The Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) four decades of martial-law rule on Taiwan came to an end in 1987, but Taiwan did not immediately escape from the shadow of authoritarian rule with free elections.
Unlike the former communist regimes in Eastern Europe that were able to establish democracy via free elections at the first try, it was not until 1996 that Taiwan's first presidential election took place. The national image created by the KMT's great Chinese ideology handicapped Taiwan by creating uncertainty over its international status and national identity.
German-British sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf once commented on democratization in Eastern Europe saying that the reason why Eastern Europe was able to successfully end domination by Communist regimes was because words like "citizen" and "civic" were not deleted from their vocabulary. Having survived the communist terminology purges, "citizenship" and "civic society" became beacons of freedom. Without exception, the post-World War II communist regimes all collapsed following free elections.
But in Taiwan, even though it commenced elections of public representatives, this did not signal the end of the KMT and its Chinese style of martial law rule. The elections of public representatives were not held based on the principles of free elections, but instead, they were no more than tools to be manipulated by politicians in the struggle to realize their own ambitions. In other words, the so-called "free elections" in Taiwan back then had nothing to do with the formation of a real civic society. Politics in Taiwan was commercialized rather than a part of cultural development, and it was not until 2000 that Taiwan realized its first transfer of political power.
Unfortunately, Taiwan still has not fully experienced the benefits of its democratic transition. Rather, it has simply inherited China's old political system through the structures of the KMT government. The pressure to which President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) government has been subjected to because of its poor performance comes from outside the political system.
At first glance, the "One Million Voices Against Corruption" campaign may look splendid given its slogans of "civic society" and "anti-corruption." But in fact, the campaign is a product of the influence of Taiwan's blue colonial powers, the slanted reporting of the nation's pro-China media outlets and a fraudulent "revolution" by DPP insiders.
Because Chen's DPP administration has failed to push through a revolution in government, it has sparked a counter revolution, which has taken the form of political theater. Such a show, in which red replaces blue, could potentially pave the way for the creation of a "third power," but whether it can replace the KMT's colonial governmental structure is another question.
Dahrendorf said that the only real road is the road to freedom, and that its three pillars are democracy, a market economy and a vibrant civil society. Given that Taiwan's democratization is still underway, if people have anything to say about Chen's DPP administration, then they should do so by following the rule of law. If the campaign strategists do not harbor malicious intentions, they will not launch a coup and abandon the proper path of reforming and reconstructing the nation.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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