Standing up for what already exists

Last weekend, I attended the annual meeting of the Global Alliance for Democracy and Peace (GADP) in Los Angeles at the alliance's invitation and delivered a speech there. This Chinese group has 98 branches worldwide, and the meeting drew over 300 participants, including people from the pan-blue and pan-green camps. My topic was: "Democracy is the greatest common denominator between the two sides."

I pointed out that although Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) said that Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙) is the greatest common denominator between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, democracy is actually the real common denominator. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) does not even recognize the Republic of China (ROC), so how could it possibly respect Sun?

Besides, even if China turns into a democracy, it will not take up Sun's Three Principles of the People as the basis on which the nation is built, for Sun maintained that socialism was embodied in the Principle of Livelihood, one of the tenets of his Three Principles of the People. We have all witnessed the disaster wrought by socialism on mankind, and Sun's attempts to ally himself with Russia and the communists show the pronounced influence of communist thinking.

Since democracy is the greatest common denominator, the resolution of cross-strait disagreements lies in the termination of the CCP's authoritarian rule. Only when China enjoys democracy can the Strait remain peaceful. This is also the only way that Taiwan's goal of becoming a normal country can be realized completely.

Today, many Taiwanese people are demanding a new constitution, and whether or not this document institutes a new national title, flag and national anthem, the right to such changes is a basic right of a democratic country. When former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) visited Beijing to worship at the feet of that nation's dictatorial rulers, and claimed that he would join with the CCP against Taiwan, his behavior was anti-democratic and a betrayal of Taiwan.

After my speech, however, the GADP's first president, Wu Ho-i (巫和怡), a KMT member who resides in Washington, said that I should never have been invited to the meeting. He was unhappy with my support for Taiwan's name change and my condemnation of Lien.

But I simply responded that if a former chairman cannot be criticized, then former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) cannot be criticized as they also served as KMT chairmen. By this logic, is criticism of former Democratic Progressive Party chairmen Shih Ming-teh (施明德) and Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良) not allowed either?

Wu has resided in the US for many years. In his reliance on blocking the free flow of thinking by depriving people of a chance to speak, rather than trying to convince them through reasoned argument, we can clearly see the vicious consequence of the slavish mentality fostered by the KMT.

Many of the pan-blue camp's supporters are furious whenever they talk about Taiwan independence. This issue does not exist, however, because the ROC has always been an independent country. It has never belonged to the People's Republic of China.

The main question is whether the country should create a new constitution and change its name. And the only reason that this issue has arisen is that most countries in the world do not recognize the name ROC.