On Oct. 19, the Taipei District Court sentenced "rice bomber" Yang Ju-men (楊儒門) to seven-and-a-half years in prison for placing homemade bombs in many public places to protest against the government's policy on rice imports.
The heavy punishment was not a surprise, but it caused much controversy in Taiwan.
There were protests in front of the court on the day sentence was passed, and some legislators launched a petition to call on President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to grant Yang a special pardon.
Yang's supporters believe that he was speaking for Taiwan's farmers, and was a hero who resisted the oppression of capitalism.
Therefore, in their eyes, the ruling was an example of collusion between government and business against them.
By this logic, Yang was a victim of a ridiculous political system, and a "prisoner of conscience." Affected by globalization, farmers are undoubtedly facing a more and more difficult situation, while numerous variables are influencing their most basic right to survive.
We cannot deny the problem. Nor can we ignore it.
Still, viewed from a different angle, can Yang's method of placing bombs to challenge the system really focus people's attention on the problem?
The popular documentary film Let It Be (無米樂) -- the story of Taiwan's rice farmers struggling in the face of hardship -- perhaps had a even greater impact on the public.
It also allows those who are unfamiliar with or have forgotten about rural villages and people to renew their humility, respect, and affection for this land.
As for the rice bomber, he may have aroused the passion of idealists eager to protect farmers, but he has also frightened many others.
If we want to educate the next generation to respect the land, to teach them the traditional spirit of "every single grain is the fruit" of farmers' hard work, I believe that examples such as that movie can create a space for positive thinking, while Yang's negative behavior will only cause more problems.
Besides, we have to know that Yang was given a severe sentence not because he protested on behalf of the public and fellow townspeople from Changhua County, but because he endangered innocent people's lives.
Since the rice bomber incident, there has been an increase in the number of anonymous, indiscriminate attacks in Taiwan.
Take the recent damage to train tracks directed against the Taiwan Railway Administration. This may be seen as a protest against the railway company's corruption, but in fact, innocent passengers completely unrelated to the issue were injured.
From this perspective, Yang may have opened a Pandora's box in Taiwan.
In pursuing justice, we must not lose our focus. Nor should terrorist methods be pursued.
It is hoped that those who care for Taiwan's farmers, and those with ideals of social justice can reconsider their methods of pursuing their goals.
The lawmakers who launched the petition to save Yang should use their time to find ways of protecting farmers' rights and improving their lives -- instead of launching a petition to catch the media's attention and attract votes.
The people of Taiwan are already sick of seeing them holding press conferences or condemning and pushing one another everyday.
Teddy Chen is a research assistant in the Institute of History and Philology at the Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS