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
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS