In remarks marking international Human Rights Day on Monday last week, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that it was important to earnestly put into practice the spirit of mutual respect and tolerance. However, Ma’s word was broken by members of his administration the very next day at a National Conference on Industrial Development held by the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
It was clear to everyone in attendance that the “common opinions” reached at the conference had been decided quite a long time ago. Although labor and environmentalist groups protested against the charade, Premier Sean Chen (陳冲) and Minister of Economic Affairs Shih Yen-shiang (施顏祥) paid them no heed and simply went on playing by the script.
Chen went so far as to say the protesters should respect other people’s right to speak. It would be fair to ask what kind of respect and tolerance the meeting’s organizers showed to those holding different opinions from their own.
Society is pluralistic by nature. Naturally there will be different opinions arising from different values, interests and ideologies. It is precisely for this reason that meetings and discussions need to be held. Those who take part in such meetings should be prepared to air their views frankly, but also listen patiently to other opinions.
This way, meetings can bring together the views of various groups and individuals in search of a consensus that may lead to solutions for social problems.
Leaving aside the views of the various participants in Tuesday’s meeting, the point is that if you hold a meeting and invite people to attend, then you should treat their opinions with respect and tolerance, and apply wisdom to arrive at common standpoints.
That is not what the meeting’s organizers did. Instead they just read through a list of predetermined conclusions. What is the point of holding a meeting like that? Who is it that really needs to show a bit more respect?
Genuine democracy should incorporate genuine respect and tolerance, and these phrases should be put into practice with sincerity, not just repeated like a mantra.
The sad thing is that, while those in government often talk about tolerance and respect, their way of operating is more often a matter of first deciding what the conclusions should be and then excluding any dissenting opinion. When there is a backlash, the authorities’ hired media hacks are set in motion to accuse dissenters of being impolite or irrational.
Last week’s conference is just the most recent example of this kind of behavior. Many other government-organized explanatory meetings, public hearings and discussions about proposed legislation and amendments tend to follow the same model.
A government that operates in this way could be called a closed-door government, and a democracy of this nature could be called a martial-law democracy, because it is not much different from the way things were done in the bad old days of martial law.
Hsu Shih-jung is a professor in the Department of Land Economics at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
With its passing of Hong Kong’s new National Security Law, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) continues to tighten its noose on Hong Kong. Gone is the broken 1997 promise that Hong Kong would have free, democratic elections by 2017. Gone also is any semblance that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) plays the long game. All the CCP had to do was hold the fort until 2047, when the “one country, two systems” framework would end and Hong Kong would rejoin the “motherland.” It would be a “demonstration-free” event. Instead, with the seemingly benevolent velvet glove off, the CCP has revealed its true iron
At the end of last month, Paraguayan Ambassador to Taiwan Marcial Bobadilla Guillen told a group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators that his president had decided to maintain diplomatic ties with Taiwan, despite pressure from the Chinese government and local businesses who would like to see a switch to Beijing. This followed the Paraguayan Senate earlier this year voting against a proposal to establish ties with China in exchange for medical supplies. This constituted a double rebuke of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) diplomatic agenda in a six-month span from Taiwan’s only diplomatic ally in South America. Last year, Tuvalu rejected an
US President Donald Trump on Thursday issued executive orders barring Americans from conducting business with WeChat owner Tencent Holdings and ByteDance, the Beijing-based owner of popular video-sharing app TikTok. The orders are to take effect 45 days after they were signed, which is Sept. 20. The orders accuse WeChat of helping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) review and remove content that it considers to be politically sensitive, and of using fabricated news to benefit itself. The White House has accused TikTok of collecting users’ information, location data and browsing histories, which could be used by the Chinese government, and pose
US President Donald Trump’s administration on Friday last week announced it would impose sanctions on the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, a vast paramilitary organization that is directly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and has been linked to human rights violations against Uighurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang. The sanctions follow US travel bans against other Xinjiang officials and the passage of the US Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which authorizes targeted sanctions against mainland Chinese and Hong Kong officials, in response to Beijing’s imposition of national security legislation on the territory. The sanctions against the corps would be implemented