Issues of transitional justice have been in the headlines this year. There has been widespread attention paid to the 228 Incident, the White Terror era, the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) stolen assets and other historical and political injustices still yet to be resolved. This is encouraging, but there has regrettably been a lack of concern for the pressing problem of social inequality and injustice for weaker working class groups, such as farmers and fishermen.
Historical and political transitional justice is obviously important, but I also think that transitional justice for all social and economic levels is critical to ensuring that people can enjoy a fundamental degree of respect, safety and security.
Farmers, fishermen and manual laborers are certainly some of society's most disadvantaged workers. Yet the only time that political parties pay attention to their hopes and difficulties is during legislative and presidential elections.
At the beginning of this year, the Council for Labor Affairs said it was considering raising the minimum wage. Workers were happy to see that 10 years of appealing for a minimum wage hike might finally produce results, but they also feared that the council's proposal would turn out to be just another pre-election ploy.
Legislators recently voted to overturn a Cabinet order last year that reduced premium interest rates on retirement savings for former teachers, military personnel and public servants. Yet the way the legislators danced around the issue for almost a year before taking action revealed that their real concern was winning votes.
Former KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) recently said that if elected president, he would increase subsidies for elderly farmers, while Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) -- a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential hopeful -- immediately agreed that the plan was feasible.
But what farmers and fishermen don't understand is why these proposed subsidies and incentives, which were sent to the legislature long ago, have just now been addressed.
There have been some indications that the Taiwan Provincial Farmers Association, a major supporter and campaigner for the pan-blue camp, wants to unite farmer and fishermen organizations to form a "Taiwan Farmers Party" to campaign for legislator-at-large seats.
Perhaps this has been motivated by disgruntled KMT members who failed to be nominated as legislative candidates. Or perhaps it's a reaction to the way the KMT cooperated with China in recent years to help Taiwanese farmers export bananas to China -- believing that the Chinese consumer market would save Taiwanese agricultural exports -- and which ended up creating serious losses for farmers.
In either case, the possible formation of such a party shows that farmers are impatient with being ignored and manipulated for so long.
What kind of system fails to protect retired fishermen and farmers after a life of strenuous labor, but offers military personnel, teachers and public servants 18 percent interest on their retirement savings?
We must work toward social justice by first devising a more structured approach to caring for disadvantaged farmers and fishermen.
People have had enough of politicians taking only sporadic interest in their concerns, of bandying issues around as election tools, and merely pretending that they care about real reform.
Margot Chen is a research fellow at Taiwan Advocates, a think tank initiated by former president Lee Teng-hui.
Translated by Marc Langer
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS