As expected, the legislature has done the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) bidding and “corrected” the Referendum Act (公民投票法) so that it cannot be used to create a “Taiwanese” constitution, change the nation’s name or decide the nation’s future.
Complete, open and unlimited referendum rights are a fundamental component of a free society. Without comprehensive referendum rights, Taiwanese are not true masters, nor are they truly free: They are simply slaves of the DPP — and of external forces.
The result of the amendment to the Referendum Act tells us that every single one of the DPP legislators shares the guilt for depriving Taiwanese of comprehensive referendum rights and the right to become free. The DPP has become a political and economic comprador that stands between external forces and Taiwanese.
If the Referendum Act really is a procedural act, as the DPP has said, then it should not contain any exclusion clauses.
Supporting a comprehensive, open and unrestricted Referendum Act means supporting Taiwanese democracy, freedom and human rights.
It is not the same as supporting a referendum on Taiwanese independence, nor does it mean supporting Taiwanese independence — it simply means supporting the fundamental right of Taiwanese to choose.
If the DPP fears that Taiwanese would write their own constitution, there is ample opportunity for the party to oppose their pursuit of independence and autonomy.
Consider the creation of a Taiwanese constitution as an example. Every stage of the process — from the initialization, proposal, signature drive, acceptance and debate to a vote on a constitutional referendum — offers the DPP an opportunity to oppose the measure. There is no need to remove the public’s right to choose by amending the act.
Crippling the right of Taiwanese to choose in this way is even worse than opposing the creation of a new constitution or the right of Taiwanese to self-determination.
The “correction” to the Referendum Act shows that the DPP has closed the door on peaceful and non-violent self-determination within the framework of the established system.
From now on, the DPP will have to shoulder all responsibility for any violence or social unrest that results from Taiwanese pursuing a new constitution and a new national name.
The process that led to the “correction” to the act shows that every DPP legislator either silently accepts or loudly agrees to follow every order issued by the party’s leader, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
This makes one wonder whether the DPP is still a democratic party or if it has become just another party that will deceive and engage in “democratic” centralism to serve its agenda.
The “correction” to the act shows that there are no longer any factions within the DPP that are working toward democracy, freedom, self-determination or, of course, independence. The only factions left in the DPP are those that do what they are told and those that want to further their own interests.
I have supported the democracy movement, through the tangwai (黨外, outside the party) movement and then the DPP for the past 40 years, but today I must finally accept that the DPP is possessed by an evil demon.
It is no longer the DPP that I once knew.
Until an exorcist ousts this evil demon from the party, I can only say: “Bye bye, DPP.”
Lin Kien-tsu is a member of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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