Banning breeds resistance
In 1979, when I was a student at a teacher training university, the democratic movement was thriving. We were motivated to fight for a better Taiwan under the dangwai (黨外) or “outside the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)” banner. Many dangwai magazines were published and they became a channel for developing Taiwan’s democratization.
At that time, the school’s disciplinary office tried banning dangwai magazines and books, yet one military instructor surnamed Tsao (曹) went against the grain.
“Our college is an educational institution to train teachers. We should of course comply with the law. That is the most important thing. Given that the publication of these books and magazines was authorized by the Government Information Office, we do not have the right to ban them. If they criticize the government for no reason or with malicious intent, teachers and instructors should take the opportunity to teach students the truth. Students should not be prohibited from reading what they want to read,” Tsao said.
For the martial law era, what he said was extraordinarily democratic and open-minded. His words laid the foundation for my understanding of democracy and urged me to reflect on the authoritarian regime. I still think about him, grateful for his teaching.
The late democracy advocate Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) gave his life for Taiwan by pursuing unconditional freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is a foundational principle of the DPP, based on the idea that one’s thoughts, whatever they are, should never be criminalized. This is also a universally embraced value.
The DPP did not achieve a majority victory in the legislative elections this year and there are many reasons. Video-sharing platforms might have played a role, but it is only one factor. If those platforms are unlawful, prosecutors, investigators and police should intervene and conduct investigations. It is improper to ban platforms outright, yet some DPP politicians have said that TikTok should be banned.
It would create more problems if too many public restrictions are imposed. Prohibiting a piece of information only makes it more widespread, and violating freedom of speech would make Taiwan no better than a communist country.
Hopefully, all DPP members would consider the public first. Policymakers should reflect on past mistakes and seek meaningful collaboration with opposition parties. Only then can the public truly benefit.
Tu Juo-fei
Taipei
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS