Talk:Demographics of Taiwan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Demographics of Taiwan 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.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article...
This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.

Contents

[edit] Bias again

Taiwan and not from mainland China, from which "Chinese" is most often attributed to nowadays.

we need proof that "chinese" is only attributed to mainlanders. A lot of taiwanese claim they are chinese sometimes, and a lot of them don't, I have seen variations of their answer depending on if the situation was good or bad. I think we need some clarification here. Also, "nowadays" sounds so informal...

[edit] Poll

Was anyone here aware Instantnood is running another poll to move "XXX of Taiwan" to "XXX of the Republic of China" at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)/NPOV/Taiwan vs. ROC? The poll "started" a week ago, but since no pages link to the polling page, I thought maybe it was a little onesided and needed some publicity... SchmuckyTheCat 21:19, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please kindly check Special:Whatlinkshere/Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)/NPOV/Taiwan vs. ROC (except those added by SchmuckyTheCat just now), for what pages are linked to it. Thank you.
Please also note that the polls there are enforcement of the naming conventions. — Instantnood 21:46, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Disclaimer

I first suggested to proceed to have a poll as a solution on March 10 at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)/archive4#Solution, and there was no objection. More than two weeks later on March 26 I suggested to have polls on a case-by-case basis (at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)/NPOV#Solution). A link was added at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)/NPOV#Solution to direct readers to the polling page on March 31, at the time when the polling page was created.

SchmuckyTheCat is wrong for accusing me for starting the polls with no page linked to it, that it might resulted in onesided and lack of publicity. Please note this is an accusation, though I am pretty sure opinion wouldn't be affected easily. — Instantnood 06:41, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ROC vs. Taiwan

This article needs some clean up. Some figures and information are in fact referring to the Republic of China, instead of Taiwan alone. — Instantnood 20:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

  • That's cuz Taiwan=ROC for the purposes of these figures. SchmuckyTheCat 21:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
    Are you sure? Are people on Quemoy and Matsu 本省人? Do they have partial aboriginal ancestry as those on Taiwan do? Are they Taiwanese people? Do the people on Matsu speak a dialect of Min Nan? — Instantnood 17:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes to all, not sure about the last one, though.--Jerrypp772000 20:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the Min dialect spoken on Kinmen, at least, is more closely related to Minbei than Minnan. And either way, they don't speak Taiwanese Minnan, as can be clearly evidenced by several vocabulary differences attributable to Japanese influence on Taiwan proper that was avoided on Kinmen.--59.105.8.4 08:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnicities

Until someone can provide credible and verifiable research that Hoklo and Hakka are not Chinese, this article should adhere to the commonly accepted view that they are indeed ethnic Chinese. The edits by anonymous user 71.106.x.x appears to be politically motivated since he did not fix the text when replacing "Chinese" with "Taiwanese". — Nrtm81 06:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Nrtm81, you think you control the history of Taiwanese, don't you? Please let us know whether you are a mainlander masquerading as a neutral editor. If not, why are you so adamant that Taiwanese are Chinese. Are you working for the Communist Chinese or paid by the KMT? I told you we are a Taiwanese watchdog group. Any propaganda sponsored by the PRC or the KMT will be removed.

lmao, I do not support PRC, ROC, or Taiwan, hence I am neutral. I accept the different views of history but as long as it is not written in a biased way. You have already admitted you are writing on a biased viewpoint (Taiwanese nationalism). You are a watchdog? A watchdog does not play games of bias. Your views are just as radical as PRC propaganda. You keep making edits that are not neutral and don't even provide sources to support your claims. That is not acceptable.
"Chinese" refers to culture and language, it doesn't mean PRC or blood. Hoklo are the only people who call themselves Taiwanese, no other people deny being Chinese, every Chinese (1.3 billion) identify as Chinese even if they are Hokkien, Hakka, Cantonese. Are you yourself Hoklo? Because I've noticed only that group is hijacking "Taiwanese" identity for themselves. They don't consider Hakka to be Taiwanese. Also "Taiwanese language" is "Min-Nan dialect". What is wrong with you? What next? Deport non-Hoklo people from Taiwan? This is the rise of racism in Taiwan and it's disgusting! — Nrtm81 00:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Most Hakka consider themselves to be Han Chinese and they call their language Hakka instead of Taiwanese. If they want to call their language Taiwanese Hakka and Hoklo language Taiwanese Holo, that is fine with me too. I'm not a racist, but want to preserve the Taiwanese language and culture for the majority, while also preserving minority rights -- such as aboriginal and Hakka. By the way, I love Hakka people and have Hakka friends. But let the majority use their own language and culture as they please. Also, I feel you are biased toward the Chinese. Despite repeated warnings that labeling Taiwanese as Chinese is unacceptable, you continue to spread this propaganda. 60% of the people only think of themselves as Taiwanese, not Chinese, according to the new Taipei Times article. You are placing a label on Taiwanese when they themselves don't think they are Chinese. Only 34% think they are both Taiwanese and Chinese, meaning that 66% don't think they are Chinese, which reflects mostly the Holo population. So that is evidence right there that you should stop your irresponsible actions.

Also, please tell us if you are a mainlander. I didn't ask you whether you support PRC, ROC or Taiwan. I want to know whether you are a mainlander. This fact is important, because then we know your what your biases are. I am Holo. By the way, I don't hate Mainlanders, but am fearful that they might sell out Taiwan to the PRC and that their political loyalties lie with the PRC, not with Taiwan.

Also, I've provided more than enough proof to show that Holo and Hakka are descendents of the Yueh peoples, and are not "Han Chinese" based on DNA. What more do you want?

Hey, why is this page locked. I want to make some changes. 228revenge 05:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

ahaha (^_^)v yeah. Just kidding. We need to resolve this issue first (about Taiwanese being part of the larger Chinese identity) otherwise edit warring does nothing but cause headaches to everyone. — Nrtm81 07:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[[1]] shows the blocking admin was in fact part of the edit war. Using sysop priviledges to put down content dispute and calling content dispute vandalism are definitely no-nos for admins. There is also the issue of gang patrolling on Taiwan-China related articles which clearly is biased toward the Chinese side.--Certified.Gangsta 08:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Uhh, that admin never contributed to this article. I requested page protection three times asking to revert the changes made by the anonymous IP user. The point is to stop an edit war and deal with the situation on the talk page. It's a complete waste of time edit warring over the usage of "Chinese" and "Taiwanese". Plus, the anonymous IP kept removing the image chart from this article. — Nrtm81 09:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Do I need to repeat everything I said at Talk:Taiwanese people again? When will people stop confounding the concepts of Chinese nation and Chinese ethnicity in order to serve their own ends?

Here, all moved from Talk:Taiwanese people: -- ran (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poll used "Zhongguoren" (Chinese nation), not "Huaren" (Overseas Chinese; Chinese ethnicity)

The recent poll used the word Zhongguoren (Chinese in a national sense). It did not use Huaren (Chinese by heritage; overseas Chinese) or Hanzu (ethnic Han Chinese). If you did a similar poll among Singaporean Chinese, probably 0% would call themselves Zhongguoren. That does not prove anything. As for butting into "other people's" business, Wikipedia belongs to all of its contributors. We have plenty of Israelis "butting into" Palestinian pages and Palestinians "butting into" Israeli pages. Rather, it is you who should be asking yourself, whether you're representing things as they are now or things as they might be or should be in the future. -- ran (talk) 15:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DPP Chairman calls himself an Overseas Chinese in Taiwan

Recently, Yu Shyi-kun, Chairman of the DPP, referred to himself as 華裔台灣人, or Taiwanese of Chinese ethnicity/heritage. The remark was designed to piss off the PRC government. If Hoklo and Hakka are not Han Chinese in ethnicity, please explain why Yu Shyi-kun, leader of the main independence-leaning party, would say such a thing? -- ran (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DPP makes a strong distinction between "ethnic Chinese" and "Chinese by nation"

I've posted this before at Talk:List of Chinese Americans; I suppose posting it again wouldn't hurt.

Let's see what the DPP, the ruling party of Taiwan, whose stated goal is Taiwanese independence, has to say about 中國人 (Chinese in a national sense) and 華人 (ethnic Chinese). All these refer to links within the DPP official website:

[2] Chinese by ethnicity:

  • "就像台北市匯集了全世界的飲食精華、特殊的書店文化及全球華人的多種客語，" - like how Taipei has gathered all the best parts of the world's cuisine, a unique bookstore culture and guest languages of 華人 [ethnic Chinese] around the world...
  • "也因此，台灣在華人世界並無成功前例的改變之下，必須經過一段人民與新政府、舊體制與新政權、新政權與新執政黨的交流、妥協與磨合，" - thus, Taiwan must, while undergoing a change for which there is no precedent of success in the 華人 [ethnic Chinese] world, go through a period of communication, compromise and friction between the people and the new government, the old system and the new government, the new government and the new ruling party.
  • "民主進步黨就是在這樣的背景下，始終站在歷史正確的一方，與台灣人民一起努力，創造了民主奇蹟，建立了華人社會最民主的國家。 " Under such a background, the DPP stood steadfast on the correct side of history, and worked together with the Taiwanese people to create a democratic miracle, and created the most democratic country in the 華人 [ethnic Chinese] world.
  • "9年前的3月，正當我們要進行全球華人社會，第一次由人民直接選舉國家領導人的時候，對岸的中國卻選擇向基隆與高雄的外海發射飛彈， " In March nine years ago, just as we were going to, for the first time ever in the global 華人 [ethnic Chinese] world, directly elect a national leader, 中國 [China] across the straits chose to fire missiles towards the sea off the coast of Keelung and Kaohsiung. (華人 [ethnic Chinese] elect a national leader of Taiwan; 中國 [China] is their enemy; so when did 華人 [ethnic Chinese] = 中國人 [Chinese by nation] ?)

[3] Chinese by nation:

  • "華裔台灣人」這個詞，聽在討厭談認同問題人的耳中，的確是非常刺耳的，認為在台灣社會中分化台灣人與中國人已經不能忍受了，" - the term "華裔台灣人 [Taiwanese of Chinese descent], in the ears of those who dislike the problem of identity, is indeed very harsh; they feel that further schism between 台灣人 [Taiwanese] and 中國人 [Chinese by nation] is unbearable.
  • 在2004年總統大選後，民眾在「台灣人認同」的共識已達六成以上，「中國人認同」維持在一成 - after the 2004 presidential election, the people's "Taiwanese identification" has reached over 60%, while "Chinese 中國人 [Chinese by nation] identity" is maintained at 10%.
  • 若認同中華人民共合國，認為台灣就是中國一部分就是中國人， - those who identify with the People's Republic of China, and believe Taiwan to be a part of China, are 中國人 [Chinese by nation].
  • 我相信台灣必定能夠為民主擴大做出貢獻，有朝一日能夠讓13億中國人也享有自由民主， - I believe that Taiwan will definitely be able to contribute to the spreading of democracy, and one day allow 1.3 billion 中國人 [Chinese by nation] to also enjoy democracy!

From the above examples, it is clear that from the independence point of view, 中國人 [Chinese by nation] and 台灣人 [Taiwanese] are opposed, while 台灣人 is included in 華人 [Chinese by ethnicity] just as Singaporean Chinese and American Chinese are included in 華人 [Chinese by ethnicity]. The DPP views Taiwanese people as "ethnically Chinese", in the sense that Taiwanese are Chinese in descent and ethnicity, but not Chinese by national identification, in the same way as Singaporean or Malaysian Chinese.

-- ran (talk) 15:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

about the Taiwanese identification: let say if Fujianese call themselve 福建人, and california call themselve californian to identify who they are; does that mean they do not consider themselve chinese nationals and american citizens respectively? it is largely a misleading poll and was debated in taiwan as changing to way the question is ask prompt a entirely different set of result. it is not in the same way as Singaporean or Malaysian Chinese as we never recieve anything from China and are immigrate while the taiwanese were still on chinese land. and the retreat(not the immigration!) to Taiwan saw wealth and treasure transfered in the name of the republic of china not taiwan. the DDP knows these point too and made comment on settling them after the taiwan is accepted as a seperate nation. but yes, the point they are trying to make is a interesting one: except there is not country by the taiwan, only one by the name republic of china... so there is no 台灣人 nationality, but is simply use to represent where they are from like 'californian' and the taiwan public want their own identify, it doesn't confirm nationalism Akinkhoo (talk) 18:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
ran, I realize it's probably too late to say anything as you comments were posted in 2005, but please try to use English for your points. And if you do use Chinese, please provide translation for anything. English should be sufficient as this is an English language Wikipedia, and we are documenting English terms. Readin (talk) 14:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
On the other hand, does a Virginian consider himself English because he is living on (formerly) English land just as Taiwanese are living on (formerly) Chinese land? Does a Virginian consider himself English because his country's government started in England? Readin (talk) 14:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
if said Virginian consider himself English, will the local governor kick him out if he openingly support the queen? and if they do that, will the queen of england declare war to protect 'her subject' like the falkland if she is able? >:D my point is what the people call themselve doesn't matter, the question is where their loyalty lies and i doubt any DPP text will give you the real numbers to that. they are but arguing to create confusion instead of solving the issue. it is like the renaming of the memorial, they go after all this naming conventional because they can't do anything about the reality that taiwan is still the republic of china. Akinkhoo (talk) 06:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Definition of Han Chinese is not based on drops of blood

....okay.... but I'm quoting the DPP. Note that I haven't quoted the Communist Party anywhere, nor the Kuomintang. Also, I have already agreed above that Hoklo and Hakka in southern China have a very high degree of Bai-yueh admixture. However, I have also explained, several times further above, that:

  1. The Hoklo and Hakka had already adopted Han Chinese culture and a Han Chinese identity centuries before Hoklo and Hakka immigrants moved to Taiwan. This identification certainly predates CPC or KMT propaganda;
  2. That you are changing the conventional definition of "ethnic Chinese", used not just in Mainland China but also around the world, including Singapore, Malaysia, North America, and even Taiwan (as I've shown by quoting DPP websites). We at Wikipedia reflect what words mean *today*, not what they mean 20 years from now, or what you think they *should* mean.
-- ran (talk) 16:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Southern Han Chinese are not 100% Sinicized Yue Peoples

Also, regarding your assertion that Hoklo and Hakka are sinicized Austronesian or Tai-Kadai peoples; the Han Chinese article quotes a Nature article in saying that:
Due to several waves of immigration from Northern China to Southern China in China's history, there are strong genetic similarities in the Y chromosome between Southern and Northern Chinese males. However, the mitochondrial DNA of Han Chinese increases in diversity as one looks from Northern to Southern China. This further provides evidence of migration of Han Chinese from Northern to Southern China. As the Han people migrated into Guangdong, Fujian, and other regions of Southern China, they mixed with the local populations there, possibly the Yue people. As this mixing process continued and more Han people migrated south, the people in Southern China became Sinicized and identified themselves as Han.
In other words, southern Han Chinese groups are a mixture of northern Han Chinese immigration, and southern aboriginal groups. It is inaccurate to claim that they are pure either way. And as I have already said, the identification of Wu, Hoklo, Hakka, and Cantonese-speaking peoples as Han Chinese is based on culture rather than drops of blood. -- ran (talk) 16:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

end of copying

In summary, I'd like to point out that ethnic Chinese form the majority of the population of Singapore and of the Malaysian state of Penang, as well as a significant minority in Malaysia as a whole. Their identification as ethnic Chinese does not conflict with their loyalty to Singapore and Malaysia, which are sovereign independent countries; if anything Singaporean and Malaysian Chinese look down on China as being poor (just as many Taiwanese people tend to do). Moreover, the DPP quotes above show that the pro-independence view in Taiwan is analogous: that Taiwanese are overseas Chinese who have left their ancestral land behind and adopted a new national identity, the Taiwanese identity.

What I've just said above, a comparison of Taiwan to the independent countries of Singapore and Malaysia, and a repeat of what I've said many times before, is blasphemous treason in the eyes of the Communist Party and the Kuomintang. And yet some editors insist that I'm just serving the purpose of Communist China. You can't get more bizarre than that.

I encourage everyone to address these points, not make personal attacks. -- ran (talk) 14:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

You got three days left to have it your way before the semi-protection expires. Then its back to business. First, I take a brief holiday. Then when I come back, I'm fresh as wild flowers, and ready to go. 228revenge 16:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ready to do what? Revert the article back? If the revert war continues, the page will be protected again. The protection is there so that we can discuss calmly, without getting distracted by reverting each other. Are you willing to do that? -- ran (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised at the hypocrisy here. How could anyone "discuss" calmly when an inferior version is kept by someone who is involved in the edit war? Thhe page protection seems to be out of personal vendetta according to the history. Admin revert to a pov version and then protecting it. This is a definite violation.--Certified.Gangsta 06:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Meh, it's not me that protected it. Also, rather than launching these vague attacks, perhaps you might want to participate in an actual fruitful and cordial discussion, as we are already doing at Talk:Taiwanese people. -- ran (talk) 13:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why is "Han Chinese" inappropriate?

This is an invitation to 71.106.x.x and User:Certified.Gangsta and anyone else, to list your points why "Han Chinese" is inappropriate in this article. Be concise and clear for each point. — Nrtm81 09:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Points against the usage "Han Chinese"

[edit] Move poll

I think this article belongs at Demographics of the ROC since every other article in the series follows that format except for Economy which I also think should be moved. So I propose we run a poll. --Ideogram 16:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Let us centralize the full debate at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China#Naming conventions. --Ideogram 17:19, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

This poll is obsolete. Please discuss a naming convetion for alll China related articles at the link above. --Ideogram 04:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be moved. John Smith's 17:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnic identities

In 20 years or so, most of the original mainlanders who immigrated to Taiwan during the civil war era will be dead. Are we still going to categorize their kids born in Taiwan as WSR/mainlanders? Or are we going to invent another category and give it a catchy name like "Shin Taiwan Ren" (New Taiwanese)??

-- Adeptitus 22:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

They are called 新住民.--Jerrypp772000 23:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

For an interesting, though legthy, discussion of Taiwanese ethnicities and the structure of ethicity in Taiwan go to the Talk:Taiwanese people page.Maowang 02:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)