The Chip Tsao controversy

A controversial Chinese writer, Chip Tsao wrote the article "War at Home," (please click the title to read it) which was supposedly a satirical look at the Spratly Islands issue. He mentioned that the Chinese didn't mind that the Russians sank a Chinese boat because the former leaders of Russia were the ideological models of the Chinese government; the Chinese didn't mind the Japanese claim on one of their islands because they love Hello Kitty. However, they would not tolerate a claim on the Spratlys from the Philippines, a nation of servants. And that is because a substantial percentage of Hong Kong household help are Filipinos.

No wonder the Filipino blood is boiling once again. True, a lot of Filipinos working abroad do the "demeaning" jobs to feed their families. It is also correct that most of these overseas Filipino workers are in the home management profession. Otherwise, they are in the medical field, which also takes CARE of other people. However, these facts do NOT give him the right to put down Filipinos, or whatever nationality his household help could be (once the Filipina leaves him).

I guess he thought Filipinos are as meek as his domestic helper and hadn't expected the global scale of negative reactions. He forgets, or doesn't know, that when push comes to shove, and when they feel that they have been wronged, Filipinos will get vengeance, as demonstrated in the history books. 

No matter how small or how poor a nation is, it has the right to safeguard its claimed territory. The Philippines was exercising its right to guard its waters in the South China Sea. And it will insist on exercising this right even if its daughters and mothers care for the children and the elderly of other nations. It is the Filipino hand which rocks the cradle, and will rule the world one day (as the oft-quoted title of the William Ross Wallace poem says).

Was his article humorous? Countries who send out their citizens to do the dirty work wouldn't think so. Regardless of the nation subject to his biting sarcasm, his article is indeed a racial slur; there is no point in pretending that it was written in jest, as his public apology weakly insisted. No matter what his intentions were, his words were taken as insults. His purpose in writing the article is never as important as its effects on the audience, a point Vicki Wilde (of the CGIAR's Gender and Diversity Program) emphasises in her talks on gender and race equality. 

Is his public apology enough? The Philippine politicians don't think so. They might file a case against him. Honestly, I think he should do his maid's duties on top of his job to realise what a pompous ingrate he really is.