Images of anti-pension reform protesters resorting to violence to try to block lawmakers from entering the Legislative Yuan for a review of pension reform proposals have flooded newspapers and social media platforms since Wednesday.
The general rhetoric on the Internet is overwhelmingly on the side of the pro-reform camp, chiefly President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration, her Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the smaller New Power Party (NPP).
Netizens have created all sorts of memes to ridicule and vent their anger at the opponents of pension reform. In their eyes, protesters are greedy and self-interested retired civil servants, police officers and military veterans who only oppose the government’s reform effort because it may rob them of the luxurious lifestyles that they have become accustomed to.
Young Internet users also created a list of major differences between the anti-pension reform demonstrations and the 2014 Sunflower movement, which the opponents of the reform proposals have used to justify their belligerent protests and perhaps a potential storming of the legislature under the pretext of “civil disobedience.”
The Taipei District Court cited the concept of “civil disobedience” in its acquittal on March 31 of 22 Sunflower movement members indicted for breaking into the Legislative Yuan on the night of March 18, 2014.
The Internet list describes Sunflower members as a group of peaceful young people who occupied the main chamber of the legislature for more than 20 days, while deriding pension reform protesters as a bunch of violent old folks.
However, a small number of Taiwanese see things differently. They believe that anti-reform protesters are also entitled, if they so desire, to break into government compounds under the banner of “civil disobedience” to make their voices heard.
After all, they are protesting against what they see as an illegal or unjust action of major proportion by the government.
In the eyes of retired civil servants, the government’s promises of financial stability and better retirement benefits have prompted them to make certain investments or purchases that they would probably have avoided if they had foreseen the possibility of drastic reforms.
The Tsai administration and most Taiwanese clearly believe that pension reform is the right thing to do and is for the greater good of the nation, so they tend to dismiss the anti-pension reform protests as self-interested, hence unworthy of the lofty title of “civil disobedience.”
However, similar sentiments surrounded the controversial cross-strait service trade agreement signed in 2013, which triggered the Sunflower movement. In the minds of then-president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his supporters, the trade pact was akin to a cure-all for the nation’s economic woes.
That is why Ma remains upset about the Sunflower movement and to this day views its occupation as an illegal activity.
Who gets to decide what cause justifies engaging in “civil disobedience,” and what cause does not?
It would be dangerous if the Tsai administration were perceived to be applying a double standard in its treatment of people protesting different issues, showing leniency only to groups that conform to the DPP’s ideology.
After all, the DPP has to appeal not only to voters who already share its ideas, but also to a sizable group of Taiwanese who identify as nonpartisan or swing voters. These independent voters will scrutinize the DPP government’s every decision to decide if it is worthy of their support.
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
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) at a ceremony on July 30 officially commissioned China’s BeiDou-3 satellite navigation system. The constellation of satellites, which is now fully operational, was completed six months ahead of schedule. Its deployment means that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is now in possession of an autonomous, global satellite navigation system to rival the US’ GPS, Russia’s Glonass and the EU’s Galileo. Although Chinese officials have repeatedly sought to reassure the world that BeiDou-3 is primarily a civilian and commercial platform, US and European military experts beg to differ. Teresa Hitchens, a senior research associate at the University of
There are few areas where Beijing, Taipei, and Washington find themselves in agreement these days, but one of them is that the situation in the Taiwan Strait is growing more dangerous. Such a shared assessment quickly breaks down, though, when the question turns to identifying sources of rising tensions. Several Chinese experts and officials I have consulted with recently have argued that Beijing’s increasingly belligerent behavior in the Taiwan Strait is driven mostly by fear. According to this narrative, Beijing is worried that unless it puts a brake on Taiwan’s move away from the mainland, Taiwan could be “lost” forever. They
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), who died on Thursday last week, coined the phrase “new Taiwanese” and used it in some of his public speeches. The concept of “new Taiwanese” was an important link in the chain of his political thought. Lee proposed the term in August 1998 on the eve of the anniversary of the end of the Pacific War. His intention was to consolidate a common understanding around the idea of “new Taiwanese,” and to embody the Taiwanese spirit of never giving up and not fearing hardship, and to create bright prospects for generations to come. However, after