German political scientist Ernst Fraenkel, sometimes referred to as the father of pluralism, observed Nazi Germany for many years and, in 1941, proposed the theory of the dual state, based on his study.
Nazi Germany was a dual state because at times, to regulate the state, the Nazi regime emphasized law and stability in areas such as administrative injunction, court rulings and even legislative actions.
The focus was on upholding and consolidating the order of its capitalist economy. So, in a sense, Nazi Germany was a country based on the rule of law.
However, Nazi Germany also often went the other way. At many times, for political goals and intentions, the law was not viewed as being important and procedure was treated as a joke.
Policy measures that result from arbitrary decisions are acts of administrative dictatorship, even when they are disguised as legal. Under these circumstances, concepts like the rule of law, human rights and procedural justice become meaningless.
So, Nazi Germany was neither a pure dictatorship nor totalitarian state; it was a dual state.
If Taiwanese look at how President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has acted since he entered office, it is easy to draw comparisons between his actions and the concept of a dual state.
Taiwan is clearly not a pure dictatorship: Administration is not entirely arbitrary, courts are not totally without independence, there is a legislative opposition, there are both formal and concrete expressions of the rule of law, and democratic and human rights values are expressed from time to time.
However, whenever the China factor comes into the equation, Ma acts in a totally arbitrary manner, as can be seen from his actions when China’s former Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) visited the nation and more recently from the stubborn way he has handled the cross-strait service trade agreement.
The Ma administration has shown that it is easily provoked to anger and that many of its actions do not differ from the actions of authoritarian governments and dictatorships.
The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben said: “The arcanum of policy is not sovereignty but government, not the king but the minister, not the law but the police force.”
When Taiwanese look closer at the operations of Ma’s government, it is shockingly a perfect example of both Fraenkel’s idea of a dual state and Agamben’s theory mentioned above.
Franz Neumann of the Frankfurt School of social theory also wrote a well-known observation of Nazi Germany titled Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism.
In the book, Neumann stated his belief that a country under National Socialism is not a country or is, at least, moving toward chaos and lawlessness, in which the rights and dignity of people will be swallowed up. He claimed that such countries were planning to use their power to turn the entire world into a chaotic mess.
Neumann believed that the most appropriate name for countries with such a social system was “behemoth,” a beast with an unpredictable temper — at times gentle and violent the next, that slaughters people and is capable of wreaking limitless havoc in the world — as described in Jewish mythology.
This nation needs to break free of the shackles of the dual state.
It cannot become a target for the behemoth to trample. Taiwan does not need moral appeals or more manners and etiquette; the nation needs the determination and will to protect democracy and human rights.
Lin Chia-ho is an assistant professor at National Chengchi University’s College of Law.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95