Written by Cheuk Kwan Lau.
Image credit: 20190929 Taiwan Demonstration in Support of Hong Kong Protests 210 by Allenwang6212a / Wikimedia Commons, license: CC BY-SA 4.0.
In January 2023, a BBC news article brought attention to the challenges faced by Hong Kongers who migrated to Taiwan. The news pointed out that Hong Kongers who migrated to Taiwan face institutional obstacles when applying for citizenship. Immigration laws in Taiwan were claimed to be outdated. The migrated Hong Kongers could legally inhabit Taiwan, yet they did not enjoy citizenship and civil rights.
Instead of exploring the various institutional obstacles they face, this article takes a unique approach by examining the perceptions of the Taiwanese young generation regarding the influx of Hong Kong immigrants. It aims to uncover the contemporary Taiwanese identity constructed by this demographic, previously seen as a strong ally of Hong Kong protestors during the 2019 Anti-Extradition Law Movement. The timeframe was set between August 2019, two months after the Anti-Extradition Law protest’s outbreak, and March 2023. Using nationalism as a theoretical framework to examine this case may provide insights into how nationalism influences the construction of contemporary Taiwanese identity. This analysis may also help us understand how the Taiwanese situate themselves in a world of globalisation where migration is inevitable. Last but not least, influenced by the “China Factor”, how Taiwanese understand themselves and their culture others are two important questions that Taiwanese people have to (re)consider.
By analysing online posts from Taiwanese youth on Dcard, a Taiwan-based social media and networking platform, this article explores the narratives and opinions surrounding the Hong Kong immigration wave and its implications for Taiwan’s identity. Dcard requires first-time users to indicate their affiliated universities when registering accounts. Thus, it is believed that the posts in the forum were mostly written by university students, which were believed to be the young generation in Taiwan. In the research on the perceptions of Taiwanese youth regarding the Hong Kong immigration wave, a significant shift towards nationalist values among the young generation was discovered. This finding challenged this perception of Taiwan’s identity. Contrary to expectations, analysing the thirty-nine online posts from Taiwanese youth revealed a prevailing nationalist and materialist mindset. This departure from the inclusive Taiwan identity indicates a complex negotiation between national interests and liberal values.
Cultural conflicts are among the most recorded reasons for such opposition and reluctance. The arrogance and ruddiness of the Taiwanese young generation mentioned are related to the cultural difference between Hong Kongers and Taiwanese. Modes of interactions, intonations, and languages and phrases used were more or less covered in the analysed posts. Moreover, a reluctance to accept Hong Kong culture appearing in Taiwan was also recorded in the data. It is arguably true that there is always an imagination of what Taiwanese culture should be among Taiwan’s young generation, and the Hong Kong elements are always those being disgusted and disapproved of. In this sense, an exclusive Taiwan identity that constitutes the imagination of what elements Taiwan people should and should not acquire exists. Under the intensifying threat from China, Taiwan’s identity may be more inclined towards a nationalist identity, that is, to prioritise Taiwan’s interests over any other values. In this case, migrant rights, or even human rights.
Taiwan seems to present an alternative understanding against Ronald Inglehart’s theory, arguing that the post-war generation tends to embrace postmaterialist values even though most, if not all, the young generation in Taiwan can survive nowadays, compared to the previous generation may not be able to secure their daily supplies stably, inflation is still a trouble for the young generation in Taiwan. The Taiwanese young generation has been facing a structural economic burden that has nothing to do with their qualifications but mainly from the limited social resource and skyrocketing rents and housing prices. Moreover, under the China factor, Taiwan is always in a disadvantaged position regarding the global economy. It is, therefore, understandable that Taiwan’s young generation would return to materialist values and prioritise economic interest over postmaterialist values. To be specific, the Taiwanese young generation prioritised national and civic interests over the notion of helping Hong Kongers. Among the thirty-nine analysed posts, the narrative of economic drawbacks brought by Hong Kong immigrants was recorded twenty-six times. According to the cited comments, the Taiwanese young generation was concerned about how Hong Kong immigrants may affect Taiwan’s economy. Job opportunities and domestic resources were seen to be exclusive to the Taiwanese. Allowing Hong Kong competitors may largely harm the interest of the Taiwanese.
Moreover, Taiwan properties were exclusive to Taiwanese only. Without denying that Hong Kong people flipped properties in Taiwan, Hong Kongers were not welcome to purchase properties in Taiwan since they were not Taiwanese. In other words, it is evident that the young Taiwanese generation would rather consider it from a utilitarian and realistic perspective: more Hong Kong immigrants would possibly lead to a more competitive Taiwan society, and the drawbacks brought to Taiwan society by Hong Kong immigrants outweigh the benefits.
Regarding politics, the Taiwanese had a polarised understanding of the immigration wave. While some of them indicated their advocacies, most of the young generation in Taiwan opposed the immigration wave. They argued that Taiwan does not have the responsibility or obligation to take care of Hong Kongers, even if they suffer oppression from the Chinese authority. Additionally, they believed that supporting Hong Kong protestors was merely a political strategy of the DDP during elections and did not represent the opinions of the young generation. Moreover, concerns about the CCP infiltration were also a crucial factor. They expressed fears that letting Hong Kongers migrate to Taiwan could increase the risk of CCP infiltration and that the increasing number of Hong Kong immigrants could harm domestic politics in Taiwan. Finally, they stressed that accepting Hong Kong immigrants would not benefit Taiwan. They claimed that it would not only lead Taiwan to a more embarrassing political condition but also fail to bring tangible benefits. From a realist perspective, the Taiwanese young generation perceived the Hong Kong immigration wave as non-beneficial to Taiwan society.
Not only does this Taiwan case refute Inglehart’s claim, but it also contributes to the discussion of the making of Taiwan’s identity. What is at stake is that such a return to prioritising materialist values was associated with nationalist discourse. The narratives employed by the Taiwanese young generation in the analysed online comments implied an exclusive Taiwan-nationalist notion: if one falls into the category of Taiwanese, then one ought to be granted Taiwan’s resources. The category of Taiwanese, however, is purely defined according to common language or origin, which means that if one speaks in languages that are not spoken by Taiwanese commonly (in this case Cantonese), or Taiwan is not one’s ancestry origin, then one is not categorised as Taiwanese. Such a narrative departs from the inclusive Taiwanese identity that incorporates cosmopolitanism and multi-ethnic values endorsed by scholars. The Hong Kong immigration wave is an example that infers that the overarching values circulating among the contemporary Taiwanese young generation online are still nationalist. Thus, with the intensifying pressure from China, it is worthwhile to be aware of the ongoing making of Taiwan’s identity.
Examining Taiwanese youth’s perceptions regarding the Hong Kong immigration wave provides valuable insights into the ongoing formation of Taiwan’s identity. This article pointed out that the prevalence of nationalist and materialist values among the young generation challenges previous assumptions, indicating the need for a nuanced understanding of Taiwan’s evolving identity. While the current trajectory may seem contradictory to liberal values, this article believes that making identity is an ongoing process, which offers some room for hope in pursuing a more inclusive Taiwanese identity. This article also holds a firm stance that nationalism is a mixed-blessing– inclination to a nationalist Taiwan certainly helps to resist the cultural infiltration from China. However, it may also deteriorate Taiwan’s inclusiveness, which has been developed throughout the years. By acknowledging these dynamics, Taiwanese may engage in constructive dialogue and actions that promote a diverse and harmonious society.
Cheuk Kwan Lau is an MSc student of Contemporary Chinese Studies at the University of Oxford. He earned his BS.Sc in Government and Public Administration from the Chinese University of Hong Kong. His research focuses on the cultural politics of Hong Kong and East Asia. Currently, he is working on a project exploring the concept of fish-human hybridity in Hong Kong literature.
This article was published as part of a special issue on ‘Taiwan in Transition’.
