Over the past week, an outpouring of criticism, ridicule and denunciation have inundated newspapers and social networking sites after Taiwanese singer Huang An (黃安), dubbed the “nemesis of pro-independence individuals,” returned to Taiwan from China for medical treatment after suffering a heart attack.
Many Taiwanese urged the government to deny Huang medical treatment, saying his ratting out of Taiwanese who support national independence to the Chinese authorities makes him too despicable to deserve Taiwanese healthcare.
Others criticized him for trumpeting his success in China and pledging his loyalty to China, but returning to Taiwan for medical treatment and to take advantage of the National Health Insurance (NHI) system.
Some netizens even “prayed for the disease,” wishing ill on Huang.
Such a public outcry is understandable, particularly when one considers a video by teenage K-pop star Chou Tzu-yu (周子瑜) giving a seemingly forced apology for holding a Republic of China flag on a South Korean TV show late last year.
The video, released on the eve of the Jan. 16 presidential and legislative elections, galvanized widespread fury and reignited Taiwanese nationalism. Some people said it played a decisive factor in the defeat of many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative candidates.
However, people seem to be getting caught up in a media frenzy and criticizing Huang without considering one fundamental fact: Under Taiwan’s Constitution, all citizens should be treated as equal, irrespective of sex, religion, race, class or party affiliation.
Article 22 of the Constitution also stipulates that the freedoms and rights of people that are not detrimental to social order or public welfare shall be guaranteed.
That means people can hate Huang and disagree with his political views and way of doing things, but he should not be deprived of freedom of speech and, most of all, his basic human right to healthcare simply because his ideas run against mainstream public opinion. Is it not the spirit of democracy?
If Huang is indeed a Taiwanese citizen and pays his NHI premiums then there is no reason why he should be ineligible for treatment on the NHI program. It is his guaranteed right.
A Facebook message posted on Tuesday by a nurse working at Cheng Hsin General Hospital in Taipei’s Beitou District (北投) — where Huang is being treated — shared a similar view.
The nurse, Huang Ching-yu (黃清裕), said that while he loathes Huang An, regardless of his personal characteristics or political affiliation, he is just a patient in the eyes of a professional medical practitioner.
“No matter who walks in the hospital, be it the president, a death-row inmate, a drug addict or a lunatic, he is just a patient and shall therefore receive all the treatment he needs,” Huang Ching-yu said.
Huang Ching-yu said the hospital’s emergency unit has been flooded with calls from people wanting to criticize its medical staff for treating Huang An.
“If you want the nation to close its doors to Huang An, of course you can do that, but not until you amend the law... As far as I am concerned, even a death-row inmate has the right to healthcare,” he said.
Amid long-running political wrangling between the pan-blue and pan-green camps, Taiwanese have been living in a polarized society where political parties are marred by sharp divisions.
It has contributed to the tendency of people to automatically stand on the same side as the party they support without giving the issues much thought or seeking more information before determining their position.
If Taiwanese intend to transform the nation into a more consolidated democracy, we need more independent, rational thinking, rather than blind conformity to party lines.
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 Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
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