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
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