国立清华大学校长徐遐生博士致词.doc

清華大學校長徐遐生博士致詞 A-3國立清華大學校長徐遐生博士致詞Hakka and Public PoliciesThe Melting Pot and the Rainbow Dr. Frank Hsia-San ShuPresidentNational Tsing Hua UniversityChairperson Yeh, Professor Chang, Honored Guests, Colleagues, It is my great pleasure to welcome the Council of Hakka Affairs to National Tsing Hua University. The work that you have set out to do is an important one, and Tsing Hua is proud to be able to help in the promotion of multi-cultural diversity in Taiwan. Some of you may have heard that I came from the United States to help foster excellence in research and education at Taiwan universities, particularly at National Tsing Hua University. In fact, I come from the University of California at Berkeley, which under the leadership of Chancellor Tien Chang Lin had as its motto: “Excellence through diversity.” Because I served for a time as the Chair of the Committee for Asian-American Affairs at Berkeley, perhaps I could share with you the meaning of the phrase “excellence through diversity” as seen from the perspective of a Chinese recently arrived in Taiwan from America. Indeed, from what I have read in the papers and seen in local television reports, I believe that the ongoing debate in Taiwan concerning the value of preserving aboriginal and Hakka cultures and languages has many similarities to the American experience of the past few dacades. When I was a child, the American public policy of achieving political harmony in a culturally and linguistically diverse society, derived by immigration from many countries, was the ideal of the “melting pot.” The melting pot concept was based on the principle that a democracy could not achieve political cohesiveness unless its citizenry spoke all spoke a common national language and all had the same moral and cultural values. The means to achieve this homogeneity was to assimilate immigrants and the children of immigrants in an educational and societal framework that dissolved minority cultural identities and languages, with all citizens implicitly acquiring the virtues and practices of the Anglo-Saxon majority. Unfortunately, the practice was less perfect than the principle. In their customs, their speech, their foods, and their religious and cultural practices, Africans, Asians, East-Europeans, Hispanics, and Middle-Eastners, were all too different and all too distinguishable from Anglo-Saxons. At first, the response of the majority to the adherence of the minorities to such differences, despite the passage of several generations in the so-called “melting pot,” led to discrimination and disdain. But gradually, the multi-cultural diversity was seen properly as a source of strength and vitality. The ideal of the “melting pot” transformed into the ideal of the “rainbow.” Under the new paradigm of the “rainbow,” America has thrived. By embracing and incorporating the arts, dances, literature, and music of its multi-cultural population, the American entertainment industry has flourished to become dominant in the world. By making full use of the different modes of thought and intellectual heritage of a diverse professorship and student body, American universities have grown to become the best in the world.By recognizing that the foods of other cultures almost any other culture are superior to the bland fare handed down by the English tradition, American restaurants have blossomed in culinary variety and excellence. By exploiting the different linguistic abilities and cultural connections of a diverse employee and leadership base, American companies have vigorously expanded into new markets and new industries. Today, the American economic and political system derives much of its strength and its vitality from the rich diversity of the linguistic and cultural base of its multi-cultural population. Does this mean that the ideal of the melting pot is dead? Yes and no. As a cultural and linguistic goal, the melting pot is a rejected idea, and deservedly so. But as a political goal, it is very much alive, and also deservedly so. Americans, especially post 9/11, are today a politically united people, unified in a melting pot understanding of the rights and responsibilities guaranteed by the American constitution and the traditions of a great democracy. Therein lies a lesson for Taiwan and, perhaps, for your Hakkanese movement. There is indeed “strength through diversity.” A culturally and linguistically diverse society is richer, more adaptive, more creative, and more interesting than a culturally monolithic one. It is therefore tremendously important that your group is leading the effort to preserve the rich Hakka language and culture. It is tragic that 5% of that language is lost every year. Diversity adds to the intellectual and economic strength of the nation. But that diversity should not spill over too much into the political arena. In politics, there is a great advantage in having a single and clear national purpose, in having a single voice in the aspirations and hopes for the future. In a culturally diverse democracy, it is important to achieve this unified vision and voice through consensus building and mutual trust. Please do not let diversity lead to political disharmony and social tur