A Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator has proposed a bill that seeks to extend a degree of legal responsibility for the 228 Incident and the White Terror to the spouse, direct descendants and other relatives of suspects.
The proposal is ridiculous, both in political terms and for the fact that it would constitute bad law.
The proposal seems to want to mobilize support from the most steadfast supporters of the pan-green camp.
Using historical atrocities to strengthen the pro-Taiwan vote has worked before, and rightly so, because the pan-blue camp has never offered genuine contrition for the pillaging and abuses its political forefathers committed against Taiwanese people.
With this obnoxious and juridically ignorant suggestion, however, the DPP seems to be either running out of viable strategies or else the ability to keep its small minority of feral members in line -- all at the worst possible time.
Some Taiwanese regard the 228 Incident as a symbol of ongoing injustice and many -- for very good reason -- bear a grudge against the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), whose soldiers and agencies have killed so many innocent people and tormented so many others.
The problem is that almost all of the identifiable perpetrators have died of old age. What should be pursued and discussed now is historical and institutional responsibility, not launching some flaccid attack on relatives for events of which the great majority are either ignorant or cannot recall.
DPP Legislator Wang Sing-nan (
This is disingenuous. The law already provides for witnesses to be called to testify if they have first-hand knowledge of a crime.
Forcing relatives of the accused to act as proxy for the accused would be unprecedented. This would not only hurt the nation's reputation but also its human rights environment.
The era of deifying Chiang Kai-shek (
However, to hunt down the families of anyone accused only creates another injustice. Truth and justice is, we can only hope, the common goal of the nation, but over-emphasizing the incident or demeaning the victims of KMT abuses by drawing up hare-brained legislation to increase a party's electoral chances is wholly inappropriate.
Politically, the DPP, by not pulling this bill and disciplining Wang for his strategic ineptitude, has given the KMT a big boost, allowing KMT hardliners to prey on the vicious stereotype of independence advocates as extremists and autocrats-in-waiting.
Wang, for his part, seems to be mostly interested in preaching to the converted to beef up the legislator-at-large vote. But the potential damage that this kind of dumb, gratuitously confrontational politicking can wreak on DPP candidates in marginal seats cannot be underestimated. Except, perhaps, by clueless DPP strategists.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS