The founding aims of the Southern Taiwan Society are threefold.
One, to protect Taiwanese values and dignity, and to concentrate the rising power of the people in southern Taiwan.
Two, to formulate educational, cultural and environmental policies focusing on Taiwan.
Three, to initiate a movement to reform Taiwanese society by stimulating joint public efforts.
The producers of Special Reports (
Based on these aims and the protection of freedom of expression, we have helped promote this film. We have distributed about 7,000 copies, but due to being understaffed, we have had to end our promotional efforts.
We wish to state that we had nothing to do with the production of these 7,000 disks. We merely support the film based on our aim of protecting the people's freedom of expression.
Taiwan's democracy and freedom are the precious results of many individuals' decades-long sacrifices and struggle. They are the accomplishments of the Taiwanese people, although China-friendly politicians now spread lies and create social disturbances in the name of free speech. China-friendly media have also turned into a source of social disorder. This free speech chaos has existed for the past three years. Had we been in dictatorial China, these media would have been closed down.
Regrettably, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) and PFP Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) obviously do not understand the true meaning and value of free speech. Even worse, they have joined the China-friendly media in slandering the Southern Taiwan Society, the Democratic Progressive Party and the Taiwanese Media Revolution Workshop, the producers of the Special Reports.
During the latest round of mayoral elections, the United Daily News flew the banner of press freedom in an editorial entitled "Does the investigation stop at Frank Hsieh's doorstep?" And when the offices of the China Times Express were searched by Taipei prosecutors three years ago, China Times also praised press freedom, while Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) commented on the prosecutors' search by saying "How can this be? This is really surprising .... Not that a newspaper's offices cannot be searched, but it must not be done without due consideration. They must first have concrete evidence, because this is really serious business that may have serious consequences."
It is a pity that when the common man is practicing his right to freedom of expression, he is slandered and called a muckraker or a degenerate. The media chaos repeatedly highlights the need to improve the nation's media.
That is why we solemnly call on Soong to shed the dictatorial mind-set from his time as director of the Government Information Office and governor of Taiwan Province. The China-friendly media should also abandon the mind-set that makes them despise and uglify Taiwan, while Ma should practice what he preaches and uphold the right to free speech instead of persecuting those practicing that right, as was done during the White Terror era.
We restate our absolute support for Special Reports. We will not retreat before China-friendly individuals resorting to White Terror tactics in the name of democracy.
Finally, we repeat our call for all people with a contempt for dictatorship and a passion for freedom to join us in our fight to build a free, democratic and egalitarian new Taiwanese nation.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS