Online commentator Lin Yu-hong (林裕紘) dropped a bombshell on Tuesday when he posted an apology for saying that he had received threats for criticizing a government program to import eggs, bringing a twist to a “crisis” that had almost fizzled out.
Lin, who runs a Facebook page called “Lin Bay Hao You” (“Lin Bay 好油”), said during a livestream hosted by former New Power Party (NPP) legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) late last month that he had received death threats due to his criticism of the import scheme. Lin’s accusation and “tearful” act garnered sympathy, and sparked fury among Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) supporters and officials.
Many KMT legislators accused the DPP of bearing some responsibility for the threats and failing to take action to address them. Former National Taiwan University (NTU) president Kuan Chun-ming (管中閔) said that the situation was due to the acquiescence of “thugs.” The TPP on social media lambasted the DPP, saying that it had initiated a “green terror,” while former TPP legislator Tsai Pi-ru (蔡壁如) said that “democracy is dead” and no one should be threatened for exposing a government scandal.
Amid the controversy, Minister of Agriculture Chen Chi-chung (陳吉仲) stepped down.
In the post on Tuesday, Lin said that while some of the threats were real, including pictures of guns and knives, he had asked Hsu Che-pin (許哲賓), a friend who works for the KMT, to send him others.
Lin attached a photograph of his DPP membership card, saying he is not worthy to be a member and would resign.
There are lessons to learn from the situation. While opposition parties have every right to monitor the governing party to prevent corruption, it is neither reasonable nor fair to launch groundless accusations based on misinformation and hearsay without evidence. Many politicians were quick to jump on the anti-DPP bandwagon and mobilize hatred among their supporters, yet were slow or shy to apologize when the truth emerged — most who posted remarks in support of Lin deleted the posts without comment.
Taiwan has become a hyper-heated political environment where any remark or report can circulate widely and feed antagonism.
As Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels said: “A lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.”
In the era of new media, in which the fourth estate has given way to social media and self-media, malevolent parties have an opportunity to hype their ideologies, spread false information and shape public discourse. As the power of discourse is no longer monopolized, it has triggered a decline in critical thinking and a rise in herd mentality.
In a democratic society, critical thinking has always been how the government and politicians are kept in check. Similarly, critical remarks by intellectuals, experts and pundits should ensure that criticisms hurled at the government are valid, even in a society rampant with false information.
However, if Kuan could throw out such an incendiary remark that was no different from an anonymous online comment, it is a truly worrisome for Taiwan’s democracy.
It is time that Taiwanese learn to spot the difference between critical thinking and mindless criticism. The former focuses on analysis and questioning, while the latter emerges from personal sentiment and emotions. People should exercise their media literacy and take the remarks of politicians and media reports with a grain of salt.
If it were not for Lin’s IP address, the egg crisis would have ended in ignominy and unwarranted charges left hanging over the governing party.
Competent politicians and leaders should be kept in office, so it should be ensured that Chen is the final victim of irrational criticism.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS