Cartoon not discriminatory
Recently, a Taoyuan high-school student’s cartoon titled The Emperor’s Clause won a special prize at the National Student Art Competition. The cartoon depicted a pedestrian as an emperor crossing the street slowly, and it drew criticism from Internet celebrity Cheap, who accused the artwork of discriminating against disadvantaged pedestrians and even demanded that the organizers take back the prize. When some Internet users expressed different views, Cheap replied: “I dare you to mock the indigenous peoples, homosexuals and women’s rights in the name of freedom of creation.”
This has now turned a simple art competition into a complex social issue.
It all started with a CNN report last year titled: “Taiwan’s ‘living hell’ traffic is a tourism problem, say critics.” To rid Taiwan of this bad reputation, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications increased the penalty for not giving way to pedestrians to NT$6,000, with a demerit of three points from June 31. A driver accumulating 12 points in a year will have their driver’s license suspended for two months and be required to take a road safety course.
The rule has been implemented for more than five months and it has been quite effective. Drivers are giving way to pedestrians, although we still occasionally see pedestrians being hesitant about crossing the road, or some looking at their cellphones or walking slowly on the crosswalk, which makes drivers waiting to turn feel anxious as the traffic light is about to turn red.
As a driver and pedestrian myself, I found the cartoon funny, as I am sure many others did. Most people would not actually plod over crossings accompanied by a tortoise as in the cartoon. Few, I am sure, would feel offended or discriminated against. They would simply see the funny side.
The point of the cartoon is to call on pedestrians and drivers to respect each other. There is no intended malice or discrimination.
One can compare this with comments made a few days ago by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice presidential candidate Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), who said: “People in Taipei like to quarrel, while people in the south like to fight.”
I was born in southern Taiwan but grew up in Taipei. I do consider Jaw’s words discriminatory.
Hsieh Chih-chieh
Taipei
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