Anyone tiring of pan-blue obstructionism will be disappointed once again by the actions of the Great Jogger and Great Blue Hope, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
So it comes as a welcome relief that independent Legislator Li Ao (
Waving around bogus US intelligence documents "proving" that President Chen Shui-bian (
In short, Li had become a rabble-rouser, but without the benefit of a rabble willing to take any notice. The situation had become so dire that actor Bacy Tang (
In Beijing, Li was given a hero's welcome -- until he started talking. Li's freewheeling speech started not with icons from the pantheon of Chinese history, but with a US Civil War anecdote involving president Abraham Lincoln and General Ulysses S. Grant. He then warmed up, praising liberal Chinese nationalist Hu Shih (胡適), and skewering officials in attendance with this Hu quote: "The struggle for national liberty is the struggle for individual liberty."
The speech, delivered without notes, covered the problems of liberalism, communism and Mao Zedong (
Pro-independence Taiwanese academics such as Hsu Yung-ming (
Ultimately, Li's pilgrimage to China is noteworthy for two reasons. The first is that even the demands of "Greater China" nationalism and its advocacy cannot restrain Li's ego -- his individuality. The second is that the communist authorities, as they rushed to censor Li's speech, were surely scratching their heads, looking at Li -- their latest would-be unificationist tool -- and asking themselves: "If this is what passes for a friend in Taiwan, then what hope is there?"
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS