Hong Kong writer and critic Leung Man-tao (梁文道) last week published an article on the Hong Kong-based Stand News Web site, entitled “S.F. Express operates one country, two systems.”
Leung described how, after purchasing some books during a trip to Taiwan, he asked his hotel to help him send them to Hong Kong by courier.
However, upon returning home, Leung received an e-mail from the hotel informing him that “due to recent controls imposed by the Chinese authorities on the contents of articles and books, three of your books could not be delivered by the courier.”
The books were Out of China: How the Chinese Ended the Era of Western Domination by Robert Bickers, The Great Debate by Yuval Levin and one of the Intellectual History series by various authors.
The incident made Leung question whether China’s “one country, two systems” model has already taken hold in Taiwan.
This is what used to happen during the Martial Law era, when disputes arose over the prohibition of books by state censors. For the same to happen in today’s democratic Taiwan would require large-scale manipulation and control. There are several questions about this episode that require answers.
First, was it the Taiwanese subsidiary of China-based S.F. Express Co or some other party that took upon itself to act as the White Terror-era Taiwan Garrison Command and prohibit the books from being shipped to Hong Kong?
As the criteria used by the courier exactly matched the rules stipulated by the Chinese government, the incident amounts to the infiltration and surveillance of a commercial courier company’s operational systems on Taiwanese soil, and more than just an exercise in “thought control.”
This begs the question: Who is pulling the strings behind the scenes and how do they wield so much power that they were able to breach a private individual’s privacy and property rights?
In addition to throwing up a legal debate on whether there has been an infringement of consumers’ rights, this unthinkable incident also raises questions regarding freedom of the press, as it involves the shipping of books across borders.
Who exactly has taken it upon themselves to check which books can be shipped from Taiwan to Hong Kong?
Remember the handover of Hong Kong from the UK to China in 1997. The promise made by Beijing at the time that Hong Kong would enjoy 50 years without changes has without a doubt been broken, as people today see the editorial freedom of Hong Kong’s press compromised and booksellers kidnapped and taken to China to face trial — just two examples among a plethora of similar incidents.
In addition to the “one country, two systems” model having morphed into an authoritarian system, just as concerning is the Chinese speculative investment that has poured into Hong Kong — where it pushes up land and property prices — as well as the tsunami of spending by Chinese consumers that are creating a bubble economy. Today’s Hong Kong has lost its original vitality and been stripped of its soul.
The question is whether similar techniques are being used in some places in Taiwan and whether the public will be able to see through the inestimable losses that will come from allowing China to infiltrate Taiwan’s economy.
The economic bubble in Taiwan continues to be inflated by Chinese investment. One day — perhaps too late — people will awaken from their slumber and realize that Taiwan has been sleepwalking into “one country, two systems” authoritarianism, from which it will be extremely difficult to extricate itself.
The Leung incident demonstrates that “one country, two systems” is gradually morphing into “unification under one system.”
Fellow Taiwanese — especially book lovers — should carefully read Leung’s article and devour every word so as to fully understand the veracity of the watchword “Today Hong Kong, tomorrow Taiwan” — and that this nightmare vision is fast becoming a reality.
The “Communist bandits” really are knocking at the door.
Writing and books are the most foundational medium and most frequently used method for the transfer of information and ideas. Despite Taiwan’s democratization, today there is once again a malevolent force manipulating and censoring information behind the scenes.
The government should treat this incident with the seriousness it warrants and use all the means at its disposal to investigate and provide a clear explanation to both the Taiwanese public and the people of Hong Kong. In a democracy, people should expect nothing less.
Chang Hsun-ching is a writer.
Translated by Edward Jones
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS