On December 12, 1999, Taiwan's baseball fans for the first time left a stadium and went out onto the streets for a demonstration. They shouted -- "Give us back clean professional baseball" and "Oppose the power struggle between the two leagues."
The parade went from the Legislative Yuan to the Control Yuan in downtown Taipei. The demonstrators marched in an orderly procession as they made their way through the busy traffic. Although baseball fans hate the Taiwan Major League (台灣?j聯
盟), they still called the chairman of the league, Legislative Yuan speaker Wang Chin-ping (?y揪鬙-), "dearest Speaker Wang" as a mark of respect in their written petition.
However, the demonstration was actually a funeral procession lamenting the death of Taiwan's baseball games. The baseball supporters put on a skit in front of the Legislative Yuan. They mocked the prosecutors who indicted baseball players but set free the gangsters who used guns and knives to coerce the players into cheating on games.
As a matter of fact, the demonstrations came too late. Long before the gambling scandal broke out and before the China Times Eagles (
As professional baseball teams dissolved one after another, the chairperson of the National Sports Council (NSC,
Doesn't Taiwan's profession baseball have game rules? When the Taiwan Major League violated the game rules and destroyed the baseball environment by recruiting amateur players, where was the NSC? Has the NSC ever tried to take any action?
Don't confuse irresponsibility with neutrality. The NSC claimed that it has been lobbying for sports subsidies and appropriated NT$400 million to local governments for the improvement of baseball stadiums around the island. Without baseball teams or fans, what do we want a large dome stadium for? As we face professional baseball's chaos, is uttering slogans the only measure that the NSC can take? As the highest supervising organization for national sports, can't it regulate the game rules for professional baseball? Can't the NSC request the two leagues to abide by the game rules?
The recent dissolution of the Weichuan Dragons, one of the most popular teams of the Chinese Professional Baseball League (CPBL,
Have the CPBL authorities noticed the seriousness of the problem? When the fans went out on the streets to appeal for justice, where were the league officers? Where were the baseball team managers? Where were our star players? Without any support from the league, teams or players, many loyal fans' hearts have died with the dissolution of baseball teams.
The CPBL still has four teams, but how long can they survive? As the once-popular contests between the Dragons and the Elephants head into history, how many baseball fans are left? The dissolution of the Dragons is a significant step marking the loss of fans and one the CPBL definitely cannot afford.
Baseball is not just a game to the Taiwanese people. It is a collective memory and an important culture asset. When the "wave," cheering slogans and fans' shouts appear in a demonstration, rather than at a baseball stadium, it is the responsibility of the government, leagues, teams and players to escort them to back to the stadium.
Let us work together to preserve Taiwan's national treasure -- sports -- and continue our baseball culture.
Lin Kuan-miao is a supporter of the Brother Elephants.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the