On Oct. 19, the Taipei District Court sentenced "rice bomber" Yang Ju-men (楊儒門) to seven-and-a-half years in prison for placing homemade bombs in many public places to protest against the government's policy on rice imports.
The heavy punishment was not a surprise, but it caused much controversy in Taiwan.
There were protests in front of the court on the day sentence was passed, and some legislators launched a petition to call on President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to grant Yang a special pardon.
Yang's supporters believe that he was speaking for Taiwan's farmers, and was a hero who resisted the oppression of capitalism.
Therefore, in their eyes, the ruling was an example of collusion between government and business against them.
By this logic, Yang was a victim of a ridiculous political system, and a "prisoner of conscience." Affected by globalization, farmers are undoubtedly facing a more and more difficult situation, while numerous variables are influencing their most basic right to survive.
We cannot deny the problem. Nor can we ignore it.
Still, viewed from a different angle, can Yang's method of placing bombs to challenge the system really focus people's attention on the problem?
The popular documentary film Let It Be (無米樂) -- the story of Taiwan's rice farmers struggling in the face of hardship -- perhaps had a even greater impact on the public.
It also allows those who are unfamiliar with or have forgotten about rural villages and people to renew their humility, respect, and affection for this land.
As for the rice bomber, he may have aroused the passion of idealists eager to protect farmers, but he has also frightened many others.
If we want to educate the next generation to respect the land, to teach them the traditional spirit of "every single grain is the fruit" of farmers' hard work, I believe that examples such as that movie can create a space for positive thinking, while Yang's negative behavior will only cause more problems.
Besides, we have to know that Yang was given a severe sentence not because he protested on behalf of the public and fellow townspeople from Changhua County, but because he endangered innocent people's lives.
Since the rice bomber incident, there has been an increase in the number of anonymous, indiscriminate attacks in Taiwan.
Take the recent damage to train tracks directed against the Taiwan Railway Administration. This may be seen as a protest against the railway company's corruption, but in fact, innocent passengers completely unrelated to the issue were injured.
From this perspective, Yang may have opened a Pandora's box in Taiwan.
In pursuing justice, we must not lose our focus. Nor should terrorist methods be pursued.
It is hoped that those who care for Taiwan's farmers, and those with ideals of social justice can reconsider their methods of pursuing their goals.
The lawmakers who launched the petition to save Yang should use their time to find ways of protecting farmers' rights and improving their lives -- instead of launching a petition to catch the media's attention and attract votes.
The people of Taiwan are already sick of seeing them holding press conferences or condemning and pushing one another everyday.
Teddy Chen is a research assistant in the Institute of History and Philology at the Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
There has been much catastrophizing in Taiwan recently about America becoming more unreliable as a bulwark against Chinese pressure. Some of this has been sparked by debates in Washington about whether the United States should defend Taiwan in event of conflict. There also were understandable anxieties about whether President Trump would sacrifice Taiwan’s interests for a trade deal when he sat down with President Xi (習近平) in late October. On top of that, Taiwan’s opposition political leaders have sought to score political points by attacking the Lai (賴清德) administration for mishandling relations with the United States. Part of this budding anxiety
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
The diplomatic spat between China and Japan over comments Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi made on Nov. 7 continues to worsen. Beijing is angry about Takaichi’s remarks that military force used against Taiwan by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” necessitating the involvement of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces. Rather than trying to reduce tensions, Beijing is looking to leverage the situation to its advantage in action and rhetoric. On Saturday last week, four armed China Coast Guard vessels sailed around the Japanese-controlled Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), known to Japan as the Senkakus. On Friday, in what
On Nov. 8, newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Vice Chairman Chi Lin-len (季麟連) attended a memorial for White Terror era victims, during which convicted Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spies such as Wu Shi (吳石) were also honored. Cheng’s participation in the ceremony, which she said was part of her efforts to promote cross-strait reconciliation, has trapped herself and her party into the KMT’s dark past, and risks putting the party back on its old disastrous road. Wu, a lieutenant general who was the Ministry of National Defense’s deputy chief of the general staff, was recruited