Social science and national identity: A critique

Pacific Affairs

Volumn 72, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 537-552

  Rigger, Shelley ^a  

^a DAVIDSON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0242287734     PISSN: 0030851X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2672396     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alastair I. Johnston, "Independence Through Unification: On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Across the Taiwan Straits," Fairtank Center for East Asian Research, Contempory Issues 2 (1993), p. 4.
2. Johnston, "Independence Through Unification," p. 6.
3. See Liu I-chou, "Tlie Taiwanese People's National Identity -A New Survey Method," (Taiwan minzhong de guojia rentong-yigexindfceliangfangshi), paper presented to Uie 1998 Annual Conference of the ROC Political Science Association.
4. Chiang I-hua, "Reflections on Current Theories of Taiwan's National Identity," (Dangqian Taiwan guojia rentongluruhuzhifanxing), paper presented to the 1998 Annual Conference of the ROC Political Science Association.
5. The progressives argue, often from a postmodern perspective, that national identity should not occupy a privileged position in Taiwan's politics but should share the limelight with other categories ofidentity.
6. Wu Nai-teh, "Provincial Origin Consciousness, Political Support and National Identity," in Tien Hung-mao, ed., Ethnic Relations and National Identity (Zuqun guanxi yu guojia tientong) (Taipei: Institute for National Policy Research, 1993), p. 44.
7. Democratic Progressive Party, "'Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China:' A Pratical [sic] Basis for a New Relationship," Democratic Progressive Party Central Headquarters, 2 August 1994, p. 4.
8. Chiang, "Reflections," p. 14.
9. Chiang, "Reflections," p. 18.
10. Ch'u Hai-yuan, The Evolution of Society in the Taiwan Area, Basic Research Plan (report on therst investigation) (Taiwan diqu shehui bianqian jiben diaocha jihua, diyi qi diaocha zhixing baogao) (Taipei: Academia Sinica, Institute of Ethnology, 1993), p. 151.
11. Ch'u Hai-yuan, The Evolution of Society in the Taiwan Area, Basic Research Plan (report on the second investigation) (Taiwan diqu shehui bianqianjiben diaochajihua, di'er qi di'erci diaocha zhixingkaogao)(T
12. GiuYun-han, Crofting Democracy in Taiwan (Taipei: Institute for National Policy Research, 1992), p. 68.
13. Wu, "Provincial Origin," p. 34.
14. Wu, "Provincial Origin," p. 46.
15. Wu, "Provincial Origin," p. 47.
16. Shyu's later studies fold the remaining residual categories (those which include at least one "no opinion" response) into his typology.
17. Shyu (Hsu) Huo-yan, "The National Identity and Party Voting Behavior of Tain-an's Electorate, 1991 to 1993," (Taiwan xuanmin deguojia rentongyu dangpai toupiao xingwei), (paper presented to the first annual conference of the Taiwan Political Science Association, 1994).
18. Wachman does distinguish between tlie state-sanctioned provincial origin label and subjective self-identification. He writes, "The real line of demarcation affecting people's identity is not province of origin, although that is relevant, but time of arrival on Taiwan and attitudes about Taiwan's political status." Alan Wachman, Taiwan: National Identity and Democratization (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 1994), p. 60.
19. Chu Yun-han and Lin Tse-min, "The Process of Democratic Consolidation in Taiwan: Social Cleavage, Electoral Competition, and the Emerging Party System," in Hung-mao Tien, ed., Taiwan's Electoral Politics and Democratic Transition: Riding the Third Wave. (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 1996), p. 90.
20. Different surveys pose the independence-unification question in different ways. Three of the most common variations are as follows: "Do you agree that Taiwan should be independent?"; "Which do you prefer: unification as soon as possible; status quo leading to unification; status quo for a time, then decide; status quo indefinitely; status quo leading to independence; Taiwan independence as soon as possible?"; and "Which do you prefer rapid independence (jidu), gradual independence (huandu), maintain status quo (weichi xianzhuang), gradual unification, rapid unification?".
21. Chu and Lin, "The Process of Democratic Consolidation," p. 90.
22. Yu Ching-hsin, "Opposition Parties in Taiwan: Some Observations on Recent Development," (paper presented to the Conference on "Democracy and Dominant-Party Rule in South Africa, Taiwan, Mexico and Malaysia," Cape Town, South Africa, 1996, Table 7).
23. Chiang, "Reflections," p. 39.
24. Ho Sze-yin, "Taking the Middle Road," paper presented to the "Workshop on Cross-Strait Relations," Vancouver, Canada, 21-22 August 1998.
25. Chiang, "Reflections," p. 40.
26. I have argued elsewhere that Chinese tradition is ambiguous on the question of whether or not cultural and political identity must overlap. See Shelley Rigger, "Competing Conceptions of Taiwan's Identity, the irresolvable conflict in cross-strait relations,"/ournaf of Contemporary China, vol. 6, no.15 (July 1997), p. 307-317.
27. Liu, "The Taiwanese People's National Identity," p. 8-9.
28. Liu points out that this finding could reflect either principle (a conviction that the views of Chinese should not be ignored) or pragmatism (the belief that it would be impossible to ignore the mainland's position). Liu, "The Taiwanese People's National Identity," p. 10.
29. Liu, "The Taiwanese People's National Identity," p. 11.
30. In this survey, which was conducted in January 1997 by National Chengchi University's Election Studies Center, respondents were offered the following choices: urgent independence, gradual independence, maintain status quo, gradual unification, urgent unification.
31. Wachman, Taiwan, p. 78.
32. Free China Journal, 12 June 1998, p. 7.
33. Cheng Tun jen, "Democracy and Taiwan-Mainland China Ties: A Critique of Three Dominant Vievts," Journal of Northeast Asian Studies, vol. 12, no.l (Spring 1993), p. 72-89. (Pagination based on on electronic version downloaded from NCLJVE cwww.ebscohost.com>)