The foundation of the US began with the Revolutionary War against Britain — which took place from 1775 to 1783 — while the origin of its democratic development began in 1787 at the Constitutional Convention, held in Philadelphia. The convention, which began in May and concluded in September of that year, resulted in the drafting of the US constitution, which was submitted to the states for approval. The founding fathers of the US — including George Washington and Benjamin Franklin — all participated in the drafting.
When faced with national distress, citizens of many imperial, transitioning and emerging countries around the world often respond by emigrating to the US. Even worse, ruling families and wealthy elites of many autocratic and dictatorial regimes frequently take refuge in the US rather than actively working to improve the living conditions in their own countries — some even become accomplices to the oppressors. During Taiwan’s martial law period, privileged circles within the ruling party and the military were inundated with this kind of opportunistic behavior.
These people fail to earnestly work toward building the political conditions for democracy, yet crave the democratic conditions of other countries. Many countries around the world are trapped in similar situations, which reflects the cultural nature of democracy — the significance behind its form and observance.
The US’ three branches of government — executive, legislative and judicial — in addition to the interactive relationship between the federal and state governments shape the effective operation of its power structure. What makes the US the US is that — despite political conflict and the chaos caused by frequent changes in the US presidency and Congress that reflect the diversity of different groups and the conflicts of ideologies and interest — its democracy continues to develop and progress.
Taiwan, which still goes by the name Republic of China, faced the reality that its territorial scope, which was once the entirety of China, was replaced by the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949. It became an incomplete state, made up of the surviving remnants of China left within its borders.
While martial law was lifted in 1987, the development of the road to democratization has been anything but smooth. A direct presidential election was held in 1996, marking Taiwan’s first significant step toward becoming a nation that exists for those living within it. However, an effort remains to break free from the situation of being a mere construct, a remnant, or an “other,” influenced or hindered by Chinese ideology.
Democratization has granted those living in Taiwan rights and responsibilities. Taiwan’s national dilemmas and the struggles of democratic development are issues that all Taiwanese with a democratic vision must face. Regardless of which candidate won the US presidential election this week, it is more pertinent for Taiwan that Taiwanese recognize the need to be self-reliant and pay closer attention to their own democratic development.
The development of democracy in the US has not been perfect, and yet it still attracts people from all over the world. Many from Taiwan and China run from their national responsibilities or leave to pursue the American dream.
Taiwan’s democratization must be cherished — only then can people living in Taiwan have the dignity of subjectivity. It cannot merely be about money. A country is the cultural imagination of community and a political structure — each citizen is the master of their own nation.
The development of Taiwan’s democracy is the right and responsibility of all Taiwanese citizens.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS