On Saturday last week, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) criticized Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Deputy Secretary-General Lin Fei-fan (林飛帆), saying that Lin, once a role model for youth, is now “throwing himself into the lap of somebody.” Ko then referred to the “Han vilification industry,” a term Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) coined to suggest there was a DPP-run cyberarmy criticizing Han online. Does Ko not reflect on his own actions?
Reports indicate that Ko keeps his own cyberarmy, and that people at the city government direct opinion on Facebook and in channels on the nation’s most popular online bulletin board, Professional Technology Temple (PTT).
When faced with questions about his own efforts, Ko typically responds with jokes or nonsensical answers, such as “‘netizens’ are different from ‘cyberarmy,’” “these PTT users are volunteer online soldiers” and “we have researched the online world — no one can direct opinion, nobody is that smart.”
When Ko said Lin was “throwing himself into the lap of the DPP,” he seems to have implied that joining the DPP gave a negative impression of Lin and shattered his former image as a “role model for young people.”
What is wrong with joining the DPP? Does Ko think the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), whose name was lifted from another party, is the only way for Lin to remain a role model?
It is clear that the TPP is Ko’s one-man party. What he says and does represent the TPP’s standards, and the way he behaves is off-putting.
Recently, Ko was criticized for calling Presidential Office Secretary-General Chen Chu (陳菊) “a fatter version of Han.” Not only did he refuse to apologize, he even defended the comment, saying that “fat” and “thin” are only adjectives.
Whether “fat” and “thin” are adjectives or not is beside the point. Ko’s comment violates the Sexual Harassment Prevention Act (性騷擾防治法). Breaching the law publicly and then trying to wiggle out of it — is that the standard Ko’s TPP aspires to?
Another issue is the scrapped extradition bill in Hong Kong. Not only is Ko unwilling to publicly support the protest movement there, he has said that “when the enemy has made a mistake, there is no need to continue kicking them.” He even made an absurd remark, saying that “it all happened because too many Hong Kongers travel to Taiwan and have become contaminated by Taiwanese.”
Ko keeps finding excuses for the Hong Kong government. After the police fired at protesters at close range, he said: “If these clashes continue, it will be hard to avoid an accidental shooting.”
He also said that “self-immolation is trending among Tibetan lamas, and it has caused the Chinese government a great deal of trouble.”
The TPP seems to stand together with a totalitarian government, mocking and ridiculing Hong Kongers and Tibetans pursuing freedom and democracy. However, this is not surprising. Ko’s proposal for cross-strait relations is that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family,” and that embracing China is the most rational position.
Today, as China continues its verbal attacks and military intimidation against Taiwan, the DPP is clearly the only political party capable of safeguarding the nation.
Lin, one of the leaders of the Sunflower movement, has long held a consistent stance on defending Taiwan’s democracy and sovereignty, respecting diversity, and embracing liberty. What is wrong with him joining the DPP?
Is the only way for Lin to be a role model for young Taiwanese to join the “fake” TPP, which supports the idea that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family,” discriminates against women and stands with authoritarian China?
Someone said that “Ko is a liar, and the TPP is a fraudulent organization comprised of liars.” When Ko laments a former student movement leader that stands with the ruling party instead of joining the TPP, he should probably look closer at the values of his own party, as well its politicians.
Chamberlain Lee is a think tank researcher and a political worker.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS