On Nov. 1, poet Tu Shi-san (杜十三) called the Premier Frank Hsieh's (謝長廷) office in the name of the Taiwan Liberation Alliance and threatened to kill Hsieh and his entire family. The case was handled quickly, and social uproar ensued. However, some media groups have chosen to portray the poet as a hero or glorious warrior. This kind of behavior can often lead to confusion among the public over what kind of behavior is right and wrong.
After Tu was arrested on Nov. 7, Hsieh made it known that he would not press charges, while the poet apologized and then expressed his regret. However, threatening others is an indictable offense and he should be punished according to the law for what he did. That would be the correct way to proceed in a healthy, law-abiding society. Surprisingly, for reasons entirely their own, some media groups have chosen to glorify Tu's crimes in their news reports and editorials.
A few so-called academics and literati have even argued that his threats were the result of righteous indignation, a poet's anger, part of a piece of performance art, an intellectual's conscience and a release of fury. They have tried to justify his crime. Not only have they not condemned the violence, but they have criticized the government for not accounting for itself. Such people mislead the public into thinking that the crime of intimidation is a suitable revolutionary action against unsatisfactory political situations. They have placed a halo above the head of the criminal, in the same manner as in the case of the "rice bomber." It should be a matter of considerable concern when values become so confused.
Hsieh complained that those who support Tu do not "place any value on the lives of other people's children," and regretted that the situation in Taiwan is now comparable to China's Cultural Revolution. During the decade-long Cultural Revolution that broke out around 1965, the late Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東) mobilized the innocent but passionate youth, laborers, and the general public of China, using the banner "revolutions are guiltless, rebellions are justified" in order to bring down his political rivals within the Chinese Communist Party. The chaos and destruction of the Cultural Revolution lay in the lawlessness of society and rule by mob trial. What is the difference between this and the sections of the media that ignore the law and praise violence?
In Tu's case, it can be attributed to a perversion in the Taiwanese media. This can be traced back to the beginning of Taiwan's push for democratization and localization. These media groups cherished the "Greater China" vision and therefore enjoyed the patronage of the authoritarian government. However, after Taiwan's democratization and localization began, they lost their vested interests and failed to adapt to the new environment, new systems and new atmosphere. They also resisted the tide of time with their radical ethnic and pro-unification ideologies.
From news reports and editorials to television talk shows, they are full of hateful anti-Taiwan sentiment that disrupts ethnic harmony and foments social confrontation, constantly attacking the government and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) on the behalf of the pan-blue camp. Some of the pro-China media also play the role of Beijing's mouthpiece by denying Taiwan's self-awareness as a result of their adherence to a pro-unification agenda.
These media groups have spared no effort in smearing Taiwan and arousing conflicts and confrontations over the past 10 years or so. Taiwan appears to be good for nothing in their reports and editorials. The native regime is incompetent, its morality is suspect, social order is non-existent and the government is in conflict with the business sector. Taiwan is apparently a living hell in their eyes. Brainwashed by these media groups day and night, some members of the public have therefore developed unbalanced impressions. As their discontent mounts, their anger finally gets out of control, leading to irrational behavior.
Tu's deplorable death threats to Hsieh and his family were a result of the poisonous propaganda distributed by the pro-China media. But even after he was arrested, these groups decided to ignore the law and lavish him with praise. This shows that they are not only the cause of this incident but also the defenders of evil and glorifiers of violence. In other words, this case has once again highlighted the fact that the pro-China media prefer to promote instability.
---Translated by Eddy Chang
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
RSS