum supporters vote, the "no" camp still gets a boost from those who don't want to vote at all. And 80% is not 100%. The "no" camp still has a 20% head start.

The other factor is that a boycott campaign will not have a 100% success rate. In other words, some people will go to the polls and vote "no." Since the "yes" camp will always win the actual vote, and any vote pushes the overall turnout closer to 50%+1, a "no" vote is actually the same as a "yes" vote. In the 2004 referendum, 8.20% of the votes were "no" votes. Had another few hundred thousand people voted "no," the referendum would have passed.⁴

However, do not expect the small amount of people who vote "no" out of ignorance to go far toward offsetting the head start granted by the boycott strategy. That 8.20% "no" vote in 2004 represented only 3.5% of potential voters. That still leaves 16 or 17 points unaccounted for. Opponents of the referendum were probably over-represented in those votes. Nonetheless, it would have taken only about five points, less than a third of the "unaccounted" votes, to swing the referendum the other way.

And that was in a referendum that was simultaneous with a presidential election, so those "no" voters had a ballot in front of them anyway. In a special recall referendum, it would presumably be easier to keep Chen's supporters away from the polls. Besides, voters today are more educated than before about how and why a boycott works.

No means no
There are easy solutions to these problems. First, it should be easy to register to vote in a new city, no matter where you were born. There is no valid reason to make people go from Taipei to Tainan simply to participate in an election.

Second, absentee ballots need to be made available to those who need them, especially those who live abroad. In a country with as large a diaspora as Taiwan, it is appalling that this has not happened already.

Third, the "50%+1" requirement for referendums ought to be scrapped. It both unfairly privileges referendum opponents, forces many to vote who would rather not, and effectively makes others vote against their conscience.

Recalling a president is serious business, and, as objectors to this essay will point out, it shouldn't be easy. But there are plenty of legitimate, democratic means of making sure that leaders aren't sacked at the drop of a hat. Far better to require two-thirds or three-fifths support among those citizens who bother to show up. That way, yes means yes, no means no, and voting is left to those who actually have an opinion.

_______________________

¹The Taipei Times, which has uncharacteristically excellent coverage of the indictments, has compiled these numbers:

Occupied seats in LY: 220
Votes needed for recall or impeachment: 147 (2/3 of total)
KMT seats: 90
PFP seats: 22
TSU seats: 12
Non-Partison Solidarity Union: 8
Independent: 3

Both of the Non-Partison Solidarity Union and the three independents "tend to vote with the pan-blue parties," writes the TT.

"Therefore, a minimum of 12 of the 85 Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] legislators would also have to back a recall or impeachment motion in order for it to pass" (assuming all others vote for the recall). That isn't a given, but neither is it impossible, as DPP legislators seek to distance themselves from Chen or simply vote their conscience (it does happen from time to time).

²Which does not directly affect the president, and may lead to snap legislative elections, which may in turn cause one of those constitutional crises Taiwan is so fraught with.

³If "having to travel farther to vote" sounds like whining, it is not. Imagine two people: one passes a polling place on the way from her house to 7-11; the other needs to spend an hour on a bus (an American bus at that) after a long day at work. Even if this only makes a difference in a small percentage of potential voters, it has still been known to swing elections.

⁴Ironically, although the referendum did not pass, it may have been responsible for Chen's narrow victory. Supporters of the referendum, most of whom also supported Chen, had two reasons to vote: the presidential election and the referendum. Opponents of the referendum had only Lien Chan to lure them to the polls.

2006-10-12T12:24:00.000+08:00

Disclaimer
I’m not a law major. I am just trying to use the Constitution to figure the mess we see now, before and after Double Ten Day. I also tried to do some math, which I’m really bad at. :P I would love for you guys to give me some feedback or correct me where I’m wrong..

The anti-Chen rally seems like it will never end. Meanwhile, KMT legislators are preparing the third recall motion. How many votes do they actually need to pass the recall motion?

According to Article 2, the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan), “Recall of the president or the vice president shall be initiated upon the proposal of one-fourth of all members of the Legislative Yuan, and also passed by two-thirds of all the members. The final recall must be passed by more than one-half of the valid ballots in a vote in which more than one-half of the electorate in the free area of the Republic of China takes part.”

There are 225 seats in the Legislator Yuan and currently 220 legislators. The KMT will need more than one-fourth of all members of the Legislative Yuan, which is 56 votes at minimum, to initiate upon the proposal. The first step can be achieved easily by the KMT. What’s hard is that the KMT needs more than two-thirds of legislators, which are 147 legislators at minimum, to pass this proposal. Even though the recall proposal is passed in the Legislative Yuan, it has to be passed by one-half of the valid ballots in a vote in which more than one-half of the valid ballots in a vote in which more than one-half of the electorate in the free area of the Republic of China take part. It requires more than one-half of the people that possess voting rights in the ROC, approximately 8.25 million people would need to vote to make the result valid, and 4.13 million votes would have to be anti-Chen. In the Presidential Election of 2004, there were 2.43 million votes in favor of pan-blue. They would still need about 1.6 million votes even if the referendum is validated.

KMT has 89 seats, which include 3 seats from the New Party.
People First Party (PFP) has 22.
New Part has 1.
Wudang Tuanjie Lianmeng (無黨團結聯盟) has 6. It is pro-KMT in general.
5 legislators do not belong to any political parties, but are pro-KMT.
The above is pan-blue, and there are 123 seats in total.
In order to pass the recall proposal, they need 24 more votes in the Legislative Yuan.

DPP has 85 seats.
Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) has 12 seats.

To break the deadlock, the KMT may consider working on Lee Teng-hui. With his influence, he can not only determine the 12 votes of TSU for sure, but also some of the DPP legislators. 12 votes from the DPP will be required to pass the proposal.

It sounds almost impossible for pan-blue to recall the president. That is why there has been mention of a no-confidence vote against the president of the Executive Yuan.

Article 3 (3), Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan), says, “With the signatures of more than one-third of the total number of Legislative Yuan members, the Legislative Yuan may propose a no-confidence vote against the president of the Executive Yuan. Seventy-two hours after the no-confidence motion is made, an open-ballot vote shall be taken within 48 hours. Should more than one-half of the total number of Legislative Yuan members approve the motion, the president of the Executive Yuan shall tender his resignation within ten days, and at the same time may request that the president dissolve the Legislative Yuan. Should the no-confidence motion fail, the Legislative Yuan may not initiate another no-confidence motion against the same president of the Executive Yuan within one year”.

The seats of the KMT, the PFP, and the New Party are already more than half of the total seats in the Legislative Yuan. In other words, pan blue can easily pass the no-confidence motion. Why don’t KMT go for it?

First of all, the focus of the anti-Chen rally and the KMT focus is on Chen right now. A no-confidence vote against Su Tseng-Chang, the president of the Executive Yuan, has nothing to do with the whole event. There’s no reason for the KMT to run the risk of being criticized under this advantageous situation. Keeping people’s focus on Chen is now the KMT’s best strategy.

Secondly, since Chen has the right to appoint the president of the Executive Yuan,[1] it is not wise for the KMT to change the president of the Executive Yuan. The next might be even worse for them, and the KMT has no control over this position. All they could do is keep voting no-confidence.

What else can the pan-blue do besides join in the anti-Chen rally, and how can the KMT sustain this anti-Chen sentiment among the people until the coming presidential election? Or maybe, with a great possibility, neither of the two can bother the KMT, if the DPP cannot come up with a new strategy to deal with this crisis.

Helen

p.s You can go check the Constitution here:
Chinese:
中華民國憲法 http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4B.asp?FullDoc=所有條文&Lcode=A0000001
中華民國憲法增修條文 http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4A.asp?FullDoc=all&Fcode=A0000002
English: http://www.president.gov.tw/en/prog/news_release/document_content.php?id=1105498684&pre_id=1105498701&amp;amp;amp;g_category_number=409&category_number_2=373&layer=on&sub_category=455

[1] Article3, the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan) says, “The president of the Executive Yuan shall be appointed by the president. Should the president of the Executive Yuan resign or the office become vacant, the vice president of the Executive Yuan shall temporarily act as the president of the Executive Yuan pending a new appointment by the president. The provisions of Article 55 of the Constitution shall cease to apply”.

2006-09-27T00:04:00.000+08:00

Hi~I am Mike~

Below are some important topics which can stimulate our deep thought. I think it is highly the time for us to learn something from what has happened recently, and I also love to know how you guys think over the things happening in our lives.Besides the issues I offer below, I also attached the response from my friends to my article, and hope that their voices will help you to contemplate these issues.

1. When you are going abroad , how would you intro yourself to foreigners , like where are you from and why ? And think about when people think you are from China or any other Asian Country , what would you think and how will you answer or explain? 2. Do you think National Identity matters ? What do you think about National Identity when you go abroad ? Is it becoming an important issue when you go abroad ? And why ? 3. Tell us your opinions on National Identity , you are encouraged to talk about your personal observation and thoughts. 4. Tell us how would you do to improve Taiwan's international recognition ? 5. What do you think about Taiwan's Media Problem and why ? Do you think it is good or not ? If not , please tell us how would you do to improve it ?

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Mike,
great issue, important issue.
The National Taiwan Normal University Dean of Fine Arts, Professor Apex Lin, has just launched an exhibition on the subject titled "My homeland".
He says that Taiwan is "drifting " , like a cloud in the sky or a leaf on the ocean. He urges his students to search their hearts and their own personal history then to assert a new national and person identity.
Interestingly, he states that his intention is not born of political considerations. He also points to the importance of "spiritual" aspects in the search for a new Taiwanese identity.
I notice that Australia is making use of citizenship tests (for foreigners wishing to become Australian citizens) to stimulate debate on the issue of Australian nation identity. Who are our heroes? What place does sport have in our culture? How do we view the disadvantaged? What relationship do we aim to maintain between the people and our politicians? What foreign policies do we stand for? What vision do we hold for the future?
The same is obvious when teaching IELTS or TEFL.These tests are being used to integrate and assimilate new residents and those aspiring to citizenship. They test English levels while importing cultural values. The content of these tests is more and more frequently an issue in the public arena. This forces the community to define and realign themselves. Clever politics wouldn't you agree?

David

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Here is from one of my another friend, Hank, to the Taiwan issue.

First of all，I think that recognition is not the same with awareness.
But it has some logical relationship，that is we have to let foreigners know Taiwan and then we can tell him what are they different between Taiwan and China.
It means strengthening Taiwan awareness is first step.
So I try to provide some ways to enlarge Taiwan awareness first.
Basically，as a new product is put on the market，we have to do some promotion campaigns，so does Taiwan.
I want to divide promotion tools into two parts，one is software and the other is hardware. Moreover，according its effect speed，I also divide them into fast and slow.

This is the structure built thought these two thinking ways.

Hardware: 1. people2. product3. food4. construction5. etc..
Software: 1. music2. culture by movies or operas3. trip4. Olympic event5. religion6. charity7. etc..

These are ways we can use to improve our awareness.Once they know Taiwan，and then we can position what we want.
But it is really hard to change someone’s thoughts if a perception has occupied it first.
So through interviews or questionnaires in recent years，we can understand Taiwan has an image of technology.
Hence，we still can deepen this concept and no need to change.
That will make others remind Taiwan very soon if technology，this term，strikes them suddenly.
Finally，it is the most difficult part eager to recognize the difference between Taiwan and China.First of all，it depends on the TA is us or foreigners.
For Foreigners，maybe they just want to know what is Taiwan and where it is.If they really want to understand a lot，I prefer to let them come to Taiwan for a trip.
It is the most efficient way to know what it is different with China.
Maybe by this trip they will know Taiwan is more diversified than they already knowand then tell their friends.
It is better than any other promotion strategies.
Action speaks louder than words or media.
But if we want us to recognize the difference between Taiwan and China，it is totally different from the above.
Perhaps，we could also divide it into lots of parts from country to people.
It is involved in the national identity，it is more complicated than promote a country.
And it is also out of the area of this question.Recognition is a very wide term.
It depends upon which part you want to let others understand，it can derives different strategies.
However，I think in this stage making more people knowto all of you!!
Taiwan is the most important.

2006-09-24T23:25:00.000+08:00

I've posted links to both ESWN and Jujuflop in the "Links" section of this blog (on the righthand side). Please give them a look. ESWN does great translations that often lead directly to stories in the mainstream media, including the NY Times, the Guardian, and other huge newspapers. Jujuflop does (actually, "did," since the blogger moved away) the best research and analysis of any English Taiwan blog.

You can add your own links to the list by looking in "Template" section. Scroll down near the bottom and copy the format of the other links. If you don't feel comfortable with HTML, just e-mail me the link and I'll do it for you. (If you don't know what HTML is, that counts as "not feeling comfortable with HTML.")

Also, Sigrid, Meg, and Rado have all written updates recently. I want to remind you that you don't just need to agree in your comment. Well-reasoned criticism is valuable, too.

Oh, and don't forget to sign your name at the end of each entry and comment.

—Chris

2006-09-18T17:51:00.000+08:00

I read this article in a couple of months ago.
It's perhaps not really an article with political issue.
However, once one has the sucificent confidence to his/her own country,
the national identity could be deep-rooted more.

Our President Chen is a representative from nobody to somebody,

his spirit is to appreciate for sure.

Yet, recently, Taiwanese are sick of scandle-ridden to President Chen.

Freedom House, a non-profit, nonpartisan organization in New York, is working for the political and economic freedom around the world. This organization arrays seven degrees to evaluate how democratic country is. The 1st degree represents for the most democracy; and the 7th degree is vice versa. Taiwan’s rating has improved from 2 to 1 because of the freedom of political rights and electoral reforms in 2006.

“In 2004 and 2005, Taiwan launched ambitious constitutional reforms that have cut the size of the national parliament in half. The country also made an effort to reduce corruption and improve the quality of political representation through ambitious electoral reform. Taiwan's tense relationship with neighboring China took a turn for the worse during 2005 with Beijing's announcement of an anti-secession law, which authorizes the use of military force against Taiwan in the event "peaceful" attempts to unify with Taiwan prove ineffective.” (http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfmpage=22&year=2006&country=7069)

Huntington, a political scientist known for his analysis of the relationship between the military and the civil government, came up with “two turn over test” which Taiwan didn’t past this test yet. As a young democratic country, Taiwan seems to be making progress for the way.

Huntington furthermore mentioned that “willingness” and “capacity” are two crucial elements for decolonized countries to promote the democracy or not. From the event of Depose-Chen rally proceeding, Taiwanese is upset over President Chen’s corruption. While we Taiwanese telling the black and white, we also could take Huntington’s theories as a consideration. Willingness perhaps can be shown from a leader’s determination; but capacity depends on a leader’s charisma and assertiveness. Yet how intertwine those two elements? Education matters!!

More information about Freedom House: http://www.freedomhouse.org/

Meg Ti-Cheng Chiu

[轉貼]龍應台談世界公民意識

進統一星巴克買咖啡，你知道可以指名要一杯「公平咖啡」嗎？

去年孩子從德國來訪，15歲的老二發問：「台灣怎麼每個街角都有7-11？」19歲的老大接口說：「對呀，我也奇怪政府怎會允許？」──媽媽龍應台忍不住好奇他們為何這麼說，沒想到這兩個青少年指出，7-11這類跨國企業有龐大財力人力可以營運，勢必擠壓本土柑仔店的生存，當一個城市的跨國企業越膨脹，意味小資本產業消失，城市的多元文化與在地特色也遭受打擊。

從小到大，孩子許多發言都讓龍應台大感驚訝他們的世界公民意識從何而來？昨晚她在「清華思想沙龍」，從主人變「客人」，以「台灣人能不能有世界公民意識？」為題演講，觀察自己的孩子在德國的教育與生活環境中成長，她發現「原來在那個環境中，公民教育幾乎無所不在，而且是『世界公民教育』！」

學校環境中，一半孩子是外國人，還有交換學生，足球隊與社團則不斷訓練著個人與團體的互動溝通；他們在學校中每一堂課討論政治、社會、公民、宗教、倫理，談個人如何面對權威、組織、國家、政府，看全球化市場經濟，談個人與良知的抉擇，幾乎不需要有專門一堂「公民教育」來教孩子怎麼成為「世界公民」。

世界公民教育無所不在，存在於每一堂課、每一個接收到報紙廣播電視電影的時刻，甚至晚餐桌上的談話。

誰是「Global Citizen」？龍應台指出：要認知到個人行動可以造成不同；關心公平、正義；關懷人類社區的現在和未來，認為這種關懷不為國界阻擋；以行動表達關懷。

她舉加拿大的「維多利亞公民教育網」為例，教十幾歲的青少年認識全球化下的貿易、貧窮問題、生態問題、人權問題、健康問題……，讓他們知道，世界上有多少人死於瘧疾，愛滋孤兒以何等驚人的幾何級數增多，教孩子怎麼寫信反應他們的關切，要把信寄到哪些關鍵單位，還要把副本寄到報社。

這個網站也讓孩子了解，為什麼一國富會導致另一國貧窮，在一杯咖啡裡，咖啡農被剝削有多少？而跨國連鎖企業的邊際利益有多可觀！

由是他們不能不知道，「樂施會」推動公平咖啡，輔助坦桑尼亞卡蓋拉合作社的三萬農民，也迫使雀巢將伊索比亞600萬美金債務減為150萬，星巴克則有「公平咖啡日」，台灣是在每月20日，這天咖啡商保證供應的是高價而非剝削價買來的咖啡豆。

龍應台強調，台灣國民所得排名全球第30名，超過紐西蘭、西班牙、葡萄牙、希臘；我們的人口結構，2003年就每三對有一對外籍通婚，外籍人口超過60萬，我們必須教育孩子具備「世界公民」的意識。

「教育」正是使國家向上提昇的關鍵，所以龍應台強調，清華思想沙龍要「影響有影響力的人」，這些人是老師，是青年，是家長，要讓大家相信甘地的話：「你必須成為你想看到的世界的改變之鍵。」【2006/03/22 民生報】

2006-09-10T22:48:00.000+08:00

I have read an article, a speech delivered by Dr. David Plott (former editor-in-chief of the Far Eastern Economic Review), titled "Does Taiwan really matter? An outsider's view," which is posted on Michael Turton's blog. Following is my sum up of it and my personal opinions.

1. the summing up of Dr. Plott's speech

Taiwan has contributed so much to China's economy success that two sides are inter-depending on each other.

(The design, engineering, logistical, and supply-chain expertise of a lot of China's electronics and high-end technology exports owe their success to Taiwanese businesses…and therefore to the accumulation of China's own foreign reserves…that word[describing the relation] is “interdependence”…It is odd that some Taiwanese would focus on the word "dependence" to describe the relationship of Taiwan to China, because Taiwan's economy has long been "dependent" on other economies through trade and business and investment ties.)

Though it's possible that China will take drastic moves to damage Taiwan's economy, it will definitely hurt itself too.

(…souring its reputation with investors, businesses and governments elsewhere in the world. It would also undermine China's standing in multilateral institutions such as the World Trade Organization.)

By further economic integration between Taiwan and China, and China and the world, shared interests will emerge and the war is more unlikely to break out. That's why Taiwan matters.

(As the greatest experiment in economic integration the world has ever seen, the European Union, demonstrates, economic integration has a powerful effect on the perceptions of common interests among nations… One could argue just as forcefully that economically integrated countries seldom go to war against each other.)

Taiwan also matters because it serves as a successful model of "Asian/Chinese democracy," and is critical to the future of democracy in China.

(The deep roots that democracy has planted in Taiwan are an embarrassment to those on the mainland, or even in Hong Kong, who argue that democracy imperils economic progress or leads to instability. The success of democracy in Taiwan is absolutely critical to the future of democracy in China.)

However, the hijacking of "Taiwanese identity" by some politicians in Taiwan has put Taiwan and the world's interests and security in danger.

(China fears Taiwanese independence. And it will go to war to prevent it…what troubles me most about the issue of Taiwanese identity is how easily it can be exploited for domestic political gain…)

The expression of "Taiwanese identity" doesn't have to be independence, as the experience of EU has demonstrated.

(Has the emergence of the European Union effaced the identity of the French, the Germans, or the Italians? I would argue it has deepened their respective cultural identities, while at the same time layering them with a new, evolving European identity.)

The way out for Taiwan is to seek identity but not independence, and develop democracy but not polarization.

(There is nothing in the rich web of cultural, social and historical experiences that make up Taiwanese identity that require independence, so long as China does not seek reunification by force and at the expense of Taiwanese democracy…One of the greatest challenges all democracies face is the risk of polarization, the tendency of political divisions within society to tear democracy apart.)

2. My opinions about the speech

The "route map" for Taiwan provided by Dr. David Plott is like this: the threat of war Taiwan faces can be alleviated by integrating more with China's economy and putting aside issues about independence; the future of Taiwan can be assured by developing a successful democracy model of Asian and Chinese.

I have some critics about this route. First, the danger of integrating with China's economy doesn't only come from Beijing government's intension, but also from the uncertainty of China's economy. As what David said in his speech, its pension system, income gap, environment pollution, and banking system are all in a mess and post great risk to its economy growth. Now with such a high concentration of Taiwan's economy on China, a reasonable management and diversification is necessary and also make sense, even in terms of business SOP. Therefore, economy interdependence is a way to prevent war, but too much of it would also be a way to mutual destruction.

Second, although seeking independence would undermine cross-strait relations and thus post dangers to Taiwan, the voice of it cannot be muted. The logic is simple: as China wages its power to block Taiwan's participation in IGO and NGOs, declaring its ownership over Taiwan, and the trend of China fever is emerging around the world, what would be the perception of Taiwan in "outsider's" view? We don't have to put this issue so eagerly that makes Taiwan a "trouble maker" (though the real trouble maker is China), but we can't let the international community think people in Taiwan are willing to accept China's setting. Furthermore, if one day we have to negotiate with Beijing to strike a deal, without accumulating our bargains from now on (though it's a little bit frustrating, in the worst scenario independence might become a tool), what can we depend on besides an uncertain Washington?

The last point is about the effectiveness of a successful model of democracy for Taiwan's "autonomy." I totally agree that sound democracy would contribute to Taiwan's reputation and secure more support from international society, but doubt about its effect to Beijing government. If Taiwan's democracy exerts great pressure to CCP's legitimacy, will Beijing government welcome Taiwan? It would do everything it can to divide Taiwan's society to tear apart the democracy, the situation that Dr. Plott recommended people in Taiwan, not China, managed to avoid. The scenario in the minds of China leaders should be this: a unified China without democratic Taiwan is the best, a unified China with democratic Taiwan while Beijing government in charge of Taiwan the second. In short, even though Taiwan can maitain its democracy under China's adverse effort, Beijing will not allow Taipei to function the democracy by itself, since it post a challenge to CCP's ruling, as Dr. Plott said. I am not saying Taiwan's democracy is worthless, but to think Taiwan can preserve its autonomy under a unified China is kind of, forgive me, naive.

Above are my opinions, please feel free to share your view or point out my blindness.

Rado

2006-08-31T07:43:00.000+08:00

Hi~I am Sigrid*

Is everybody doing well recently? Hope that all of you have a gorgeous summer!
I have been thinking about what I am going to talk in my article for a while. Originally I was so reluctant to talk about the biggest issue recently --Shih Ming-the’s anti-Chen campaign(it has been changed to be “anti-corruption” now). However, after I saw the article in Taipei Times, I changed my mind. The author’s name is 李敏勇, a person whom I have never heard of, while what he writes much moved me, and the headline of this editorial “The country that I want has a vision for all of us” makes reference to my bosom and my opinion regarding the “anti corruption campaign” initiated by Shih.
I smell in this “anti-corruption campaign” the private revenge of a politician and see in this protest the corruption of democracy. I appreciate Shih’s brevity and resourcefulness but not his protest this time. I feel embarrassed because I am a member of the “silent majority.” I don’t want to be a radical dissent, but actually I do have some judgment on the demonstration. It recalls me the question which I can’t answer very well when I was interviewed by Echo--- “ why the youth in Taiwan are so indifferent to politics ?” Why? Education will be held responsible for these consequences, I think. Still worse, after we grow up, we are too busy in competing with others and pursuing achievements to care about what on earth happens to our country. Just like the soap operas we watch everyday, “Politics” becomes the term we “watch” everyday on TV instead of people’s affairs and opinions toward the only country we have. Do you really believe that Shih stepped forward for people’s voices when he appealed for volunteers’ donation? How many people donate for defending Taiwan’s democracy? Every generation must be blamed on not only for the hostile words and behaviors of some of its members but for other members’ indifference toward these hostile words and behaviors as well. Maybe I am too young to judge good from wrong, so I dare not to criticize those enthusiastic politicians who work hard to defend Taiwan’s democracy. However, my conscience prefers the Shih as a warrior for democracy to the Shih as a politician for his private political career. As for this protest, I haven’t seen any concrete list of the source of donation so far, such as the names of the donators or good reasons for the sum of donation. I am not persuaded into backing him up. I don’t believe that the one hundred NT dollars can buy priceless democracy. I even can’t see the “version for all of us.”

Ps. Recently I finish reading a book named “The Five People You Meet in Heaven.” This book had been published for a long time, but I was too busy to have time to read it. It is a story about a poor worker’s life, and throughout the author’s description, the story talks about that our achievements are fulfilled because of others’ company, that the love you give will be not in vain at all, and that others’ stories and our story will get involved in the unpredictable future. This is really a good book for your guys’ leisure time, and hope that you “have a good time with it.” Besides, bellow is the article I saw in Taipei Times:

The country that I want has a vision for all of us
By Lee Min-yung 李敏勇Tuesday, Aug 29, 2006,Page 8

I do not want a country that has accustomed itself to colonial rule and that can never escape from the shadow of this slavish mentality.
AlthoughTaiwan's transition of political power in 2000 was realized amid shouts of dissent, its democratization process is stuck in the management of a fictional state left by authoritarian leaders of the past, unable to impart and handle transitional justice.
The country is filled with statues of colonial dictators, and these symbols of colonial government can be found at major intersections, on school campuses and in government agencies and military camps in cities and the countryside.
I do not want a country in which politicians battle only for power and benefits in the way one handles a commercial career.
These politicians, who uncritically and without shame accepted colonial rule, now take pride in rationalizing that era.
Those who are former dissidents from the opposition movement have moved from reform to becoming part of the old establishment; some have inherited the behavior of the colonial ruler though they were never subdued by them while others were, and now they are praised for lauding the colonial administration.
I do not want a country whose people have empty, soulless bodies.
I see people locking themselves up behind iron-clad windows, unable to participate in society, focusing instead on making money and worshipping materialism.
In other words, these people are incapable of participating in cultural refinement, in spite of the nation's favorable economic circumstances.
These individuals include the middle class, the wealthy and the educated, who generally lack understanding of their national identity and behave as opportunistic immigrants might, defending the colonial system and resolutely rejecting political reform and the nation's reconstruction.
I do not want a country that does not believe in democracy and progress and that lacks faith in freedom and human rights.
I see that the mutual alienation under colonial rule has led to utilitarianism.
I also see that people attach themselves to a foreign power, disregarding the fact that this power is threatening their country.
These people are constantly deceiving and humiliating themselves.
I see people accepting different colonial models and unable to let the world understand that they really want independence.
I see cultural workers and artists shamelessly shouting slogans to promote a cheap revolution without the slightest feeling of shame.
I want a country that is free, democratic and beautiful.
I want a country in which people advance their civilization, respect human rights and treasure the natural environment.
I want a country whose people can walk out of the dark of their nation's past sufferings and boost justice and build a peace-loving society.
I want a country where people recognize their national identity, work together to protect their homeland and reach out to other nations with dignity and through gestures of goodwill.
I want a country that has the ability to maintain economic prosperity.
And I want a country that is capable of refining culture and voicing a rich national character that can generate a new vision for the nation.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.

2006-08-07T13:42:00.000+08:00

Most of you have probably read the BBC article about the remarks Chen made to you during your meeting ("Taiwan president urges efforts to change US one-China policy").

I don't think the article ran anywhere other than the Central News Agency's (中央通訊社) website. It says the Taiwanese participants are "10 young men" who "visited 40 US states." It's sadly unsurprising to see this kind of error. There's probably some kind of lesson in that, but don't ask me. I'm on vacation.

—Chris

2006-08-01T14:02:00.000+08:00

Hi, I'm Scottie, 2006 Ambassador from Taiwan,

Thanks for everything all you dedicated guys out there in the foundation have been doing!
You are just awesome!!

And also, thank you, all my 29 sweet partners in 2006 Ambassador Program.
You guys the best!

Pretty honored to be part of this 2006 Ambassador Program, I am pleased I've absolutely learned something and personally gained some unprecedented experience while spending time in both L.A. and D.C..

I would say, anyone who wishes to shoot for something great would always need some true dedication and craziness.

We are not alone!

To give, and to receive.

Scottie

2006-08-01T12:05:00.000+08:00

I am Rado, now struggling with Chicken Pox(水痘), which most of our age had suffered long time ago. To think of the trip in the US, however, is knid of alleviating my pain, because it was exciting and full of wonderful events.

I could hardly remember how I survived the first week in LA, but I'm sure the Bonaventure is one of the best hotel I've ever been. Everymorning before 7, I got to wake up and dress myself and then rush, through confusing paths, to the meeting room, and not sure whether I have time for my breakfast. Lectures were almost good, really, just a little too much to digest. After all-day workshop, the office in World Trade Center would start another round of fighting, fight for WHO, high-level visit, FTA, voting records, or a drink in 35th floor in the next building. That was a fantastic process that made me grow, because I couldn't believe there are so many people can get together to suffer and make fun of it at the same time! Not kidding, it's all for Taiwan.

Time flied, and we came to DC. Politics is not so sunny, just as the wheather there. We started to learn how to present to the MC's, but the fake MC's always tortured us. The way to Capital Hill was difficult, and to find the right building was no easy job. No wonder the meeting I had joined with the aids/MC's were not always smooth, because it's not easy for them to get their places, too. However, I was glad to see all theses people, for I know that most of them agree with the rights we ask for, though few of them could give concrete support. But I'm not so frustrated, because to make a dream come true is not always easy, at least we dare to dream it, and we will definitely get some rewards. Part of the rewards realized soon, they were Tequila and Bud Light beer and other numerous drinks I would never remember, among tasty dishes and at relaxing bars. Still, we have to do role-play and have meeting, no matter how relaxing in those few hours.

Now, back in Taiwan, the excitement during the two weeks is hardly to recall. The next time I can feel it must be our renuion when we talk about it. But it's fine becasue we have this blog, and anyone of us can post that feeling at will. And the most important is that we have known each other, and realize we can do something for Taiwan because there is Formosa Foundation. I don't want to be emotional but that really makes me happy and comforting, for we, people who have similar moves deep in heart, can share what we think and form as a group, and have experienced all this together...let's have a drink soon!!!

2006-08-01T11:21:00.000+08:00

台灣在國際上的孤立本來就不合理，台灣已經達到各項指標，足以讓世界承認並成為國際社會的一員。但是因為受到中共的打壓，所以讓台灣的外交屢屢受困，這是很讓人受挫的地方。

因此，聽到這個活動可以跟美國國會接觸覺得非常棒。台灣、美國關係本來就非常密切，美國又是世界上最具有指標性的國家，如果美國能在WHO或是FTA等議題給予台灣更多支持，那對台灣將很有幫助。

我很幸運參加了這個活動，讓我有機會能夠站在美國國會議員前，爲自己的土地發聲，對我來說十分有意義：他們可以藉由我認識台灣，我也可以經由跟他們的交談獲悉他們對台灣的觀感，更清楚國際上的看法。

這個活動讓我成長很多，聽到了很多不同的聲音。不只讓我的觀點更多元，也讓我更珍惜台灣發展出的民主自由果實，這不只是前人的努力結晶，也是普世都該捍衛的價值。

Cathy

2006-07-31T21:28:00.000+08:00

Hi, this is Meg(Ti-Cheng) from Taiwan.

I am blessed to be a part of the Ambassador Program. Joining this program is one of the most rewarding experiences I have had in this summer. Although it has a tight schedule, yet every minute was well spend. I usually went to sleep at midnight and woke up at 7 sharp. I wouldn’t say it was a torture, but it was really demanding.

However, “the price of greatness is responsibility.” It was definitely worth to be demanded. During the program, esp. when I was really tired, I asked myself why not have an enjoyable summer and just hang out with friends? If Taiwan’s situation is easy, I have a reason to have an easy life. Yet Taiwan is marginalized by this world. It is frustrating, but it is not the end of the world. I was so touched that there are many foreigners who do care about Taiwan, and worked hard not to isolate Taiwan. I know some senators or congressmen may forget about meeting us, but if we could keep meeting them year after year, they probably will recognize Taiwan someday.

Last but not the least, I do appreciate Formosa Foundation for giving me the chance to speak up for Taiwan in the States. I’m sure I have gained a more concrete Taiwanese identity after this program. If people around me can see this slight influence from me, I am glad I can help.

2006-07-31T16:45:00.000+08:00

Hi, everyone,

I am Natalie, one of the ambassadors from Taiwan. As for program, it is a meaningful and positive activity comparing to some politicians' behaviors recently…:) Though we are students, we devoted our efforts to making Taiwan better and brighter. At the beginning, I could not believe one day I can do something for my growing country specifically, not watching TV only, not complaining all day long, but bravely speak out to those members of Congress. I would like to say I am proud of being one of the ambassadors from Taiwan. And I do think our performances and spirits during the overall program should be recognized. Maybe our English-speaking skill is not perfect but we tried our best to raise every question in speeches and show up our faces at least to represent Taiwan when in D.C. Now we are in different places, mapping out our future, but we have a part of same memory in our life. Also, appreciate Enoch and Daniel's advices and reminders to us while in D.C. Thanks for your encouragement and supports. Hope one day our path can cross again for Taiwan! :)

2006-07-31T13:22:00.000+08:00

fter the program, one friend of mine asked me, “Why are you interested in politics? Don’t you think it’s dirty?”

Traditionally, Chinese culture appreciates those who are like Tao Qian (陶潛). They believe that politics is dirty, full of bribes and greed. Some may say, “Don’t tell me about such dirty things. Now I have to wash my ears.” How noble.

I’m not arguing over whether politics is dirty or not. I just want to share my motivation for joining this program.

During the Young Ambassadors program, I went to Congress with Taiwanese and American students. We made appointments with them and tried to help them understand the situation Taiwan is in. We were trying to influence the way Taiwan could be. Not for bribes, money or power, we did this because we care. We care a lot about cross-strait relations, the most important issue for Taiwan. Don’t criticize Taiwan if you don’t read newspapers. Don’t criticize Taiwan if you thought that hiding yourself from politics (or realities) is noble. If you don’t like the way things are, go change it then! Stand up and do something for Taiwan. No matter which direction you want to work toward for Taiwan, you are compelled to do something unless you are 100 percent satisfied with Taiwan.

This program provides us an excellent opportunity to do something. Instead of hiring professionals to interview congresspeople, the Formosa Foundation gave the opportunity to us. We are just students and not professional at all, but we are enthusiastic. We are concerned for Taiwan, and we are here to make a stand. It’s our right and our responsibility to do something for our country.

I will continue to recommend this program to my friends, and I will continue to work for Taiwan. As long as we enjoy voting rights, we should never forget how precious Taiwan’s democracy is.

Helen Chou

2006-07-31T11:44:00.000+08:00

我現在在上班沒事做哇哈哈，就來偷空寫個心得。

活動整體而言真的是十分的有收穫，在洛杉磯的課程當中，我們交換了許多意見，相當意外的發現，許多美國學生的立場比台灣學生還要更堅定，兩邊所獲得的資訊也有些許的不同，我想無論是美國或是台灣學生，都從這樣的討論當中得到許多收穫。就美國學生而言，他們也許平時並沒有許多機會聽到來自台灣的心聲，大部分是來自父母親，但父母親也許移民至美國已久，對於台灣現況的解讀與在台灣居住的台灣人仍有些差距，在與美國國會議員討論之前，能夠有這樣的分享，個人覺得是十分珍貴的；對於台灣學生而言，這樣的分享更是一大鼓勵。

在美國交換學生一年，我真的不敢期待美國人會主動幫台灣，我週遭（之前啦）的台美人大部分對於台灣不太關心，有許多人的阿公阿嬤也都搬到美國了，一輩子沒去過台灣，我唸的國際研究也特別討論到這些議題，結論都是他們就是美國人，祖先的故鄉不是他們的故鄉。我也的確可以了解他們的心情，因此，我之前並不期待台美人對於台灣會有什麼特別的情感，其他民族的人就更不用說了，沒有歷史背景，怎麼可能來幫我們？結論卻是，有的，在美國有這麼一群人，在為台灣的民主與未來努力，與台灣沒有歷史連結的人、沒有在台灣出生的人、沒有受到中共壓迫的人卻是這麼努力的，在美國為台灣而努力。而我呢？

這樣小小的一個島，在地圖上這樣小小的一塊，我在美國每一次看到都仍會感動，無論我未來在哪裡，我都會告訴我的小孩，這裡是我的家，番薯大的一塊地，在面臨中共的威脅下，我們卻仍能堅持民主精神。民主真的得來不易，是好多人流血換來的，我們很幸運不用坐在廣場前被坦克車壓，我們也很幸運沒有在二二八風潮中哭著要投票要民主要自由，為什麼不珍惜？為什麼不努力把握？這個活動帶給我鼓勵，我希望我能更進步，快點學習更多能力更強，能夠幫助台灣更多；而我也慚愧了，我做得還不夠，番薯大的一塊地，大家都要努力才能維持它的好。
再一次謝謝吳先生以及所有的籌備人員，這個活動讓我視野更廣闊、看得更多，亦覺得責任更是重大。在這樣小小的一個島，大家都要努力。

2006-07-30T13:02:00.000+08:00

By Chris

Sorry about slacking off on this entry. I'm on vacation in America. I'm leaving to go camping tomorrow for a week. Before I go, let me sketch out some ideas that might be useful for writing English posts on this blog.

Like I mentioned in the e-mail, you can always write a post like Sigrid did—thoughts on the program, upcoming events, etc. But that will get old quickly, so we should try to do something a little more general-interest. Again, if we compile enough of this, and the quality is good, we can start another website for non-FF people.

The rest of this entry deals with how the English-speaking world gets its news about Taiwan. It's long, but if you want to write something in English I think it's important to know this.

_________________

Newspapers

There are three English newspapers in Taiwan. The biggest by far is the Taipei Times, my old employer. The TT is owned by the Liberty Times (自由時報), so obviously it's pretty Green. Not as Green at the LT, but still pretty Green. It's read by a lot of important people in D.C., though, which can't be said of the other two newspapers.

One of those is the China Post, which is very Blue, is popular with English teachers, and is despised by its own employees. Foreign media sometimes refer to its articles.

Last (and least) is Taiwan News, a well-meaning rag that's always about to go out of business. (They say that once it does, the Apple Daily (蘋果日報) is going to start an English paper, and all the best people from the TT are going to defect.) Hardly anyone reads Taiwan News, and its staff seems really stressed out and unhappy.

None of these papers is profitable. The TT stays in business because it's supported by the LT and by Union Bank of Taiwan (聯邦銀行). I hear the China Post is only still around because it runs a cram school and pays its editors almost nothing. Who knows what keeps Taiwan News alive.

Being money-losing enterprises, free-market competition doesn't really force these papers to get better, and in my opinion none of them are all that good (although the TT is probably the most professional newspaper in Taiwan).

All three do a bad job of reporting on the Taiwanese media and Taiwanese society. And the TT (the only one that really matters in terms of international influence) has such a transparent agenda that anyone who pays attention knows that they're biased.

In other words, English speakers have very limited access to (1) what Taiwanese people read and think about, and (2) good coverage and analysis of Taiwanese news.

Foreign media

Sorry, the foreign media doesn't cover Taiwan very much. It doesn't tend to do much with the "Taiwan Question," either, although just about every article on Taiwan needs to include the sentence Beijing insists that Taiwan is a renegade province of the PRC or something, usually tacked awkwardly onto the end of the story by some editor.

Every once in a while a semi-important regional newspaper will run an editorial on why the US should support Taiwan. For a long time major liberal media like the New York Times was thought to be pro-China—or at least opposed to the conservative hostility toward Chinese communism, which some liberals saw as a remnant of the Cold War. But China's human-rights situation has been pissing off liberals for a while now. It doesn't necessarily translate into caring about Taiwan, but the NYT has been going after China a lot lately.

CNN, on the other hand, is said to make its reporting more China-friendly in order to get the right to broadcast into China. (I don't know that this is true.)

There are a couple web sites that collect Taiwan-related news from all over the world. They might be useful: Taiwan'sNews.Net and the Taiwan section of Topix.

Blogs

There probably is a demand for decent coverage and commentary on Taiwan. Maybe not enough to sustain a major newspaper, but that's what the internet is for. There is a huge English-language Chinese blogsphere (部落格空間, I think), but the Taiwan blogsphere is relatively small and not well-read.

The main blog that deals with Taiwan is actually a China blog, based in Hong Kong: ESWN . It is by far the most important English-language blog that covers Taiwan—or China. It provides English translations of Chinese media, and also intelligent commentary. It's more China-oriented, and is sometimes perceived to be anti-Taiwan, or at least anti-Green—although the blogger says he is merely skeptical of Taiwan in many ways and provides a lot of Blue-ish opinions as a counter to the Taipei Times, and he also includes a lot of criticism of China from a Taiwanese perspective. For example, he translates a lot of Long Yingtai (龍應台).

Even though the main focus is China and the Chinese media, there's a lot of stuff about Taiwan on ESWN that you can't get anywhere else. It has periodic collections of opinion polls from various newspapers that are really useful, and also talks about pop culture—the kind of stuff that makes the front page of the Apple Daily.

It's hard to exaggerate the importance of ESWN. It's read by reporters from many major English news services. Lots of major newspapers—the New York Times comes to mind—get story ideas from ESWN. That's because reporters from these papers either can't understand Chinese or don't have time to pay close attention to what's going on in the Chinese-language media.

All the translations on ESWN are done by one person. Even so, there is no way we match it. Still, check out the website and maybe you'll get some ideas for posts. This type of thing is a good way to attract readers.

The best blog that focusses just on Taiwan is Jujuflop. For the most part, the writer comments on stories from the Taipei Times, the China Post, and on ESWN. What makes the blog so good is his analysis, which often involves research simple research that no one else in the English-speaking world has bothered to do.

Another main blog belongs to Michael Turton, who is very Green and very critical of ESWN (read his argument here).

For example, ESWN recently posted this editorial from Hong Kong's Apple Daily (written by Be Da-Zhong (卜大中), who writes for Taiwan's Apple Daily). The article, which attacks Chen Shuibian partly for supposedly planning to change Taiwan's name to "Taiwan," is hard to entirely agree with, since it's not very well-reasoned. But the overall points are valid and I think it's important for English-speakers to be exposed to this point of view. A Green-supporting foreign blogger named Michael Turton attacked the article (which isn't that hard to do). Then Jujuflop did some research and provided a really excellent piece of writing about the media reports of plans to change Taiwan's name ("Does Chen Shui-bian want to change the country’s name?"). Again, if you want to do a really useful piece of writing for people outside of the Formosa Foundation, you could do a lot worse than to think up something like this.

Notes for blog entries

If you're writing in English, provide Chinese names for most proper nouns. People might not know the English name, or they might want to do further research online using Chinese.

It's also important to provide links to whatever articles you need to talk about. If you don't have a link, go find one. If you absolutely can't find one, make sure to write "(no link available)" or something, so people know you're not just being inconsiderate.

Don't repeat yourself, don't do long introductions or use a lot of unnecessary rhetoric.

Be intellectually honest. If you are going to make an argument (e.g. Ma Yingjeou is stealing the public's money), don't take it farther than you have to. If something is an allegation, acknowledge it as such—even if you wish it weren't. Don't call claims "preposterous" or "unbelievable" if they're believed by lots of people. Don't assume the reader agrees with you, and don't cite rumors as if they were definitely true.

2006-07-22T13:15:00.000+08:00

哈囉~我是SIGRID
呵呵~我是第一個耶~~好感動 *
嗯因為在下的電腦不知怎地~
又罷工了
所以在把它送修之前,
我先放上自己的中文版心得
等到我的電腦學成歸國之後,
我會換上英文版的
至於細部的話,
因為時間不夠, 以後有想到的再慢慢寫囉~
在放上心得之前,有兩件大事要跟大家說喔

1.JESSICA說她AUGUST 16要回來台灣了~
嘿嘿嘿我想有一個人會很高興對吧
2.最近有個活動是在培養藝術特展的義工
雖然是不支薪的,但是之前的培訓會教你義大利三百年繪畫經典原作
可以了解西方十四至十七世紀藝術、文化、宗教的成就與發展
個人是覺得超棒的,
聽說這種活動對於"探尋生命意義，並感受尊重生命與關愛生命"特別有重要性
有沒有覺得每天和手機黏在一起是很沒有意義的事呢~
有沒有覺得每天面對法律條文很辛苦呢~
有沒有覺得留在華盛頓幫教授做事是很吐血的事呢
或是~看著圓餅圖就想睡呢~呵呵
喔喔還有~有沒有覺的花一千五百圓逛光南是件很可怕的事呢
來體會一下生命的意義吧~不用花錢,不用吐血, 還可以欣賞一堆裸.....
呵呵~請不要想歪~
有興趣的可以跟我說~
不過我大概還得要等個兩天才能上網
(華碩的皇家俱樂部實在是ooxx)
在此就祝大家可以幸運地撈到一個沒風沒雨的颱風假囉~呵呵

Sigrid Chen7/22/2006

一.關於行前準備

我個人覺得也許應該把徵選時間提前,並且提早讓參予者知道她們所屬的小隊以及負責的議員。因為我們知道自己被選上的時候已經接近期末考了, 尤其是我這學期修了十五個學分,外加每學年都要的檢定考,就算不睡覺功課也寫不完,就算知道我們的小隊隊員或是負責的議員,也沒有多餘的時間去討論及分配program的工作。所以如果能夠把徵選的時間往前提一個月,讓參予者及早知道自己被選上了,也許他們能夠有更多的準備以及更多的信心去完成他們的工作。中間的一個月,我建議可以讓在台灣的受訓者上一些課程,如果基金會有經費上的考量,其實前兩任大使們,一定有人很願意不支費用,並且為下一界的大使盡點棉薄力的。其實在剛到美國的第一個星期, 我整整吐了兩天, 前兩天上課沒進入狀況, 也不清楚到底自己的組員是誰, 更別提那些平常沒接觸過的政治名詞了。那幾天衰運當頭,當然不可能只有這樣一點點小事而已, 我辛辛苦苦從台灣一路揹~揹~揹到LA的筆電, 在剛到LA的第一天,還來不及光宗耀祖的時候就壽終正寢了(泣)。所以晚上的小組Meeting 時間只好想辦法跟別人搶電腦用。在這裡要強烈建議下一屆的大使們, “一定要帶筆記型電腦去”, 因為在那邊沒電腦用, 根本就幫不上大家的忙。因為第一個星期都是在做research, 所以你只有兩個選擇: 一,幫大家倒水和幫大家吃餅乾; 二,想辦法屠殺同胞搶到一台電腦。幸運的是, 因為Fang的幫忙,不知道從哪邊挖來一台常常當機的筆電, 所以在第一個星期的最後幾天,我可以幫忙查一些資料,但是第二個星期就全然不是那樣一回事了..因為去到DC 之後,只能借用別人的電腦。但是問題是一個房間只能有一台電腦上網,而小組meeting都是在一個房間,戰況慘烈,真是可想而知。

*建議行前會準備事項 *
1. 提前徵選
2. 如果可以的話,可以替大使安排一些課程
3. 強調一定要帶”可以用的”筆記型電腦
4. 我不知道為什麼我會整整吐兩天,不過我在猜可能是因為吃太多零食的原因,所以告
訴下一屆的隊員,不要在抵達的第一天太過貪吃,前車之鑑阿!

二.關於課程

我個人覺得第一天所安排的課程是比較讓我覺得毫無頭緒的,而聽說第一天的課程是安排給組員 “聯絡感情” “強化團體意識”用的。我那天吐得一踏糊塗,連垃圾筒長怎樣都不知道,更別提知道那天發生什麼事了。事後聽到大家的感想之後,反而覺得很是有趣。基本上我覺得Catherine應該算成功了, 因為她成功地變成大家第一個話題。對於不熟的組員,你只要問他 “How do you think about our first class in the first day?” 很容易就能得到熱烈的回應, 不過往往都是負面的就是了。就我個人的看法,我覺得這堂課有保留的必要,聽了同學的自我介紹之後,或多或少都會了解到自己的group裡是怎麼樣的人。我覺得Catherine看起來經驗老到,她會選擇這樣的教法,應該有自己的用意。但是我覺得可以改進的一點是:時間的掌控。很明顯的,用整整一天來上一堂課其實太過冗長了,其實下午時間可以留給group裡的隊員,把不是自己隊上的人分在一起,然後在沒有 “ten minutes later I want to hear what you got..”的壓力下進行,也許會有不錯的效果。關於時間的掌控這點,我覺得這對整個program是最重要的。組長對時間的掌控, 上課課程時間的掌控, Role Play 的時間掌控就我個人看來都很重要。

對於組長對時間的掌控方面,我強烈建議下一屆的program要求組長們在program開始前交一份組裡的工作進度表, 裡面要大致說明他們計畫在哪一天完成哪些事,以及他們大致上的想法,並且確認組員都能夠拿到一份copy。這樣一來不僅可以避免做風隨興的組長到最後必須帶領隊員乘風破浪地挑戰不可能的任務,還可以明確地讓隊員知道到底組長要的是什麼。

對於speech的時間掌控方面,我認為每場speech都可以選一個大使去做時間的控制以及茶水接待。尤其每個場次之間的休息更是重要。因為我們幾乎是每天都在熬夜了,所以不休息很難有精神再繼續專心地聽。往往只要在第一場演講起了睡意,疲倦就會像拿了接力棒一樣來個沒完,然後晚上的research自然也好不到哪邊去了。 Role Play在LA和DC都有安排,就我來看是以DC的比較有效。在LA的Role Play是星期二的 “Brainstorming:issues of concern re Taiwan and US”和星期四的 “Issues re Taiwan and US”。星期二的Role Play 裡Terri和Amy敎我們很多很有用的東西,但是因為星期二的Role Play是在一小時內跑完A 到G 所有的group,因為是組的第一次presentation,所以每個組都很緊張,尤其是要是遇到作風瀟灑的組長,在隊員還搞不清楚得狀況下就要上場了,光是想就很可怕。就我的例子來說,我分配的工作是 “you just need to cry”…..“cry”?! 我很慶幸後來我們組裡負責講經驗的並沒有講很長,於是我抓到一個小機會可以好好補充,不然我演下巴掉下來還可能會比較逼真一點......。(ps這真的不是抱怨 ,老實說, 我們組員的感情都很好,而且組長真的很nice, 而且不止我們這一組有手忙腳亂的感覺,每組都很緊張的。有的在別組在報告的時候偷偷溜出去練習,有的根本就沒在聽,可是問題是別人遇到的問題都是我們遇得到的,觀摩別組的練習以及別組的議題真的很重要,但是因為大家都在緊張,所以會有一團亂的感覺。)Role Play真的很重要,尤其是在DC的Role Play更是push我們最大的動力。至於LA的Role Play我建議可以改成每天課程後都有一小時,一個星期剛好夠七個組都練習到,然後一小時切割成兩個半小時,一個半小時給前一天的team當作成果回收,另一個半小時給當天要present的team。當然這些安排可能也需要在第一天或是之前就提前告知,因為在用餐時間前宣布一些重要事情,這些重要事情是很容易被忽略的。另外星期四的Role Play是把所有人打散,要自己選自己有興趣的議題做研究。個人覺得這個想法真的很不賴,而且對於我們之後在華盛頓的lobby真的很有用。但是這樣不免會發生晚上的group research的時間要分給這個role play的組。就我來說,我沒有處理得很好,因為我們組在最後幾天的工作量還滿重的,所以星期四的Role Play我並沒有花很多的時間。這個問題不難解決,還是要回歸到行前準備工作上,如果可以事前告知我們所需準備的議題,其實這樣的分組是很棒的,因為這樣不僅可以認識不同的組員,也可以有不一樣的交流。

*建議課程的方面*
1. Cathrine的課很不錯,但是可以不要太長
2. 時間的掌控很重要。

三.關於在DC 拜訪議員辦公室的幾天

前一兩天我很緊張,尤其是擔心自己因為文化差異或是認知差異講出什麼不得體的話,所以幾乎都是在背稿,而且還真的出了槌。好像是在第一天吧,因為我的稿是 “I worried about my myself, my friends, and my family.”但是因為那天那個aid離我太近讓我太緊張了,所以我只講了”my friends, and my family”然後突然驚覺我只講了兩樣,可是明明要講的有三個阿…第三個是什麼咧~第三個到底是什麼呢~於是我很明顯地遲疑了一下,實在是想不出自己之前講過哪兩個,在實在講不出什麼可以另外worry的對象之後,在重複講了 “my family”之後,硬著頭皮把剩下的講完。當然那個aid的臉上掛著一副 “我了解”的微笑,大概也只有笨蛋會看不出來我在背稿吧。但是這樣的情況隔天就改善了,因為我們隔天遇到一個態度很強硬的人,不知怎地激發出我的愛國情操,於是在我激昂地發表了一篇言論,感覺很痛快之後,背稿的陰影就不怎麼存在了。在這邊提供給下一屆大使一些建議,就是 “flexibility”真的很重要,尤其對於來自台灣的大使,更應該有些發自內心的聲音,這樣往往更能達到說服的效果。

四.感謝

最後當然是要謝謝基金會所給的機會囉! 這次的美國之行認識了很多真誠的朋友,也見識到很多不一樣的事情,也改變了很多我對事情的看法。這次的課程真的安排的很棒,沒什麼可以挑剔的,從這次的活動之中我得到了很多很多的東西,也希望我的feed back可以對下一屆活動的舉辦有所裨益才是。民主啊,果真是調崎嶇的路,但是看看這些身旁同行的夥伴,我們應該知道--我們其實並不孤單!