A legitimate government
Why should any Taiwanese, including former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), be tried under the laws and Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), which were imposed upon us without our approval? The only legitimate government is one which has the consent of the people.
The ROC government under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) decades ago asked Taiwanese to join their fight against the Chinese communists and regain control of the “mainland.” Now the KMT has done an about-face and plans to surrender to the communists and make Taiwan part of China — taking the Taiwanese people along as hostages.
Taiwanese cannot be governed this way nor should they be governed by discriminatory rules. They need a functional constitution approved by themselves.
The Democratic Progressive Party administration intended to rewrite the ROC Constitution because many rules are not applicable to Taiwan’s situation, but they were warned by the US executive branch against changing the “status quo.”
Most Taiwanese don’t want to be governed by the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the US Military Government or the repressive KMT.
Nor do Taiwanese want to live in a limbo in which their rights are not safeguarded because there is no de jure nation to protect their rights in international organizations.
The US government has ignored the rights of Taiwanese for more than half a century, leaving them unrepresented and stateless.
As the KMT is not sincere about change, in order for Taiwan to function normally and according to fair rules, a civil government must replace the one imposed upon Taiwan since the issuance of General Order No. 1 by General Douglas MacArthur on Sept. 2, 1945.
This order must be terminated, giving the Taiwanese the freedom to form their own government and draft their own constitution. A legislative election would preferably be supervised by a qualified international body.
ALISON HSIEH
Athens, Greece
Stop the falling birth rate
A report by the Washington-based Population Reference Bureau found that Taiwan has the world’s lowest birth rate (“Report says birth rate in Taiwan is lowest in world,” Sept. 22, page 2). This unfolding crisis has been of growing concern to officials for quite some time. The fertility rate in Taiwan hasn’t even been at the replacement level (2.1) since 1983.
The best “solution” the government has been able to come up with so far is offering a nominal subsidy to entice married couples to have more children. There seem to be few takers.
In the past two years alone, the fertility rate has dropped from 1.2 children per woman to one child per woman, with no signs of a slowdown in the decline. If anything, the drop is accelerating.
The reasons for Taiwan’s rapidly falling birth rate are manifold: governmental family planning policies over the past 50 years, societal values that emphasize higher education and careers for women over marrying and having children, the economic considerations of child-rearing, and the widespread acceptance and use of selective abortion as a means of birth control. Not coincidentally, abortion was legalized in 1984, the same year Taiwan’s birth rate fell below the replacement level.
The low birth rate has led to numerous other problems, including a school crisis resulting from too few new students, a serious sex-ratio imbalance, a labor shortage and growing national debt (since there are fewer workers to support increasing government expenditures).
Unfortunately, years of listening to and accepting the advice of population control “experts” on how to achieve “sustainable” development has backfired.
If we fail to teach younger generations that children and families are the building blocks of society and a valuable asset necessary for a nation’s long-term growth and stability, the Taiwanese risk becoming an “endangered species” (no disrespect intended).
The government simply doesn’t have the money to bribe couples into having children. No matter how much we hate to admit it, there are many problems that money just can’t solve.
WAYNE T. SCHAMS
Pingtung
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS