Avoiding ‘Animal House’
In the classic comedy movie Animal House, the dean of the university famously lectured a disheveled and intellectually deficient student, saying that “fat, stupid and drunk” is no way to go through life.
In his letter, Tien C. Cheng (Letters, Aug. 6, page 8) expresses some of the thoughts that I have had regarding major events of the past couple of years. I found it curious that Taiwanese kept voting for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidates in the legislative election and then reinstalled the KMT in the presidency. How odd that so many people were willing to cede complete control of their future to a political party that persecuted them for decades.
Perhaps, not having lived in Taiwan, I’m simply out of touch with everyday Taiwanese folks. But then again, I don’t see large numbers of African-Americans voting for candidates openly affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan. Nor do I hear of European Jews voting for candidates with neo-Nazi tendencies.
What are the possible reasons for this consistently odd pattern of voting? Naivete … maybe Ma will revive the economy and bring me a pay raise? Greed … let’s make money and forget the rest? Apathy … no interest in politics, someone else will do the heavy lifting? Fear … don’t want to speak up for fear of 228 Incident-style retaliation by the KMT? Brainwashing … from consuming only pro-KMT media?
Since the presidential election, National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall has reverted to being named after a dictator who murdered so many Taiwanese. What kind of nation tolerates such a symbolic reversal of freedom?
Taiwanese can’t depend on resident foreigners or overseas Taiwanese to make their case for progress. Either the people who didn’t vote for the KMT need to convince those who did to reconsider next time or those who didn’t participate will need to take a stand against the KMT.
I’m not saying that the Taiwanese population resembles the dean’s description of that student in Animal House, but “naive, apathetic and brainwashed” is not the path that one should be choosing consistently.
CARL CHIANG
Richmond, California
A case for ‘warts and all’
The struggle dominating US congressional politics before this year’s summer recess pits those insisting on perfection against those who would compromise for something feasible — but not without blemishes. This ideological tussle is threatening to stall the implementation of universal healthcare.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his supporters aim to create a similar conflict — with a far more disruptive effect — by preaching red-herring political morality to the Taiwanese public.
For more than a year, and with relentless assistance from the pro-China media, Ma has been hammering away at the immorality of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his family’s financial impropriety. This has succeeded in driving a wedge in the pan-green camp that has more or less crippled the opposition.
The pro-China media’s ability to manufacture a moral pedestal for Ma and the KMT has played a significant role in this regard.
Along the way, Ma’s handling of his municipal special fund has been whitewashed. Though Ma was acquitted by a string of “creative” judges, one could not help note that Ma’s behavior would have little success passing muster in ethical terms.
Ma’s sleight of hand was nonetheless miniscule compared with the wealth the KMT siphoned off Taiwan.
A law was recently drafted to battle official corruption by making asset unaccountability punishable by lengthy jail terms. This was quickly watered down because it had the potential to ruin the political lives of the KMT hierarchy — if the law applied to political organizations, the first entity to go under would be the KMT.
They may be unable to overlook Chen’s deviation from the moral norms of society, yet Taiwanese these days find themselves — at least involuntarily — honoring dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), the individual most responsible for ruining or ending the lives of tens of thousands of innocent Taiwanese.
Moral apartheid of this magnitude inevitably takes a toll: first, a collective loss of self-confidence, accompanied by fragmentation of unity. The two then feed on each other.
The feebleness of the Democratic Progressive Party helped to ensure the opposition’s almost intractable downward spiral.
Many international observers didn’t quite hit the mark when they predicted that the Taiwanese independence movement would be an immediate casualty of Chen’s downfall.
Instead, public polls reflect a continuing rise in Taiwanese consciousness in the year since Ma took office. It is society’s self-doubt on Taiwan’s ability to curb Ma’s attempt to put Taiwan on the wrong track that underscores the political damage wrought by the Chen debacle.
Fortunately, a growing number of Taiwanese have begun to compartmentalize Chen’s doings, lest they cloud the common cause.
Perhaps they will conclude that the “warts and all” approach beats “dying with dignity” hands down.
HUANG JEI-HSUAN
Los Angeles, California
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
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
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
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
RSS