Governments in Taiwan have a tendency to take advantage of the disadvantaged in society. Despite paying lip service to the importance of helping the less well-off, both local and central governments tend to ignore them either in favor of corporate interests or out of a general tendency to look down on the poor.
Take the example of single and unmarried mothers. Because salaries have stagnated for more than 10 years while the cost of living has risen dramatically, growing numbers of young people find it hard to get married and raise a family. Both parents need to be working just to cover the basic costs of raising a single child. This puts pressure on any new family, and hence, divorce is on the increase.
As a result of these economic and social pressures, more of babies have been born to unmarried mothers. One might expect local governments to see this as a good thing, considering that Taiwan’s birthrate has already plummeted to one of the lowest in the world, meaning huge social problems are looming just around the corner when the population starts to fall.
Indeed, central and local governments have announced a raft of subsidies for newborns, with Hsinchu County offering a bonus of up to NT$100,000 for the birth of triplets. Although these incentives are intended to increase the birthrate, for some reason, unmarried mothers need not apply.
Local government offices say that any request for a payment relating to the birth of a newborn must be accompanied by paperwork proving the parents are married. No other requests will be considered. In other words, in the eyes of local government officials, the 7,492 babies born to unmarried mothers in 2009 are not worth spending a single dollar on. National Taiwan University professor Chen Chao-ju (陳昭如) said it was as if local governments did not consider children born to unmarried parents to be “ideal citizens,” adding that these regulations clearly violated the principle of gender equality.
Another example of the rights of the disadvantaged being trampled underfoot is the case of elderly farmers in Houlong Township (後龍), Miaoli County, who protested against a Miaoli County request to extend a deadline on the submission of an industrial park project. That’s just what elderly farmers down south need — another industrial park to pollute their land. Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) had even promised that their land would not be expropriated to build the park.
Thankfully for the farmers, the Construction and Planning Agency rejected Miaoli’s request to extend the deadline, but not before vigorous protests and not before industrial planners said they could build a somewhat smaller industrial park, which would do little to alleviate pollution.
Most of these elderly farmers that industrial planners seem to view as minor irritations to be ignored or bulldozed out of their fields to make way for huge chemical plants, own the land they occupy. They have rights that should be legally protected, and are a burden on nobody, as they mostly rely on subsistence farming. Kicking them off their land would just force them into the cities, to the houses of their grandchildren, where they would be a financial burden.
In cases too numerous to count, local governments around the nation regularly display a callous disregard for those on the bottom rung of society, or they have to be all but forced into doing their job — namely protecting the rights of the weak and vulnerable in society. If Taiwan truly aspires to serve as a beacon for human rights in the region, this has to change.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS