The second round of protests against President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) on Ketagalan Boulevard has left me depressed. None of the rationales behind the so-called "anti-corruption" campaign convinces me that it is anything other than an aftershock of the last presidential election.
Taiwan's next election will make it clear whether this administration has won any political achievements and if voters believe that it has been involved in corruption. If Chen's aides and relatives -- including his son-in-law, Chao Chien-ming (趙建銘) -- have violated the law, they will be judged by the law and by history.
Unless Chen is guilty of rebellion, treason or politically subverting Taiwan's sovereignty, there is no other reason to disrupt the normal course of democracy and make him step down before his term is over.
If it is proven that the president indeed has violated corruption laws, I would agree that it would be best for him to step down. This is not because clean government is more important than democracy, but because corruption would make Chen unable to represent Taiwan's democracy.
However, guilt should not be decided on TV, in polls or based on the writings of academics.
The prudent and perceptive wait until legal investigations are complete before hurling charges, but former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (
John Wei (
Next, Jerry Fan (
While Fan's mantra may sound good, it fails to accommodate divergent views. If a country is to be strictly ruled by morality, then very people would pass the test of propriety, justice, honesty and honor. Poets and artists would face adversity, creative industries would be unable to develop and Taiwan's diverse array of opinions would be stifled.
Moreover, the principle of presumed innocence would be discarded and anything not deemed to fit the code of "propriety, justice, honesty and honor" would be criminal. Democratic progress would be turned back and Taiwan would revert back into a totalitarian country.
Replacing the rule of law with "moral" standards runs counter to historical trends. This is the second danger of the anti-Chen campaign: the abandonment of democratic values.
With the anti-Chen movement making toppling the president its first priority, violence may come in many forms. Cheng Tsun-chi (鄭村棋), a social activist and former Taipei City labor affairs bureau chief, has said that if Chen refuses to step down, he would launch a bloody revolution.
Yang Tu (楊渡), an editorial writer for the Chinese-language newspaper China Times, has a three-step plan to force Chen out.
The first step is inciting a popular movement to plunge Taiwan into chaos so that the people will storm the Presidential Office. Next, the Presidential Office would be forced to dispatch troops to put down the protest. Finally, with Taiwan on the brink of collapse, the US would miraculously be convinced to step in to force Chen out.
Yang says rebellion is the only way to success. Unable to convince his critics, he turns to anger and urges Taiwan onto an anti-democratic and violent path. This is the third danger of the movement: conspiring to use violence.
Some people say that overthrowing Chen is a revolutionary goal that supersedes democracy and the rule of law. The problem with that theory is that most revolutions throughout history have fought to move countries away from totalitarianism and toward democracy.
Going in the opposite direction would in fact be anti-revolutionary. By disregarding democracy and the rule of law, the anti-Chen campaign is by definition a counter-revolutionary movement.
I have visited the sit-in on Ketagalan Boulevard several times, where the more the emotional speakers talked about toppling Chen, the more they felt they were right. The more they spoke, the more frenzied their words became.
I urge these people to take a deep breath and consider a few questions. Regardless of whether Chen is guilty of corruption or not, shouldn't we wait for an answer from the courts before taking action? Isn't violating the principle of presumed innocence a regression from democracy?
And if the president is overthrown, could it be that authoritarianism would return, utterly negating 30 years of democratic achievements?
The ability of the anti-Chen camp to ignore these questions baffled me until I read an essay on the McGurk Effect, in which the brain tries to make sense of contradictory things.
Shouldn't those who want to depose Chen be more humble and question whether their views are biased? Are they hearing one thing, seeing another and thinking a third?
As renowned US science fiction author Robert Heinlein once said: "Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal."
Jason Liu is a professor in the department of chemical engineering at National Taiwan University of Science and Technology. Translated by Marc Langer
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS