In the middle of last month, former Tunisian president Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali was ousted in the “Jasmine Revolution.” This was followed by anti--government demonstrations in Egypt, with protesters demanding the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Yemen was next. It seems that the fire of political reform has been lit and is sweeping across the Islamic world from North Africa to the southern Arabian Peninsula.
People in these post--colonial states have had enough. Their anger has boiled over and they have taken to the streets demanding political reform and a change in their government. The anger that had previously been directed at the colonial powers is now being aimed at their own authoritarian rulers.
Late last month, Chinese tycoon Chen Guangbiao (陳光標) visited Taiwan and reportedly donated more than NT$500 million (US$17.3 million) to poor Taiwanese. Chen’s donations were like a slap in the face of the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who has pledged to boost the economy.
As chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), Ma inherited a party system from the Chiang (蔣) family. How many years has this system existed? There is also a very strong likelihood that Ma will be the party’s candidate in next year’s presidential election. Can this be true?
The Chinese translation of the influential German Jewish political theorist Hannah Arendt’s, The Promise of Politics, was published in December. In the book she asks if politics actually creates problems, if we could live without it and what would then happen?
This is certainly worth pondering. Without politics, would it finally be possible for people to have the freedom that they long for?
Arendt asks: “What is politics?” I think a simple answer would suffice: Politics is really all about “freedom.”
I use this specific word for a reason and I wonder what it means to ordinary Taiwanese or to our politicians.
Taiwan emerged from a dictatorship to become a free and democratic nation. The KMT has been in power for many years — years characterized by a lack of freedom and democracy. Despite the fact that we are now free and enjoy democracy, the power the KMT gained during the Martial Law era has yet to be truly deconstructed.
Taiwanese suffered strife and calamities during this period, but many seem to have forgotten this. The privileges still accorded military personnel, civil servants and school teachers are a direct product of the KMT’s “party-state system” ideology. This issue is still with us.
During its history, the KMT has been equally comfortable with an anti-communist and a pro-communist stance. At this point in time, it is collaborating with the communists.
This is being done in bad faith. It is the government going back on its promises and is tantamount to conning the public. All the KMT cares about is staying in power. In a way, it doesn’t really matter if it regards Taiwan as a geographical base, a battlefield or a colony. In the end, it all boils down to the same thing.
Advocates of change would do well to look into what Arendt says about political ideology in her book and think seriously about the implications. They should not just gloss over it.
Lazy thinking leads to impoverished ideas. And impoverished ideas cannot rouse the public to push for reform and progress.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS