Generational Change and Ethnicity among 1980s-born Taiwanese

Abstract

This paper aims to show that Taiwanese born in the 1980s constitute a “post-reform” generation whose perception of cultural difference and ethnicity may challenge the efficiency of the “four major ethnic groups” categorization as an analytical framework for research on Taiwanese youth's identity, political behaviour and social interactions. Using quantitative data from a questionnaire distributed in 15 universities nationwide in 2010 and qualitative data from interviews, this paper first focuses on the attitudes of Taiwanese born in the 1980s toward what are generally considered the three core elements of ethnic group-making in a Chinese socio-cultural context: patrilineality, locality and language. Then it shows that the combined effects of democratization, Taiwanization and contacts with mainland China have decisively impregnated their life experiences and influenced their perceptions of cultural difference. Consequently, the different aspects/ factors that contributed to the formation and the deepening of ethnic boundaries and ethnic conflict up until the 1990s are not effective anymore, nor are they significant for Taiwanese in their twenties. This process is transforming ethnicity rather than erasing it. Thus “having an ethnic identity” is still considered important by a majority, but its meaning and salience have changed, leading to the necessity to redefine, a process that could be undertaken using the concept of “symbolic ethnicity”.

Generational Consciousness and Political Mobilisation of Youth in Taiwan

“…During the 2000s, the media landscape was mainly in the hands of the traditional media, which relayed these stereotypes. Apart from the bulletin board system (BBS), which played a central role in the Wild Strawberries Movement (ye caomei xueyun 野草莓學運) and whose operation by thematic pages and threads of posts prefigured Facebook (Hsiao 2017) (Lepesant 2011). My interviews reveal that during this first phase, collective protest action seems unthinkable.…”

“…Rigger (2006) uses this definition and opts for a similar division of the Taiwanese population into four political generations. More recent studies also follow this perspective, although each adopts its own generational divisions (Lepesant 2011(Lepesant , 2012Rigger 2016;Brading 2017;Lin 2017;Liu and Li 2017). Three recurring criticisms, however, are levelled at the use of the generational cohort as a category for analysing social behaviour and change.…”

“…As regards the quantitative data, the three questionnaire surveys I conducted in 2005, 2010, and 2014 in 12, 15, and 45 higher education institutions spread across the island have been the subject of detailed presentations elsewhere (Lepesant 2011(Lepesant , 2012(Lepesant , 2017 and are not really the focus of this article. Indeed, these three quantitative surveys are primarily concerned with highlighting the existence of a generational cohort, whereas the following developments show the effects of the emergence of a generational consciousness, and thus of the transition from a "generation in itself" to a "generation for itself," on the political mobilisation of the under-forties.…”

The Coevolution of Media and Politics in Taiwan: Implications for Political Communications

“…In the cases described above, party efforts to develop online campaigning were primarily driven by the hope of reaching younger voters; largescale social mobilizations since 2008 were organized by young people; and the dynamism of Ko Wen-je's election campaign was in large part generated by the enthusiasm of young volunteers and supporters. A generation gap has emerged in Taiwanese society in terms of national identity, socio-economic opportunities and political attitudes (Le Pesant, 2011;Liu and Li, 2017;Zhang et al, 2005). Common to many societies, a similar generation gap exists in attitudes and usage patterns of newer technologies and the internet (Salkowitz, 2008), not least because young Taiwanese have long exhibited very high levels of internet usage and technological competency (Ishii and Wu, 2006).…”