Two recent incidents point to continuing issues that Taiwan faces as it progresses both in developing its national identity and furthering its democracy. These particular issues also raise questions, namely: Who are Taiwan’s national heroes? And how should they be defined?
The first incident took place when Free Taiwan Party Chairman Tsay Ting-kuei (蔡丁貴) said that instead of paying a fine, he was willing to serve at least part of a prison sentence for removing a statue of Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙) from Tainan’s Tang Te-chang Memorial Park in 2014.
Tsay was clear that he was aware that his act was one of civil disobedience and upon his conviction, he was willing to pay the price.
However he also wanted it understood that he did it for Taiwan and its identity.
By his actions, Tsay was raising a specific challenge, namely: What direct relationship, if any, does Sun have to the nation building of Taiwan and its democracy?
Sun, of course, is considered a founder of the Republic of China (ROC), but that was in China in 1912 and at a time when Taiwan was a part of the Japanese empire. Furthermore, as it is obvious that Tsay knows Sun’s pictures are found in all government buildings in Taiwan, he was raising a different question regarding the validity of Sun’s pictures: Should they remain in such places?
The second recent incident also involved statues. This incident was the administrative decision by officials at National Chengchi University to remove all statues of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) from the university’s premises. The origin of National Chengchi University dates back to 1927, again in China and not Taiwan. The university was created to train students for civil service in the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). When the KMT was driven from China in 1949, the university followed and was reopened in Taiwan in 1954.
Both these statue incidents address the unique historical challenges that Taiwan faces as it develops its identity and frees itself from what could be called a Stockholm syndrome mentality that still hangs over it from the White Terror and Martial Law eras, when Taiwan was controlled by the KMT’s one-party state.
In short, even though Sun and Chiang might be considered heroes in the pantheon of the KMT diaspora, they obviously are not such in the eyes of Taiwanese. Instead their statues bring back memories of the sufferings, death and horrors of the White Terror period.
If this is the case, who then are or should be Taiwan’s real heroes?
Finding heroes in the establishment of Taiwan’s democracy is a challenging matter. First, because it proved to be a long process with many contributors, and second, in the process a free media developed and has set the bar high.
Unlike media propaganda machines of a one-party state, a free media makes it difficult to hide any individual’s faults and mistakes over the years. All people — even heroes — have feet of clay, as the saying goes, and a free media rarely lets such things go unnoticed. Few people can remain on a pedestal for too long under these conditions.
Who then might be the actual heroes of Taiwan’s democracy? The list of contenders swells. Certainly there were many martyrs who died as a result of the 228 Incident and the White Terror era. The names of some, but not all, are found at the 228 Memorial. Then there is Green Island (綠島), which served as the chief political prison of the times. Bo Yang (柏楊) served nearly 10 years there for a political cartoon, but he was only one of innumerable others. Many names, although not all, are engraved on a memorial wall there.
Taiwan has had high-profile deaths, like Tang Te-chang (湯德章) who was executed during the 228 Incident and who the Tainan park was named for; Chen Wen-cheng (陳文成), who was an associate professor from Carnegie Mellon University who was found dead, apparently murdered, at National Taiwan University in 1981; and democracy pioneer Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕), aka Nylon Deng. These names stand out because death is permanent, but there are so many others who even if they did not die, still made sacrifices.
After the Kaohsiung Incident, Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) went to jail and he also lost family members.
Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊), former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) and so many others also went to jail.
One need not even have gone to prison to serve Taiwan’s cause. Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) contributed much to move the cause of democracy forward from his office when he required that the president be elected by the people.
Heroes come in all shapes and sizes and are found in each generation, as democracy needs continuous step-by-step development. This presents other challenges. A part of this continuous process was when Lee was president and numerous professors, students and others participated in the Wild Lily Student Movement. That movement helped Lee bring about the removal of the formerly permanent members of the Legislative Yuan.
The Sunflower movement also made its contribution. It forestalled the Cross Strait Service Trade Agreement and guaranteed that it would be properly reviewed item-by-item in the legislature. That helped prevent Taiwan from becoming too dependent on China.
When one looks back over the years, with all the protests and participants, it becomes obvious that Taiwan’s democracy has no one cause and no one contributor; instead it is the product of many people. For this reason, there are no one or two people who should stand on a pedestal like Sun or Chiang.
Taiwanese instead can ask what are the ideals of their democracy and who represents these ideals most? Each person can ask what he or she has done to move forward the cause of Taiwanese democracy. Each age must find its own way to contribute.
Yes, Taiwan has many unsung heroes and there is a refreshing directness in this reality. Its democracy has clearly been a joint effort.
Time eventually becomes the ultimate test of a hero and not fleeting popularity. Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) received the highest amount of votes when he was first elected president, but this did not prevent him from being called a bumbler with a low approval rating when he left office eight years later.
Democracy remains an ongoing process that calls for new heroes in each age where each must contribute in his own way from the president on down to the lowest citizen.
So too, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) must now ask what legacy she will leave when her term ends. What has she done to move the nation forward in her years as president? Only in this way can she make her contribution to the list of heroes.
Jerome Keating is a commentator in Taipei.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS