In the wording of their verdict in the corruption trial of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), the three court judges wrote in the style of cranky old Chinese teachers. The tone of the verdict makes them look like tyrannical feudal officials who exercised undivided administrative, legislative and judicial powers in ancient times, rather than judges in a democratic era.
By quoting ancient sayings in the verdict, the judges unintentionally gave themselves and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) a slap in the face.
The verdict condemns Chen with the Chinese proverb: “As the grass bends before the wind, so do inferiors imitate their superiors” (風行草偃，上行下效). In reality, the saying better describes Ma’s new party-state system and authoritarianism. As for another quoted saying, “To be a leader is to be a master and a teacher” (作之君，作之師), this is also a reflection of Ma’s arrogant attitude to ordinary people in Taiwan.
The late writer Bo Yang (柏楊), who was persecuted by the previous Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime, once satirized the police for acting like the public’s master, parent and teacher. Ma’s style is arrogant and anti-democratic. He wants to be both a master and teacher, but he is by no means a caring parent. His patronizing comment to Aborigines that “I see you as people” and his cold and uncaring treatment of typhoon victims are ample evidence of his true character.
Ma’s administration has the characteristics of feudalistic rule, rather than the rule of law. Believing himself to be a kind leader, he decides for himself what benevolent policies are right for the people and what constitutes justice. His self-righteous attitude and arbitrary actions are reflected in the behavior of KMT bureaucrats, who struggle against their opponents in the style of “hating evils as deadly foes” (嫉惡如仇) and “expelling and exterminating every enemy” (趕盡殺絕).
During the old days of authoritarian rule by the KMT, the party used the judiciary as a tool to attack its critics and opposition forces. Former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen carried out reforms without availing themselves of this tool. Ma often proclaims the independence of the judiciary, but in his case it means “allowing” judicial officials, who have long been manipulated by the KMT, to refer to his views and implement his will.
As a tool in the hand of political forces, the judiciary makes its decisions not according to evidence or the letter of the law, but according to political demands. In order to put Chen behind bars, the KMT government went so far as to make the unlawful move of replacing the judges in charge of the case. The party’s proxy, Presiding Judge Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓), who anachronistically relied on centuries-old precedents to absolve Ma of accusations of corruption, applied entirely different standards in Chen’s case, listening only to the “proof” presented by the prosecution and quoting irrelevant ancient morals and philosophy in imposing a heavy sentence on the former president.
Neo-authoritarianism is based on Confucian ethics, so it is not surprising that Tsai should quote Confucius (孔子) in the verdict. Ma is determined to repress his opponents, and Tsai complied by imposing a severe sentence on Chen and quoting Confucian philosophy as grounds for the court’s decision. Ma takes pride in being the people’s master and teacher. He does not need to interfere in the judiciary, because bureaucrats and political hacks alike can figure out what he wants and act accordingly. Ma must be very pleased with their performance.
By scolding Chen with criticisms that are more applicable to Ma, Tsai has revealed for all to see the feudal and autocratic face of Ma’s authoritarian rule.
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG AND JULIAN CLEGG
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS