Delight, anger, sorrow and happiness are normal human emotions. However, after suffering heavy oppression from a foreign colonial government, Taiwanese are only capable of feeling sorrow and lack the ability to, or do not dare, get angry.
Despite having no new convincing evidence, the Special Investigation Panel (SIP) recently and unexpectedly indicted former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). Taiwanese should be angry about this instead of just lamenting the sorrows of being Taiwanese.
If we only feel sorrow when we see those in power carrying out political persecution, then the poison has gone too deep — we are experiencing the wrong emotions. People in Middle Eastern and North African nations, such as Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Libya, who suffered corruption and political persecution for years under the highly oppressive rule of their dictators reacted not with sorrow, but with anger. The result was the “Jasmine Revolution.”
In a democracy, anger does not have to lead to revolution because anger can be expressed peacefully and voters can vote their leaders out of office.
The democratic system that the forefathers of Taiwan’s democracy movement shed blood and sweat for was established with the aim of creating a fair society in which everyone has the equality of opportunity. Lee nominated James Soong (宋楚瑜), now chairman of the People First Party, to run for the now-scrapped position of Governor of Taiwan Province and teamed up with Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), now president, to promote the “New Taiwanese” concept. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) appointed Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politician Tang Fei (唐飛) as his first premier. These were all strategies aimed at encouraging a sense of pride in Taiwan while recognizing the different ethnic and political groups that coexist in the country.
Lee and Chen worked hard to secure Taiwan’s independent status and their actions had the same goal as the pro-Taiwan policy of “defending Taiwan through reform” that former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) promoted after the Republic of China was kicked out of the UN. Now, though, Chen is in jail and Lee has been indicted.
Taiwanese do not believe that those two former presidents should have immunity from the judicial process just because they contributed to the establishment of Taiwan’s democracy and the protection of its sovereignty. However, they firmly believe that the judiciary should use one set of standards and base all charges on concrete evidence, and that those with different opinions should not be persecuted because it suits the interests of those in power.
Ma constantly breaks his promises and he is incompetent. He has betrayed Taiwan’s sovereignty, stunted its economic growth and caused the gap between rich and poor to widen. For these things, Taiwanese should be angry.
Ma uses the judiciary as a tool and had nothing to say when members of the Koo (辜) family who were witnesses in Chen’s case said that prosecutors instructed them to give false statements. Now Lee has been indicted without any new evidence being submitted. These actions imply that Ma is out to eliminate pro-localization leaders. For this, Taiwanese should be angry.
We have seen over the past three years that only a pro--localization government is capable of enacting reform and upholding Taiwan’s sovereignty and independence. We must abandon Ma to save Taiwan.
Abandoning Ma and implementing reform to protect Taiwan are two strategies that will shine brightly in the history of Taiwan’s struggle for sovereignty and independence.
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS