Usually what happens after an election candidate is caught red-handed in a scandal is that he will lie through his teeth and drag his feet as long as he can. If he could tell only part of the truth and get away with it, he would not hesitate to do so.
However, a very strange phenomenon is taking place in the current US presidential campaign. Not only is every candidate racing to tell the truth, but they all see honesty as the most powerful weapon in winning.
Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona has to be the frankest candidate so far. He was a prisoner of war during the Vietnam War. Because he was subjected to excruciating torture during his five years of captivity, some people have questioned his mental suitability for the presidency.
McCain has not only faced this allegation frankly, but even took the initiative to make a 1,500-page record of his medical treatments public so voters could fully understand his past.
McCain's act was a ground-breaking one in US presidential campaign history and quite possibly a first in world history.
In addition, McCain was involved in a loan scandal in the early 1990s. When someone questioned him about this part of his past, he answered frankly that "it was something that should not have been done" and "I will engrave it on my tombstone." He did not look for excuses to justify his own mistakes.
McCain's honesty has led the American media to crown him as the "least defensive presidential candidate." Not only does he admit to past wrongdoings, but he does so without any reservations. As a result, other candidates have had no choice but to join in this game of honesty. The New York Times even ran an article titled "the candidates may be too honest" to describe this strange phenomenon.
Thanks to liars such as Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton the American people are fed up with deceitful politicians. Therefore, the voters' focus on the candidates, especially when it comes to character, has been completely confined to the single issue of honesty. They might have been almost bored to death by Jimmy Carter, a person who seemingly never uttered a false word. However, if forced to choose between a liar and a bore, American voters prefer the latter.
Now, let us compare McCain's honesty with James Soong's (宋楚瑜) handling of his current money scandal. From Soong's initial withholding of truth to the public statements issued by his spokesperson which subsequently proved to be outright lies, we can see that Soong is still operating along the same old lines of hiding the truth, covering up, delaying, lying, forced confession and partial confession.
This routine may previously have saved many politicians from disgrace. However, the forced confession of any politician inevitably tarnishes his character. If it is subsequently revealed that even his forced confession was only partially the truth and the part that has yet to see the light of day is not only more lies, but even greater lies, then not only would any remaining public trust in his character be completely demolished, but his political career would be ended immediately.
Although Soong has always prided himself in steering clear of muddy waters, the campaign expenditures he reported for his provincial governor election campaign matched the mandated ceiling exactly, not one cent more or less.
Such exactitude tells us that Soong has a prior history of dishonesty; he has just managed to deny all previous allegations of wrongdoing.
In view of the way he has been handling the current scandal, we cannot help but ask ourselves is he, who enjoys a flawless "expenditure record," being completely honest this time?
Wang Chien-chuang is the president of The Journalist magazine.
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS