Beginning at 2pm on Aug. 17, the TV news kept on broadcasting news of KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and his wife, Lien Fang-yu (連方瑀) as they saw their daughter, Lien Yung-hsin (連詠心), off to her studies in the US. Frankly speaking, this is really troubling and also very surprising.
It is troubling because why would it concern the public that Lien's daughter is leaving the country? Wherein lies its newsworthiness? Is it necessary to broadcast the story over and over again?
It was surprising to see both the departing one and those seeing her off actually crying. Lien Yung-hsin was only going to the US to study, she did not leave never to come back, nor is she dying, joining the army or going to war. What was there to cry about?
Today's world is but a small place, and an overseas student can come and go several times over a year, particularly postgraduate research students. So what was there to cry about?
In the 1960s and 1970s, studying abroad was without a doubt a big thing for a family. At the time, Taiwan as a whole was like a big prison. Under the surveillance of the Chiangs, the people were no different from prisoners.
Gaining admission into a school didn't necessarily mean that one would be able to leave. Even if one managed to leave, family members would not necessarily be able to leave the country to go visit, not only due to economic reasons, but also because they wouldn't necessarily be able to get passports.
Many people felt free as birds once they got on the aircraft, and vowed never to return. Whether on the dock or at the airport, therefore, it was not very strange to see both the departing ones and those seeing them off crying.
Today, studying abroad is a common triviality, so why are the Liens and their daughter crying at the airport? Lien Fang-yu was even escorting her daughter to the US.
The only reason is that the Liens are a world unto themselves, completely unrelated to Taiwan's democratic progress and historic development. Lien Chan was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. His daughter will, of course, be even better off and you could even say that she was born with a gold spoon in her mouth.
The official career of Lien Chen-tung (連震東), Lien Chan's father, can of course not be compared to that of his son. Lien Chen-tung never reached any further than the ministerial level, where he amassed the huge family fortune.
Lien Chan went from minister to premier to vice president and his wealth does not compare unfavorably to and, in fact, even surpasses that of his father.
Lien Yung-hsin is therefore sure to be even more spoiled than Lien Chan. The result is this rare behavior of one of the richest families in modern Taiwanese history.
We can use PFP Chairman James Soong's (宋楚瑜) definition of "one country on each side" -- "the poor on one side, and the rich on the other" -- to describe the Lien family's crying together.
Soong, who owns at least five houses in the US, can of course modestly count himself a citizen of the "country of the rich."
Lien Chan's wealth is known by all and sundry, and he is definitely a citizen of the "country of the rich."
We can only imagine Lien Yung-hsin's spoiled upbringing. The ancients had a saying: "The child of a wealthy man will not stand below a high wall," not to mention travel far.
The Liens' crying tells us a lot.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
Translated by Perry Svensson
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS