 Professor of National Taipei University, author and also political activist. Dr. Keating has written four books about Taiwan. His most recent book, The Paradigms That Guide Our Lives and Drives Our Souls, explores the different prisons through which one views life and might cause them to change. Certainly, there are many paradigms through which we can better understand Taiwan. Dr. Keating is joining us via Skype from his home in Taipei. Welcome to Asia and Review. I should say welcome back. This is your second appearance. Okay. Well, Bill, good to be back. Looks like you're pretty comfortable there in Hawaii. Yeah. You know, one thing about the weather in Hawaii, it's a lot more stable than the weather in Taipei. I mean, it's constantly warm and balmy and we're blessed by the trade winds. And yes, it does rain a little bit every day, but nothing like the rain in Nangong. I'm also told that Mujia in that section of Taipei, it rains a lot too. So I suppose we're blessed here weather-wise. Okay. Well, let's talk about your book. Okay. Tell us the paradigms, okay? Paradigms that guide our lives and drive our souls. Tell us, what's the thesis? Let's start off there with kind of a basic question. Okay. Maybe I should start with the throw out some paradigms, Bill, and then I think that people can relate to it because paradigms are both models and they're ways of perceiving reality. And so, like, if I throw out the Middle Kingdom, that's a paradigm that I've had. And the way also we have viewed China as regards Asia. Make America great again. You know, then you have to say, okay, what was the model for greatness of America? This flat, then a geocentric universe, a heliocentric, those are paradigm shifts. Usually you become aware of paradigms when you have a paradox or Hitler use to make, those are some examples of where they drive. So why should we care about paradigms? Well, I care about them because they are, though we don't realize it, they are the way that we perceive reality. Prisons through which we view life. They, well, they put us in a bubble in our perception of reality that isn't necessarily bad, it's the only one we have, but we need to constantly expand it. Both understanding our own paradigm if we can join it. Does that mean cultural understanding? Is that essentially what you're getting at? Yeah, an understanding in, let me throw a paradigm, global village which Marshall McLuhan brought in in the 60s. I think you would relate to that. I remember Marshall McLuhan from when I was a freshman. Okay, right, and you probably locked in, you know, the global village was a new way of looking at the world, at business, at trade, at communication. What you're going to be pushing for at the end of the book is a global home. That's the main, understand how paradigm is easier to make paradigm shifts because if you're open to new information, you can then be open to new paradigms. Hmm, interesting. You know, as you were talking about, you know, how you conclude the book, you know, a sort of a global paradigm, seeing the world in one way so as to, as I understand it, to reduce tension, to reduce acrimony, to reduce the possibilities of war. In other words, everybody lived in peace. It makes me sort of think, believe this or not, it makes me recall what Mao Zedong said about, you know, the Paris Commune. And his idea of society was that society should be built along the lines of the Paris Commune. However, the Paris Commune really didn't work too well at the end. Yeah, I just have to think of that as you were talking. Okay, I'm pushing, as I say, a global home. So when you have a global home, you then have to say the global family is the family of man. And that embraces all cultures, all religions. When you look at paradigms, we have these three realms of philosophy. And these are ways that we think the world should be. And therefore we have competing ideologies. And then, of course, phenomenology is kind of what's in it for me. And the way I think the world should be as well as what it is for me. Are you creating a utopia through your exploration of paradigms? I'm for a utopia. I use the metaphor between parents, between children, siblings. The good of the family is the overall good. It's an important thing in expressing paradigms. So the family of man, different cultures have to get along with each other, like brothers and sisters. And, well, I know you've got at least a sister, but you probably had some spats with her in the past. Oh, never, never, not at all. So tell me, let's hold up your book again. Maybe, Zuri, can we get a picture of that up on the screen? Okay. And I'll put this to the side since it creates a little bit of glare. Is your book available on Amazon? If someone wants to go and buy it, can they get it on Amazon? Which seems to be the easiest way to purchase books these days. Okay, then I'm working on right now. I'm working with a couple of people to get it on Amazon and make it available. That cover, by the way, is the second paradigm shift that I have once, the global home. Now, that's going to be tough because it means we have to respect the environment and the economical system which benefits not a zero-sum game. That's the tough part. But the second paradigm shift then is that once we have established we can then look to our, going from that home to our destiny and the stars and the universe. And let's say, there are people that are looking at that already. Think of, like, who's at Neil, the universe that we belong to and that we can explore. Thinking, you know, when you think of when Magellan saved the world he didn't make it, but one of his ships that took it three years they knew the world was round, they knew they could make it but they didn't know how, they didn't know what they would run into. So a book like this takes a lot of research to write. I mean, you're dealing with all sorts of different fields of inquiry. How long did it take you to write it? At least two to three years. Now a lot of the ideas have been germinating since my graduate studies, the religions, and he spoke about cult having a sense of the sacred and the profane. Now the sacred and the profane are paradigmatic ways of looking at the world and through a sense of the sacred or a people's sense of the sacred you start to understand them better. So we're approaching reality. So what were the particular, we're coming up here on Break Here, but what were the particular challenges in writing the book? Well, I think the scope of it is so wide. Physics, metaphysics, phenomena blend together into one coherent message and yet keep it succinct enough that it wouldn't be too boring, you know, something that people could get a hand on, people could see as... Okay, we have one minute until break, so let me squeeze in this question here. How can we use your book and your exploration, your investigation of paradigms to better understand Taiwan? How can we use it? Okay, you want an answer now or you want a way to... Well, let's try to get this in before the break. We have about 45 seconds. Okay. Well, I think you have to look at what is Taiwan's national narrative and what is Taiwanese for different people. It's been upon three million people, the same as Australia. It certainly should not be upon a people, a democracy, that have of the world. Good, good, good. Well, that's... Azuri, can we go to break now? You're watching Think Tech Hawaii, exploring the world we live in, recognizing the changes around us and looking into the future of our lives together in these islands. Great content for Hawaii from Think Tech. Aloha, my name is Justine Espiritu. This is my co-host, Matthew Johnson. Every Thursday at 4 p.m. on Think Tech, we host the Hawaii Food and Farmers series. We like to bring in folks from the whole realm of the local food supply and agriculture, anyone working on these issues, any organization or individual that has plans or projects. What kind of people have we had on? We've had farmers, we've had chefs, we've had people from government, larger institutions, everyone who's working to help make Hawaii's local food system that much better. So you can see us every Thursday and join the conversation on Twitter, and we hope to see you there. Oh, we're back again. We're talking to Dr. Jerome Artidian. He's joined us via Skype from Taipei, Taiwan. Either way, he's lived there 28 years. There's a very good insight into Taiwan society and particularly Taiwan politics. First, by the show, we talked about his new book, The Deals to the Paradigms, and now we want to get into taking advantage of his knowledge of Taiwan politics and see if we can learn a little bit. So, Jerome, how would you evaluate the presidency at Tsai Ing-wen to this date? Okay, that's a good question, Bill. It's a, in some ways, a tough one to answer, and she's in her first year. She was elected on January 20, but took office on May 20 of 2016. So she hasn't yet completed her full year. I'd like to give an answer of 70%, but let me explain it. It's more, think of it like a term printed into her is getting into the process. It's looking good. You have to deal with, then we'll see how her team works them out. There was a huge demonstration in front of the president's office, and it was all about pension reform, which is a long-burning issue, an issue which the Kuomintang, the KMT, didn't deal with very well. What's your take on that? On the pensions? Okay, yeah, that probably, I would say right now, the hottest issue in Taiwan is pension and pension reform, and a needed thing. The problem of it has come a result of a dealing from the past one-party stake days. People in the Militation were given, they didn't have great salaries at that time, so they were given a great pension plan, and like many of them have, can draw 70% to 80% of their previous salary when they are retired. Now that's a great pension plan. It's better than any social security you or I can get. But they also can put a certain amount of money in the bank untouched in percent interest. Now, I don't know anywhere in the world that you can put money in the bank in percent interest and any government that could sustain that. So this is what, you know, has to be, those people are upset because they're... They're losing out. ...is being touched. Well, okay. And they are cutting it for both, you know, teachers and everyone, and the bank percent. There's no way you can sustain that. So this is the pension reform. It's going to probably hit the legislative yen in March. Okay. Well, that's... Okay, I don't mean to cut you off. ...results. All right. That's her key domestic challenge at the moment. Of course, her international challenge or her challenge in cross-strait relations, and I suppose that's international in that it ultimately involves the U.S. as well as China and Taiwan, is her refusal to recognize the 92 consensus. And should she recognize the 92 consensus? No way, in my mind. Perhaps we should back up a bit here and explain just briefly what the 92 consensus is for someone that might not understand what it is. Okay. Well, the 92 consensus is first a fabricated term by Xu Chi, and he admitted it in 2006 that he fabricated it in the year 2000. So now you have to look back. 92, that was just when the people were beginning to freely elect their legislators. So it was really a party-to-party consensus between the Guomingdan and the Chinese Communist Party. So that's the first part. And the second, you've got to look at the terms of it. You know, the agreement that there is one China, but they then limited the different interpretations. Now that one China issue, Bill, I think that's a good topic for you for a future show to really nail that thing down. It went to the United States and on her way to Central America. And they keep saying you've got to repeat the one China. One China does not mean the U.S. agrees to China's interpretation of what that is. And, of course, for China. Of course. Okay. Well, just for the benefit of our listeners. So why can't Xi, therefore, recognize the 92 consensus? What would the ramifications be for her if she did? Okay. A ramification of it would be, I think, that she would be accepting in a way, because Xi said, you're not only accepted the consensus that there is one China, but Taiwan is a part of China. And to be dealt with there. Yeah, we accept this. It's like locking yourself into a long, you know, we say, let's run the Taiwan Strait. Let's talk about dealing with each other. But let's not preset the game that you win at the end. Okay. So really, if Xi were to accept the 92 consensus, she would lose her party. I mean, her party, the DPP, the Democratic Progressive Party, is one that is obviously not very fond of China, and holds some hope of independence for Taiwan one day. If she were to recognize the one China policy, the 92 consensus, then it seems to me she could very well be in a situation that Shenzhen was in, which would be that when he was considered to be somewhat friendly to China, people left him and joined other parties. She would face the same fate, wouldn't she? Yeah, she'd kind of be, in a way, trapped the same way that Chen was, you know, they tried to trap Chen. If I were in that bargaining position, I would say, let's wait till you become a democracy and let's talk about it. That's not going to happen for a long time. I think we all know that. Well, how about her cabinet? How would you evaluate her cabinet? What about her premier, Mr. Doctor, I should say, an inchman? How would you evaluate him and his cabinet that he's put together? They seem to be having a lot of trouble. Okay, they go in here, Bill, you know, just to kind of liven it up a little, that, you know, we really haven't touched the phone situation and, in a way, got Taiwan discussed by other people. You know, I think that's true, but on the other side of the coin, it seems to me that call created a lot of trouble for Taiwan, too. Ever since that call took place, and of course it got everybody in Beijing all rattled and shook up, you had the thing where trying to put pressure on Nigeria to have the Taiwan Trade Office move from the capital to the port city of Lagos. You had, you know, some other events take place that seem to suggest that maybe that call, while I agree with you, I liked it in lots of ways, but maybe it's having some ill effects as well. I understand the trouble, and the trouble is real, but at the same time I would say it's necessary. You know, otherwise China will be like the frog and the water that gradually turned up people be boiling. China will keep the pressure on and always, you know, retaliate in some way. But what this has done, of course, now it has shifted the attention into other areas. So I'm going to say, hey, we're still here, we're not going to be marginalized. Okay, we know we're going to get pressure, but we'll accept that. You know, a much better thing. Okay, we're down to about a minute and a half here. So let me squeeze in this question. Maybe if you could get a somewhat brief answer to this. How would you, since you've lived in Taiwan a long time, how would you evaluate a Taiwan democracy? I know I'm probably asking for a lot here and suggesting a brief answer in a minute and a half, but we've got to try to squeeze this one in. Okay, I see it as progressing very well, Bill. It's going through a lot of growing things, but I see it as definitely progressing. I'm going to throw out some quick things for you. I see, you know, transitional justice has still to be served. That will probably come in the summer. The pension thing, the state assets, those are things coming. An interesting thing, Bill, the KMT, here's a, they have five people now competing for the new chairman. That's a very unusual thing on the KMT side. And I'm going to throw in one more fact. Okay, and that'll probably bring us up to our close. So here you go. 97% of our people are covered by health insurance. Any country to match that? That's a really, really good point, and we all know the Taiwan health care, the standard is quite good and quite high. Okay, well, I think we're just about at the end. Okay, Bill, one more point. Well, I don't think we have time. I'm sorry, but we're out of time. Okay, it looks like our time is up again. Thanks, Professor. I want to thank Dr. T for joining us, and thank you for doing and sweet my guest with you all. I'm Taiwan scholar, Professor Jay Bruce Jacobs, and Monash University Professor Emeritus, joining us from Melbourne, Australia. See you then.