Taiwan’s democratization is the result of a long-term struggle and social movements. All sorts of democratic developments — be they elections, removal of the ban on political parties and newspapers, the re-election of the National Assembly and direct presidential elections — were all fought for by the public.
The democratic achievements that Taiwan enjoys today were possible only because countless people in previous generations brought protests to the streets, shed sweat and even blood. The momentum of democracy was completely driven by the public; not one bit came about through the magnanimity of the party-state and the dictatorship.
During the Martial Law era, any form of protest or social movement was met with the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) accusations of their being communist spy activities, propaganda for Taiwanese independence, conspiracies, subversion or anything considered a threat to national security. Those who took part in such movements or protests were deemed, without exception, to be insurgents threatening social stability.
Even after martial law was lifted, when a group of academics, led by former Academia Sinica member Lee Chen-yuan (李鎮源), formed the Action 100 Alliance to promote the annulment of Article 100 of the Criminal Code through peaceful and nonviolent protests on the street, they were depicted in the media as rioters.
However, the growth of the Internet and transparency of information has made it difficult for some media outlets to interpret facts as they see fit. The use of the term “riots” has become less credible. So a new word was selected to replace the old terminology — populists.
The pan-blue media and politicians no longer seem able to make a comment without using this word. What they want to imply is that the public is a group of rioters who lack the ability to debate, who make decisions and blindly follow others based on emotional impulses instead of calm cool reasoning. They attribute all of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) failures to the new scapegoat, the populists.
Although their use of terminology to counteract social movements has improved with time, what remains is the KMT elite’s mentality of superiority and entitlement. As for the real causes of the problems in this nation, they usually just stick their heads into the sand like ostriches.
However, by reviewing the past some interesting occurrences can be seen. After the pan-blue camp lost the 2000 presidential election, groups of people illegally gathered and surrounded the KMT’s headquarters and the presidential residence. In 2004, despite the coalition between former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), the pan-blue camp lost the presidential race again, after which pan-blue supporters illegally protested on Ketagalan Boulevard for 21 days, even burning cars, throwing stones, attacking the police, hitting civilians, throwing Molotov cocktails and the like. If that was not populism, or rioting, I do not know what is.
In 2006, before former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was even put on trial and found guilty of corruption, a group of people in red shirts illegally rallied on Ketagalan Boulevard and at Taipei Railway Station to try to pressure the judicial system through extra-legal means. If this was not populism, what is?
The terminology has gone from “rioters” to “populists,” but it seems the real problem that Taiwan’s democracy suffers from is the KMT’s habitual use of language to stigmatize those who disagree with it.
Steve Wang is an assistant professor in the Institute of European Studies at Nanhua University.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry