The US Communist Control Act is a federal law that was signed by then-US president Dwight Eisenhower on Aug. 24, 1954.
The act outlaws the Communist Party of the USA and organizations that support the party or communist ideology. It also defines what evidence juries should consider in determining participation in the activities, planning, actions, objectives or purposes of such organizations.
The act dates from a time when the US was chief among the “first world” camp of democratic nations and was applying a strategy of containment to the “second world” camp of communist countries.
On the domestic front, the US adopted the Communist Control Act to suppress communism and safeguard national security. The US is without doubt a democracy, but, in the interests of national security, it took firm measures to oppose communism.
Last year some Taiwanese used the National Development Council’s public policy participation Web site to submit a proposal to add to the Criminal Code a clause banning the display of China’s national flag, known as the five-star red flag.
The Ministry of Justice issued an official response to the proposal, rejecting it on the grounds that it would be incompatible with the Constitution’s purpose of safeguarding citizens’ freedom of expression.
This decision suggests that the ministry is oblivious to the critical reality that Communist China’s bayonets are closing in on Taiwan.
Surely the most urgent thing now for free Taiwan is for the nation’s leaders to demonstrate a firm national will. However, the ministry’s response has been taken by those people who like to display the five-star red flag as an act of surrender and it makes them all the more confident to go on flying the flag.
For instance, someone had the strange idea of decorating Mofan Street in Jinmen County’s Jincheng Township (金城) by hanging Republic of China “white sun” flags on one side of the street and People’s Republic of China “five star” flags on the other.
Local residents have even been boasting about this move and calling it a marvelous idea.
They have said it encourages more visitors to “check in” and that media reports are bringing in more tourists.
This absurdity shows their inability to distinguish friend from foe, and it is likely to set off a butterfly effect that leads to similar things happening in other places.
Considering the major implications that this trend could have for public and military morale, as well as national security, how could the Ministry of Justice issue such a hasty response that saps Taiwan’s national will?
A national flag is a symbol that declares a nation’s sovereignty and marks the extent of its territory. Displaying the five-star red flag, which is the flag of an enemy country, is not a matter of words, but an action, putting it beyond the bounds of freedom of speech.
Such actions do fall within the bounds of what is permitted under the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), but what has really been going on for a long time is the occupation of our streets by violent “red” groups who stir up trouble as they attempt to use our democratic society’s soft spots to subvert Taiwan.
This menace is becoming a plague on the nation, so how can the government bury its head in the sand and fail to respond by promoting legislation that reflects this reality?
French revolutionary Manon Roland is said to have cried out as she was taken to the guillotine: “O Liberty, how many crimes are committed in thy name!”
Is democracy really so impregnable that it needs no defenses?
On Dec. 18, US President Donald Trump presented his first National Security Strategy report to the US Congress. The report contains harsh criticism of China, which it identifies as the main threat to the US, as it seeks to challenge its leading economic position, and to erode US security and prosperity.
If even a superpower like the US is so cautious and vigilant about China’s globally expansionist totalitarianism, what about Taiwan?
Our media are full of defeatist opinions that sound like surrender in the face of intimidation.
What will happen if the ministry’s mindset remains confined to the surface appearance of freedom of expression, without the foresight to see the harm that abuse of that freedom can do to Taiwan? Does the prospect of becoming an accomplice to China’s “united front” strategy really not worry the ministry?
Chu Meng-hsiang is an artist and counselor of the Lee Teng-hui Association for Democracy.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath