Thursday, January 11, 2018


Each question 10 points. Choose 4. Answer in a few short sentences. When you are done you may go. Have a good vacation.

1. In The Big Short, the main characters all believe what will happen to the housing market? Why does everyone think they were wrong?

2. Looking at the maps for the class, if Iraq breaks up into many countries, which country will probably control the south-eastern corner of Iraq? Why?

3. Why do Iran and Turkey oppose Kurdish independence?

4. What are the advantages for big business if aborigines lose control of their land?

5. What is the total geothermal potential of Taiwan? How much of that is probably useful? How much do the experts we read expect to be installed?

6. The new referendum law made changes to the voting age, the threshold for passing a referendum, and restricted the possible content of referendums. Describe these changes.

7. In Taichung, Mayor Lin changed the licensing process for coal plants. How did he change it, and why did he make that change?

8. Globalization is usually thought of as a process of homogenization or hybridization of cultures. What do those two ideas mean? Give an example of each from Taiwanese life.

Thursday, December 14, 2017

Week 13: Referendum Law


1. What were the problems with the old referendum law, from the DPP point of view?
2. What did the DPP mean when it called the old law a "bird cage" law?
3. What is the new voting age for referendums?
4. What commission did the new referendum act get rid of? Why?
5. What cannot be changed by referendum under the new law?
6. What is the new threshold for passing a referendum? How is that different from the old law?
7. What was the decision on absentee voting?
8. Why is the new law better for democracy, according to its supporters?

Thursday, December 7, 2017

Week 12: Pollution and Election

Asia Cement gets exemption:


Air Pollution becomes an issue in the 2018 elections!


1. Taichung mayor Lin demanded that the Taichung power plant reduce coal consumption. How much, according to the DPP? How much, according to the KMT?

2. What were Lin's three demands? Explain why the licensing review reduction from every five years to every two years is important.

3. What are sources of air pollution in Taiwan?

4. What is the Kaohsiung government doing to reduce air pollution? Why won't this have much effect?

5. Think carefully: what important local source of air pollution is not being dealt with by the new rules and changes in policy?

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Week 11: Renewable Energy I





2. Where are important locations of geothermal energy in Taiwan? Why those places?

3. Taiwan used to have a geothermal energy plant in Yilan. What happened?

4. What is the government doing now about geothermal energy? What is the investment for the 2010-2014 period?

5. Looking at (a), why does the writer expect that geothermal energy will be sustainable in the long run?

6. What is the rate growth for CO2 emissions in Taiwan for the last twenty years?

7. What was the installed renewable energy capacity in Taiwan in Jan of 2013? What kind of renewable energy has the most installed capacity in Taiwan?

8. How does potential wind capacity compare to European countries?

9. What is the most abundant ocean energy in Taiwan? Why isn't it used?

10. What is the theoretical reserve solar power of Taiwan?

Thursday, November 23, 2017

Week 10: Asia Cement vs Taroko

1. Which aboriginal peoples owned the land of Asia Cement?

2. How did Asia Cement get the land from them, according to aborigine political activists?

3. What compensation did the aborigines receive for giving up their land? What jobs did they get?

4. What rights do aborigines have to their own land? What rights don't they have?

5. What happened when the aborigines tried to plant crops on the Asia cement land? Who was sent to stop them?

6. What are the advantages for big businesses if aborigines lose their land? See if you can think of two advantages, one about resources, one about labor.

For indigenous peoples, Taiwan’s transfer to Chiang Kai-shek’s Republic of China in 1945 was just a change from one colonial regime to another. (Chiu, 1999) In some respects, Chinese rule was worse than Japanese administration. Older Taroko people remember that even Japanese police officers learned the Taroko language in order to communicate with local people. The KMT, on the other hand, forced them to assimilate and conduct their lives in Mandarin. Ironically, the most significant space for the preservation of their language has been the Presbyterian and Catholic churches (see Michael Stainton’s article in this issue).
Older Taroko people also relate how their families were first relocated from the mountains to the foothills by the Japanese, and then from the foothills to the base of the mountains by the KMT. The forested mountains are now designated as the Taroko Gorge National Park, and it is illegal for Taroko people to hunt or fish in their traditional territory. They are now forced to live on narrow strips of land between the mountains and the sea, amidst cement quarries, cement factories, railroad tracks, and industrial parks.
Aboriginal Reserve Land
In 1968, the KMT government began legal registration of Aboriginal land in Taiwan as Aboriginal Reserve Land. Although indigenous people had lived on Taiwan for 6,000 years before the first Chinese settlers arrived, Aboriginal families received only cultivation rights under the new legal system. Usage rights on the land, moreover, were granted only on the condition that crops be planted for 10 years. The stipulation effectively forced assimilation on Aboriginal people, as it made them abandon their traditional mix of hunting, gathering, and slash-and-burn agriculture. It required that they instead adopt Chinese customs of settled agriculture, presumably for the growth of cash crops. The law stipulated that land could not be sold or rented to Chinese people--it either had to be cultivated or ceded to the government as state property.
Although Aboriginal Reserve Land was supposedly reserved for indigenous people, legal loopholes actually gave the Taiwanese government as well as Han Chinese individuals and corporations access to indigenous land. The government often "rented" indigenous land to outside commercial interests if indigenous people did not cultivate the land and sign "rental" agreements for the property in question. And indigenous people themselves often rented land to each other or outside Han Chinese. Han Chinese entrepreneurs were thus able to acquire space for villas, hotels, and factories on reserve land. The legacy of these problems remains. Indigenous people have no full legal ownership rights over the land, which means that they have no right to take out loans against it, a restriction that has prevented them from developing their own lands.
The policy of Aboriginal Reserve Land thus gave corporations adequate legal loopholes through which to seize Aboriginal land during a window of opportunity from 1968 to 1978. In 1973, the Taiwanese conglomerate Asia Cement applied to rent land from the Hsiulin Township Office and held its first consultative meeting with Taroko people. Township officials encouraged Taroko people to rent the land, saying it would give them employment opportunities, prevent out-migration of young people, and bring development to the community. The original landowners received compensation for displaced crops--a mere fraction of the land’s real estate value--and the promise that the land would be returned to them after 20 years.
Since Taiwan was under martial law from 1947 to 1987, there was no room for protest. The company did little to fulfill its promise of employing Taroko people. Although it had promised one job to each of the 100-some families ceding land, only 30 people actually got work doing low-level jobs as laborers, drivers, and machine operators. Many of them developed respiratory ailments from inhaling cement dust, and three have died of lung complications. By the 1990s, even those few dangerous jobs were being filled by migrant workers from Southeast Asia.
Fighting Back
Twenty years after the initial agreement, when some of the original owners tried to reclaim their land, they found that their property rights had mysteriously disappeared. Asia Cement claimed that the Taroko people had relinquished their rights to the property and that the company had the legal papers to prove it. They argued that the land was state property, and that they were renting it legally. But by this time, martial law had ended and the Taroko people were ready to fight back.
The Taroko were helped in their struggle by 58-year-old Igung Shiban. Shiban, trained as a midwife and beautician, had spent most of her adult life in Japan, but moved back to her Taroko community to vacation as her husband was recuperating from serious illness. When she came back home, she found that her father’s property rights had disappeared. With her help, the Taroko people organized the "Return Our Land Self-Help Association," sent petitions to the county government, and brought suit to court. (Shiban’s Japanese husband, Mr. Maruyama, has supported her financially and emotionally throughout her efforts. He has also helped her write legal documents.)
One lucky day for the Taroko people, township officials left a hearing in anger, leaving behind a stack of documents. As Igung Shiban looked through them, she found that they were filled with irregularities. Some were missing dates or official seals. Most suspicious of all, the signatures of many former owners who had supposedly given up their property rights were all written in the same handwriting. In nearly a year of research, she pulled the agreements, one by one, from the township office files and showed them to the signatories to confirm whether or not they had actually signed them. It turned out that most of the signatures on the agreements to relinquish land rights were forgeries.
Asia Cement resorted to intimidation to stop her research--Shiban and her husband were physically attacked twice, and her husband was burned on the leg—but they didn’t give up. Fortunately, local environmental activists and National Legislator Bayan Dalur, an indigenous representative given a seat through the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), helped them pursue the case by providing access to government documents.
In 1997, Igung Shiban herself ran for township council representative as a DPP candidate. The KMT, however, nominated her brother’s wife as their candidate to split the loyalties of her clan group. Asia Cement also threw their financial resources into the campaign, bribing Taroko people as much as NT$10,000 ($300) to vote for the KMT. In a community with high unemployment and low family incomes, the temptation was difficult to resist. Still, Shiban lost the election by only 50 votes, a result that revealed her strong support in the community. Asia Cement also tried to manufacture consent within the community through financial support of Taroko cultural activities. Most notably, they helped Igung Shiban’s younger brother Jimi Shiban (an Asia Cement employee) collect and exhibit photos of elderly Taroko people with facial tattoos. Their support for cultural preservation, although certainly important from an anthropological perspective, has further divided the Taroko people.
Igung Shiban has continued her struggle for her ancestral land in both the courts and in other venues. In 1998, she presented a report on Taroko land struggles to the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations. And she gained the support of some journalists; Taiwan’s "Super TV" even made a documentary film on the Taroko struggle. In August 2000, the Taroko people finally won cultivation rights in court, partly due to pressure on their behalf from Yohani Isqaqavut, chair of the Executive Yuan Council of Aboriginal Affairs. On September 4, 2000 the Taroko were able to enter their land for the first time in 27 years. They celebrated the event with a traditional ceremony in commemoration of their ancestors.
The struggle is not yet over. In March 2001, conflict broke out when Asia Cement sent foreign workers to prevent Taroko farmers from planting crops. A journalist was injured in the violence that ensued. Taroko people have planted crops several times since then, but Asia Cement responded by removing the young plants from the ground. The company is hoping that intimidation will prevent the Taroko people from cultivating the land, a precedent that will eventually be recognized as a legal abandonment of the property. Though the Taroko people continue to lobby for enforcement of the rights they earned in court, they lost an important ally during the 2001 elections when Bayan Dalur was defeated in his campaign for re-election to the national legislature.
Only the Tip of the Iceberg
The struggle for Taroko land rights is only the tip of the iceberg. Indigenous villages have been relocated without consent to build the Hualien airport. Both the Tayal tribe of Taoyuan County and the Rukai tribe of Taitung County have lost lands to dam construction. Throughout Taiwan, indigenous land has been expropriated by the Retired Servicemen’s Association, by the Forestry Department, and for the construction of national parks. Indigenous peoples have clearly suffered more than any other ethnic group on Taiwan from colonization and development.

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Week 9: The Big Short Test

REVIEW TEST: Choose any three questions. Answer them in a few short sentences. You may use the readings and information from class, and your notes.

1. In The Big Short, the main characters all believe what will happen to the housing market? Why does everyone think they were wrong?

2. Why doesn't the US support Kurdish independence?

3. Looking at the maps for the class, if Iraq breaks up into many countries, which country will probably control the south-eastern corner of Iraq? Why?

4. Why did China and the ROC become interested in the Senkaku/Diaoyutai Islands after 1970?

5. Why did the ROC suddenly become interested in owning the South China Sea islands in the 1930s?

6. Explain briefly how the French and British shaped the modern boundaries of Syria and Iraq.

7. Why do Iran and Turkey oppose Kurdish independence?


Today's reading:

Illegal Factory Problem


1. Why are so many illegal factories renting land zoned for agriculture?

2. Land use has a typical pattern of evolution, according to the article. What is it?

3. Why is there so much unused land in government industrial districts?

4. How can a tax help solve this problem?