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.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS