Taiwan in Time: Nov. 14 to Nov. 20
On the morning of Nov. 19, 1977, an elderly couple arrived at Jhongli Elementary School (中壢國小) to cast their votes for Taoyuan county commissioner.
The election supervisor, Fanchiang Hsin-lin (范姜新林) reportedly stepped in and voided their votes for Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良), a Taoyuan native and former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politician who had published two books criticizing his party earlier that year, and ran for the position despite the KMT already nominating a candidate. He had been expelled from the party in the previous month.
Photo: Chang Fu-chong
There had long been speculation that the KMT was interfering with past elections to prevent dangwai (黨外, outside the party) politicians from winning. Just two years previously, they allegedly foiled outspoken KMT critic Kuo Yu-hsin’s (郭雨新) bid for a legislative seat by simply discarding ballots for him in the voided pile. After this was discovered by citizens at an Yilan polling station, about 20,000 people took to the streets and surrounded the county government office.
Fanchiang explained to the media that the couple went to the same voting booth and kept talking to each other, which is against the rules. He added that they used their personal seals instead of the stamp the polling station provided. Whether that was the case, to many disgruntled citizens, it simply added fuel to the fire.
After hearing that their vote was voided, the two returned to the polling station to ask for a new ballot, but Fanchiang refused. An argument broke out, and the couple were taken to Jhongli police station.
Photo: Li Jung-ping, Taipei Times
Word spread quickly, and soon hundreds of people gathered outside of the school and clashed with the police. After toppling a number of police cars, some stormed the police station and started destroying items inside. The police retaliated with tear gas, but this did not stop the mob from setting cars on fire. Finally, they ended up burning down the entire station.
The police allegedly fired at the crowd at one point, resulting in two civilian deaths.
“Because of what happened in Jhongli, election staff became extra careful and properly announced and displayed each ballot during the counting process,” Hu Huei-ling (胡慧玲) writes in the book, One Hundred Years of Pursuit (百年追求). Hsu won by a large margin.
POLITICAL WATERSHED
Later known as the Jhongli Incident (中壢事件), it was the first large-scale civil disturbance since the 228 Incident 30 years previously. Political science professor Lien Pei-te (連培德) writes that it was a “watershed in the liberalization movement” as it “exposed the KMT to internal and international demands for political liberalization and the inevitability of political change.”
“It also provided a blueprint of action to subsequent and larger-scale movement activities such as the [Kaohsiung Incident],” Lien adds.
Thomas Gold writes in his book State and Society in the Taiwan Miracle that the incident was “extraordinary,” in a “newly industrializing society noted for its strict authoritarianism and politically apathetic populace, a segment of the people had resorted to such an extreme and risky act to vent its frustration.”
Gold added that Taiwan had seen a relatively long period without any social or political upheaval.
Chan Chia-wen (詹嘉雯) explores the incident as a defining moment in Taiwanese history in the study The Jhongli Incident and the Transformation of Taiwan’s Politics (中壢事件與台灣政治轉型).
First of all, the dangwai became increasingly organized as they gained more clout through the election, even though parties outside of the KMT were still banned.
“Before 1977, the opposition often fought their battles individually, trying to exert pressure on the KMT by participating in local elections,” Chan writes.
But soon after the incident, the Taiwan dangwai Personages Election Assistance Group (台灣黨外人士助選團) was formed, putting together an international press conference in late 1978.
“The incident reflected the power of the people, and many intellectuals felt less fear about participating in politics or the dangwai. As a result, many of them became new recruits for the dangwai,” Chan writes.
A year later, other dangwai politicians such as Annette Lu (呂秀蓮), who would later become vice president, followed Hsu’s example and started openly publishing books critical of the KMT for their campaigns.
The fact that the incident did not turn into another 228 was also encouraging. Even though two people died in the immediate clashes, Hu writes that then-premier Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) forbade the army from interfering and refrained from violent suppression or retaliation. Instead, Chiang beefed up his riot police force to prepare for further incidents.
Of course, it would not be all smooth for the dangwai, as is evident in suspension of central elections in late 1978 and the Kaohsiung Incident of 1979, where a pro-democracy rally turned violent and led to the mass arrests of dangwai members. But to many, the Jhongli Incident was a new beginning.
Taiwan in Time, a column about Taiwan’s history that is published every Sunday, spotlights important or interesting events around the nation that have anniversaries this week.
Cheng Ching-hsiang (鄭青祥) turned a small triangle of concrete jammed between two old shops into a cool little bar called 9dimension. In front of the shop, a steampunk-like structure was welded by himself to serve as a booth where he prepares cocktails. “Yancheng used to be just old people,” he says, “but now young people are coming and creating the New Yancheng.” Around the corner, Yu Hsiu-jao (饒毓琇), opened Tiny Cafe. True to its name, it is the size of a cupboard and serves cold-brewed coffee. “Small shops are so special and have personality,” she says, “people come to Yancheng to find such treasures.” She
The low voter turnout for the referendum on Aug. 23 shows that many Taiwanese are apathetic about nuclear energy, but there are long-term energy stakes involved that the public needs to grasp Taiwan faces an energy trilemma: soaring AI-driven demand, pressure to cut carbon and reliance on fragile fuel imports. But the nuclear referendum on Aug. 23 showed how little this registered with voters, many of whom neither see the long game nor grasp the stakes. Volunteer referendum worker Vivian Chen (陳薇安) put it bluntly: “I’ve seen many people asking what they’re voting for when they arrive to vote. They cast their vote without even doing any research.” Imagine Taiwanese voters invited to a poker table. The bet looked simple — yes or no — yet most never showed. More than two-thirds of those
In the run-up to the referendum on re-opening Pingtung County’s Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant last month, the media inundated us with explainers. A favorite factoid of the international media, endlessly recycled, was that Taiwan has no energy reserves for a blockade, thus necessitating re-opening the nuclear plants. As presented by the Chinese-language CommonWealth Magazine, it runs: “According to the US Department of Commerce International Trade Administration, 97.73 percent of Taiwan’s energy is imported, and estimates are that Taiwan has only 11 days of reserves available in the event of a blockade.” This factoid is not an outright lie — that
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu’s (洪秀柱) attendance at the Chinese Communist Party’s (CPP) “Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War” parade in Beijing is infuriating, embarrassing and insulting to nearly everyone in Taiwan, and Taiwan’s friends and allies. She is also ripping off bandages and pouring salt into old wounds. In the process she managed to tie both the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) into uncomfortable knots. The KMT continues to honor their heroic fighters, who defended China against the invading Japanese Empire, which inflicted unimaginable horrors on the
RSS