So “2630” has been on an official hunger strike for at least a week. I’m referring, of course, to the political artist formerly known as Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), now known fondly by his detention center number.
Yes, the former president has gone from commander-in-chief to complainer-in-clinker. And following the lead of fellow alleged bribee, Yunlin County Commissioner Su Chih-fen (蘇治芬), to protest the alleged political persecution against him, he ain’t eatin’ nothin’ — not even a tiny bite.
These days that’s no real sacrifice, of course, since most of the stuff on the shelves is China-made, melamine-soaked druck that will give you kidney stones bigger than the bubble-tea tapioca balls from the Shida night market.
These days your odds of good health are probably better on a hunger strike than off.
According to Reuters, Chen was finally hospitalized after 108 hours of non-eating. Said the wire service:
“A doctor on Wednesday determined he was fit enough to return to jail, prosecutor’s spokesman Chen Yun-nan [陳雲南] said.
“‘Our employees will encourage him to eat normally,’ he said.
“But the ex-president will continue to refuse food, his lawyer Cheng Wen-lung [鄭文龍] said, and he is not afraid of dying.”
If he’s really not afraid of dying, he ought to prove it by tucking into a pile of China-made cookies. Now that might convince me he’s innocent.
The snarky cable TV media pointed out how much more comfortable the hospital is then the Tucheng detention center, thus suggesting A-bian was overacting in order to score better digs, as the Filipinos say.
So what will the political fallout of Chen’s case be? That brings us to Vapid Rent-a-Quote of the week, hereby awarded to Tamkang University’s Alexander Huang (黃介正), for the following zinger in Reuters.
Huang allowed: “I have limited knowledge of whether the case would be a minus or a plus for the 2009 elections.”
Wow. Thanks, H-dog, that’s real helpful.
Meanwhile, nearly three weeks into their impassioned protest, the youthful “Wild Strawberries” are looking more and more like the “Wild Dingleberries.” Which is to say, for Ma’s government, they’re irritating, embarrassing and difficult to remove — but, in the larger scheme of things, inconsequential.
This is not to downplay the enthusiasm of these kids. Kudos to them for standing up ... er, sitting down, for Taiwan’s democracy, and putting Ma on notice that he needs to avoid the temptation of reverting to his authoritarian roots. The ’Berries are watching you, buddy.
But what’s with their demands? An apology from Ma and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) for police misconduct and revision of the Parade and Assembly Law?
First off, being prez means never having to say you’re sorry — unless the political benefits outweigh the costs, that is. Second, Ma’s government also favors a degree of revision of the parade law, which kind of takes the bite out of that one.
Again, I love these kids’ pro-liberty spirit, but they’re looking increasingly like that unmade James Dean sequel, “Rebels Without a Well-Thought-Through Cause.”
If you’re going to sit in the rain for a couple weeks — which sucks, by the way — why not put some real teeth on your demands? Like, pizza for every Taiwanese citizen on Wednesdays?
Seriously, though, how about following up on one foreign academic’s suggestion and demanding an independent, blue-ribbon panel of legal experts to investigate the recent Arrest-a-Thon of Democratic Progressive Party figures?
Even more significant, the ’Berries should demand the scrapping of the right to hold anyone without charge for up to four months. As it stands, Taiwanese prosecutors, given a local court’s approval, can jail incommunicado anyone they see fit — thus creating mini-Guantanamo Bays (minus water-boarding) across our good island.
We can call it the “Chabuduo Archipelago.” As in: “Well, they’re probably guilty, so let’s just lock them up until we can figure out exactly why, and maybe we can get the media and talkshow crackpots to find the evidence.”
Alarmingly retro for a 21st-century democracy, don’t you think? Most of my drinking buddies didn’t even know Taiwan’s prosecutors could do this — until the recent detention-fest.
Prosecutors say they need to put suspects in the slammer without charge to prevent them from colluding with other suspects. In other words, they don’t want their pesky targets running around actually talking to other people — as if they were members of a free country with civil liberties or something.
What this means is that old Johnny could be locked up just for writing this column — while prosecutors spend two months locating a translation of “dingleberries” to determine if my use thereof constitutes a criminal act.
But back to Chen. The former prez’s prison diet hasn’t stopped his yappin’. According to the rag now staining your fingers, Chen’s lawyer said Chen had asked about the stock market (“How much money did I lose this week?”), and criticized Ma’s plan to save the economy with vouchers.
Yes, in case you haven’t heard, our economy is contracting faster than a man’s privates after a December dip in the Tamsui. To reverse this alarming trend, we’re all going to get NT$3,600 in vouchers, hopefully by Jan. 19, to spend as we please — on Taiwan Beer, betel nuts, hardcore pornography, whatever.
If all goes to plan, this will give our sadsack economy the swift kick in the keister it so badly needs.
I was thinking of splurging on a new winter-sweater-slash-drool-absorber for the house canine Punkspleen. Unfortunately, my Green Island-wandering gal Cathy Pacific, otherwise known as Household Finances Dominatrix, has already spoken for my bit. Apparently there’s a new “Coach” bag out and her own NT$3,600 won’t cover it.
But what’s 2630 going to do with his vouchers? He’s not eating, so he won’t be able to spend it on Taike Doritos or melamine wafers. Maybe some decoration for his cell — a dark green throwrug, perhaps?
If he’s smart, he’ll donate his NT$3,600 to the Wild Strawberries. Sad to say, this may be his only hope of walking free before Lunar New Year.
Got something to tell Johnny? Go on, get it off your chest. Write to dearjohnny@taipeitimes.com, but be sure to put “Dear Johnny” in the subject line or he’ll mark your bouquets and brickbats as spam.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS