Feb. 27 to March 5
“Today, the family of the victims will listen with their own ears as I, as a public servant of the country, accept the responsibilities of the government’s past mistakes and offer my deepest apologies.”
These words were part of the speech by then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) on Feb. 28, 1995, the 48th anniversary of the anti-government uprising and subsequent brutal crackdown that would be known as the 228 Incident.
Photo: Hung Jui-chin, Taipei Times
It was the first time a president officially addressed the incident, much less apologized for it, as the incident had remained a taboo subject well into the 1980s. Even after the lifting of martial law, artist Chan San-yuan (詹三原) was reportedly jailed (under other pretenses) for designing Taiwan’s first 228 memorial monument in Chiayi in 1989.
CENSORING 228
To understand the extent the incident was “erased” from public memory, communications professor Hsia Chun-hsiang (夏春祥) analyzed news reports from the Taiwan Shin Sheng Daily News (台灣新生報), United Daily News (聯合報) and China Times (中國時報) between 1947 and 2000.
Photo: Hung Jui-chin, Taipei Times
Between 1948 and 1957, only four news articles mentioning the 228 Incident appeared in these papers, all of them appearing in the government-run Taiwan Shin Sheng Daily News. One of these detailed the punishments for those involved in the uprising, and the other three were direct reports on notable people involved with the incident.
After 1957, the 228 Incident disappeared from these papers for 27 years until the United Daily News published a feature on the history of the Central News Agency, which mentions how staff members reacted during the incident.
In 1985, legislator Chiang Peng-chien (江鵬堅) requested that the government acknowledge and apologize for the incident, suggesting that they designate Feb. 28 as “Peace Day.” The Executive Yuan did not respond and major newspapers did not report on the matter.
Two days before the 40th anniversary of the event in 1987, the first critical article appeared in the United Daily News, a column by historian Hsu Cho-yun (許倬雲) asking the government to directly address and resolve the “228 tragedy.”
Martial law was lifted a few months later, and freedom of speech began to return. By 1992, a United Daily News poll showed that 80 percent of respondees knew about the incident.
INTO THE SPOTLIGHT
Despite official censorship, Taiwanese kept the memory of the 228 Incident alive in private. And since the 1950s, independence activists working in Japan and the US continued to make the incident one of their talking points.
According to the article The Predicament of Historical Justice: Ethnic Issues and the Discourses on the 228 Uprising by historian Chen Tsui-lien (陳翠蓮), overseas Taiwanese published books in 1983 and 1984 that heavily criticized the KMT’s handling of the events.
The government dismissed these authors as instigators who were reopening old wounds to advance their independence agenda. They decided to write their own book, which contained the following passage:
“After the incident, the government and people both stopped talking about the events because of how painful it is to everyone …We only hope that time can wash away these horrific memories and people can stop debating which facts are true and who was in the wrong ... Otherwise it will only disturb our peaceful life as a united people. These overseas groups bring this event up each year to slander the government and distort the truth.”
In February 1987, local activists started the 228 Peace Day Association ( 二二八和平日促進會) and started holding memorials all over the country. Although riot police were sent to stop them, the activities continued. Chen writes that the government at this point finally realized that they could no longer brush the incident aside.
At first, officials continued the rhetoric of “needlessly reopening old wounds,” but after the end of martial law, more legislators spoke out and the media reports only continued to increase, although Chen writes that much of the content echoed that of the government.
When Lee became president in 1988, he too stated that people should bury the hatchet and look toward the future instead of the past. By 1990, his stance had changed, establishing a 228 Incident Task Force and allowing the events to be included into high school textbooks for the first time.
However, the family of the victims and 228 activists were not satisfied especially because their calls for the government to formally apologize were repeatedly denied.
After his 1995 apology, Lee added that this was just the beginning.
“We can’t be satisfied with building this monument,” he said. “We need to publicize the truth behind the events, compensate the victims, designate a memorial day, and also heal our people’s spirits and rebuild their dignity. These will all happen in the near future.”
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.
May 6 to May 12 Those who follow the Chinese-language news may have noticed the usage of the term zhuge (豬哥, literally ‘pig brother,’ a male pig raised for breeding purposes) in reports concerning the ongoing #Metoo scandal in the entertainment industry. The term’s modern connotations can range from womanizer or lecher to sexual predator, but it once referred to an important rural trade. Until the 1970s, it was a common sight to see a breeder herding a single “zhuge” down a rustic path with a bamboo whip, often traveling large distances over rugged terrain to service local families. Not only
Ahead of incoming president William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration on May 20 there appear to be signs that he is signaling to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that the Chinese side is also signaling to the Taiwan side. This raises a lot of questions, including what is the CCP up to, who are they signaling to, what are they signaling, how with the various actors in Taiwan respond and where this could ultimately go. In the last column, published on May 2, we examined the curious case of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) heavyweight Tseng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦) — currently vice premier
The last time Mrs Hsieh came to Cihu Park in Taoyuan was almost 50 years ago, on a school trip to the grave of Taiwan’s recently deceased dictator. Busloads of children were brought in to pay their respects to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正), known as Generalissimo, who had died at 87, after decades ruling Taiwan under brutal martial law. “There were a lot of buses, and there was a long queue,” Hsieh recalled. “It was a school rule. We had to bow, and then we went home.” Chiang’s body is still there, under guard in a mausoleum at the end of a path
Last week the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) released a set of very strange numbers on Taiwan’s wealth distribution. Duly quoted in the Taipei Times, the report said that “The Gini coefficient for Taiwanese households… was 0.606 at the end of 2021, lower than Australia’s 0.611, the UK’s 0.620, Japan’s 0.678, France’s 0.676 and Germany’s 0.727, the agency said in a report.” The Gini coefficient is a measure of relative inequality, usually of wealth or income, though it can be used to evaluate other forms of inequality. However, for most nations it is a number from .25 to .50