With the recent Justin Lin (林毅夫) incident, Taiwan's society has undergone another baptism of fire and the positive consensus engendered by the incident has been an unexpected windfall. Clearly, Taiwan has already developed the characteristics of a civil society, societal development being guided by the debate emerging from the people and media, rather than by the maneuverings of politicians.
Two months ago I visited Kinmen. To my surprise I discovered that Kinmen's culture and its people had developed a certain confidence and I was elated for both the local government and the people. During a chat with a noodle shop employee, I was proudly told of about the satisfaction of being Kinmenese -- such things as not locking doors at night, pensions for the elderly and stipends for pre-school and school-age children. Learning of Kinmen's social welfare system filled me with ebullience similar to what I experienced visiting Stockholm in 1998. The Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) administration's social welfare policy leaves one feeling optimistic.
In chatting with people on Kinmen I saw Taiwanese values, as well as a basic difference between Kinmen and Xiamen. Deep in my heart, I felt that defending Kinmen was equal to defending Taiwan -- as well as universal values. It is as if a "great wall" of democratic freedom connects Kinmen to London and Stockholm.
Actually, in Taiwan -- especially in Taipei -- a very endearing society has already developed. Within this society, Eslite Bookstore is a representation of the aspirations of everyday people.
This Eslite-style satisfaction is built on the universal values of freedom, open-mindedness, innovation and cordiality. If one had to explain how Taipei was different from Shanghai and Beijing, the answer would most likely be "Eslite bookstore." If one had to explain how Taipei was similar to New York, Paris and London, the answer would also be "Eslite." Eslite represents universal human values. One would have difficulty imagining an Eslite bookstore in Beijing. The books might be there, but the soul wouldn't.
The Justin Lin incident made me reconsider things -- what are we trying to uphold? If it's like Lin has said, why should we defend this little island and be willing to give up the vast mainland?
To me, defending Taiwan means defending Eslite bookstore and the boundless dreams of the people of Taiwan. Eslite bookstore is only one example of the multitude of wonderful things to be found in Taipei, which include cafes, bookstores and eateries. Even more significant is the sense of satisfaction that emanates from the city's people.
A friend once asked me why I still adhere to certain ideals regarding Taiwanese society. Actually, the stage of development Taiwan enjoys was achieved more endearingly than by any Chinese society in history. Among the key factors responsible for this are a reverence for democracy and a respect for the individual.
The fact that Eden Foundation founder Liu Hsia (劉俠) can live so confidently and with such integrity; the joy expressed by female legislators in the Legislative Yuan upon passage of the Gender Equality Labor Law (兩性工作平 等法); the fact that many people with cerebral palsy can now live confident lives -- everywhere are to be found declarations of Taiwanese society's universal values.
These things are unimaginable in China. We see the manner in which Falun Gong gatherings are broken up. And when we see 30,000 to 40,000 people in Hong Kong holding a candlelight vigil on the 13th anniversary of the Tiananmen Massacre, we can appreciate what people in the territory hope for -- as well as what they live in fear of.
What principles do I uphold? Just the defense of Taiwan and Eslite bookstore, that's all.
Su Ih-jen is a professor at the National Taiwan University College of Medicine.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
RSS