Facts and razzamatazz
The owners of a newspaper are free to voice their opinions in the form of an editorial framing their interpretation of the events of the day.
Readers may agree or disagree with this editorial line, but what all readers would expect from a newspaper is an unswerving adherence to the facts, that is, finding out the truth of a particular matter, while refusing column inches to any statements that contradict facts.
It is therefore regrettable that you continued to give column inches last week to Lu I-ming’s (呂一銘) dubious claim that “The [World] Games ... made Taiwan a focus of worldwide attention” and that as there was “substantial coverage by international media ... the Games brought international recognition for Taiwan” (“Kaohsiung showed the nation’s true face,” July 28, page 8).
As I stated earlier (Letters, July 27, page 8), where are the facts to support this claim? Where are the figures for worldwide TV audiences? TV contracts? Countries in which the Games were televised?
What about newspapers? In the US, there was a minor article on Kaohsiung’s new stadium in the Architecture Review section of the New York Times on July 15. The word “Taiwan” rather than “ROC” or “Chinese Taipei” was used — once. In the UK, there was no mention of the Games in either the Telegraph or the Times (the two most popular broadsheets). In Germany, Der Spiegel contained not one mention of the Games, while in France, Le Monde had nothing to say whatsoever.
So, are Democratic Progressive Party supporters willing to lie both to themselves and to the people of Taiwan? (Because, let’s face it, the World Games was nothing more than a bit of razzamatazz for the Taiwanese nationalist movement.)
Apparently they are. Consider the response to my letter by one Charles Hong: “But Fagan should accept the fact that the World Games raised Taiwan’s international profile” (Letters, July 30, page 8).
To which I can only reply: Where are the facts that support this contention? Are they to be found in my dog-eared copy of Nineteen Eighty-Four, perhaps?
It is high time that the people of Taiwan recognize the fact that their country is known as “Taiwan” throughout the world — regardless of Beijing’s newspeak efforts — because of Taiwan’s history of trade.
If members of Taiwan’s political class and their supporters are willing to tell such barefaced lies to the public — and lies that are easily shown to be such — then what else are they capable of?
The only thing that can “raise Taiwan’s international profile” is continuing and expanding international trade. It is of vital importance to civilized life on this island that Taiwanese fight to free international trade to and from Taiwan from both the manipulation of political forces in Beijing and Taipei.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
RSS