Sat, Apr 29, 2017 - Page 8 News List

Reform protest ‘civil disobedience’?

By ChangKuo-tsai 張國財

In the three years since the Sunflower movement flew the civil disobedience banner in 2014, Taipei has experienced a series of protests and demonstrations. On Wednesday last week, the draft pension reform bill was discussed in the legislature’s Economics Committee while anti-reform groups gathered in a massive protest outside the Legislative Yuan.

The protesters also claimed the civil disobedience banner, saying that if it was alright for the Sunflower movement, then why should it not be OK for them, too?

However, is a group of demonstrating citizens calling for “disobedience” sufficient to dub the protest an act of civil disobedience? Are the reform protests and the Sunflower movement even comparable?

Civil disobedience requires a few special characteristics: concern for the public interest based on social conscience and justice, which is based on an intentional violation of the law; an extraordinary action that commands the acceptance of a majority of the public, that does not involve violent protest and rioting; holding to principles of fairness and justice, and being an ethical, open, non-violent and peaceful protest aimed at urging the government to change unjust policies or actions.

This demonstrates that civil disobedience is not simply a matter of citizens being disobedient. Furthermore, the Sunflower movement and the reform protesters are different both in substance and action.

One difference is the attempt to persuade people with reason or force. The reform protesters attacked legislators, county commissioners and city mayors, surrounding, pushing, beating and pouring water on them. They also broke a window on a media van and threw smoke bombs outside the Presidential Office.

Such behavior turns the concept of non-violent and peaceful civil disobedience on its head. This attempt to use force to persuade the government stands in stark contrast to the Sunflower movement’s peaceful, non-violent attempt to persuade the government using reason.

The second difference is public interest versus vested interest. The Sunflower movement took action to block the opaque cross-strait service trade agreement and in doing so, displayed social conscience and a concern for the public interest that reached far beyond their own interest.

The reform protesters, on the other hand, are working to protect their own vested interests rather than the interests of the public, and they are trying to maintain an unjust system rather than working for fairness and justice. One wonders whether they are really working for harmony and forgiveness between generations or if they are just trying to exploit the younger generation.

The third difference between the two movements is the issue of popular will versus subversion of the will of the people. The political parties and civic groups that participated in the rally against the cross-strait service trade agreement on March 30, 2014, were marginalized at the time.

The vast majority of the approximately 500,000 people who participated in the rally were young and had never been to a demonstration before; a far cry from the middle-aged, predominantly male pan-green camp demonstrators who usually attend anti-government rallies.

Most of the March 30 demonstrators came by MRT rather than being bused in; one recognized the faces of hardly any of the marchers.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top