Sat, Apr 10, 2004 page8

• The student protests are not in `Wild Lily's' class

  • By Chin Heng-wei 金恆煒
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  In 1990, Taiwanese society was shaken by the magnificent Wild Lily Student Movement (野百合學運) -- which was launched in a bid to force government leaders to advance political reforms. The participants' demands were legitimate, and teachers and students from different political parties and ethnic groups all took part in this large-scale mass movement. The representativeness of the movement lay in its being a national campaign that exerted unstoppable pressure, eventually adding a new page to the history of the nation's democratic development.

  Looking at the current student movement at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial in Taipei, only a few students are participating. Some of the leading students in the campaign are members of the pan-blue camp. But they did not make clear their political status at the beginning in order to present to the public an idea of their "neutrality." Some of their statements were quite similar to those of the pan-blue camp after the presidential election. Who would believe that these protesters are not pro-blue?

  In particular, one of the campaign conveners, Chen Cheng-feng (陳政峰), is in his 30s. He already holds a bachelor's degree and a master's degree, and is presently a student in National Taiwan University's history department. He has worked for the pan-blue camp and is more like a "professional student." Another campaign convener, Chen Hsin-ju (陳信儒) -- a student in the university's department of business administration -- used to serve in a pro-blue organization and is probably as blue as his fellow student.

  Today, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) are unwilling to accept but can do nothing about the election failure. So they use the students as an "amulet" while initiating the hunger strike in order to fulfill Lien's wish of regaining power.

  Only a small number of students have taken part in the demonstrations and not many teachers have showed their support for the students either. The scale of the campaign is much smaller than that of the Wild Lily campaign. The differences between the two student movements are vast.

  In fact, what interests us is why some local media have run page after page of reports about the campaign.

  Both the United Daily News and the China Times have done so, with relatively more praise and less criticism. The manipulation behind their reports is clear: Their purpose is to infuse the pan-blue camp with the spirit of the Wild Lily Student Movement. The question is: Is it really necessary to cause a sensation like this over such a tiny group of people? Besides, the United Daily News has always emphasized the "proportional principle." Why has it ignored its principle this time?

  Do the pan-blue camp and the pro-blue media really think that they can destroy Taiwan by initiating a student movement like this? They are pitiful and pathetic.

  Chin Heng-wei is the editor in chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.

  TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Uncrewed surface vehicle unveiled

  • 2

    Yaya in Taiwan voluntarily flies to PRC

  • 3

    LA Dodgers show off World Series rings

  • 4

    Hong Kong Sevens settles into new Kai Tak Stadium

  • 5

    Dodgers edge Tigers and Yankees beat Brewers in opening games in the US