The use by the pan-blues of Adolf Hitler in their campaign ads is beneath contempt but we hope that in the last week of the election campaign it might serve to focus people's minds on the choice they have to make. For what was Hitler's government but the capture of the institutions of the state by a criminal gang? And what is the pan-blue alliance but a criminal gang seeking to capture the institutions of the state?
For those who find even this analogy in questionable taste let us remind them that during its period of government in China the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) murdered some 10,075,000 people -- ordinary innocent people, we stress, as this figure does not include war deaths. It is often forgotten that Chiang Kai-shek (
Times have changed, say the pan-blues. Perhaps so, but the fact that the pan-blues have never shown even the slightest contrition for what they have done -- and hard-liners were in fact incensed when in the late 1990s former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) apologized on behalf of the government for the 228 massacre -- suggests that they gave up the habit of killing not because of some Damascene conversion in their moral outlook but simply because it was expedient to do so.
What the pan-blues have never given up is their propensity for theft. Their presidential candidates are themselves mired in this culture of theft. People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Thieves leading a party of theft -- hardly an edifying prospect for a future government. Which makes Saturday's mass turnout for the pan-blues rather depressing. Why would people want to vote for a party whose principle skill is looting? It is truly amazing that anybody can fail to see the pan-blues' desire for power as anything other than the desire of confidence tricksters to persuade the people to leave the cookie jar in their care. Voting for the pan-blues is simply queuing up to have one's pocket picked.
This election has been characterized as a fight between pro-Taiwan and pro-China forces. It has been described as a battle between progressive forces, with an agenda that stresses democratic choice and popular sovereignty, and the forces of reaction, with their record of political exclusion and their current rejection of democratic choice -- a rejection best summed up as "you can vote, but only for the things we allow you to vote for." Both of these characterizations are correct.
But there is one more way of looking at the election. It is between those who have had a vision of how to make Taiwan a better society and have tried to actualize that vision, and those who see political power as a means only to enrich themselves. The pan-blues are not interested in making Taiwan a better place to live in. They are interested in expanding their real-estate portfolios in the US at our expense. What amazes is that Lien and Soong's prostrating themselves on Saturday did not cover them with ridicule. After all, if they love Taiwan so much, why did that make sure their sons dodged military service? Why do they have so much property and so many family members overseas? Can Taiwanese really fall for these crooked charlatans? Do turkeys really vote for Christmas?
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS