Yesterday was 228 Memorial Day. However, over the past eight years, since former president Lee Teng-hui (
First, it is imperative for the public realize that what happened on Feb. 28 56 years ago was not an isolated and random infliction of violence by a government on its people.
There were many contributing factors to the event, ranging from ethnic tension between the Taiwanese and the Chinese mainlanders, the depression and the corruption and autocracy of the KMT regime, among others. On the other hand, the incident can been seen as formally beginning an era of White Terror and government oppression that lasted until a little over a decade ago.
The day symbolizes the oppression of an alien regime against the people of Taiwan. In this regard, it makes sense for the DPP to choose the 228 Memorial Day as the day to remember the Kaohsiung Incident, to make public de-classified files on the incident and demand an apology from PFP Chairman James Soong (
The pan-blue camp has also criticized the DPP of selectively focusing on the Kaohsiung Incident for political consideration, since many former victims and participants of the incident now play important roles in the DPP government. The pan-blue camp has also argued that reclassification of files of the 228 Incident and the White Terror era deserve more attention. But, one cannot help but think that this is perhaps because the Kaohsiung Incident, which occurred only a little over two decades ago, is simply too close in time for the many current pan-blue leaders, such as Soong, to evade responsibility.
Soong has adopted an embarrassingly evasive attitude toward his part of his past. It is true that in order to move on the people of Taiwan must learn to forgive those who have wronged them. But, isn't an admission of wrong by the wrongdoers a precondition to forgiveness? If there was no wrong, what is there to forgive? This is true irrespective of whether the wrong was the 228 Incident, the Formosa Incident, or the Kaohsiung Incident.
Many pan-blue camp members who helped the old KMT regime oppress the people characterized what happened as "a historical tragedy," playing down their own roles and perhaps implying they had no choice about doing the things they did.
But, even if they truly disapproved of the government's wrongdoing, just like everyone else, they had three options -- one, stand up against it; two, keep quiet but take no part in it; and finally, give disgruntled assistance.
It goes without saying what these three options respectively reflect about the moral characters of the ones who take them. While those who chose option one were clearly heros and those who chose option two were ordinary people, those who chose option three were at least accomplices.
If there is anything that should be learned from the 228 Incident, the White Terror era and the Kaohsiung Incident, it should be the priceless value of democracy. It is the only way that a government can sustain power without resorting to bloodshed, violence and gun barrels. The day also reminds us that the nation's democracy today was not without a costly price, giving everyone even more reason to appreciate democracy, freedoms and human rights.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS