Tue, Nov 21, 2000 page8

• Public is not extremist on energy

  • By James Hsueh 薛承泰
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  The "consensus that there is no consensus" (沒有共識的共識) has recently become a popular concept in Taiwan. Such a consensus can fall into one of the two following categories. First, people with opposing positions reach a consensus that it is impossible for them to agree (i.e. have a consensus) on anything substantive, since they have nothing in common. Second, people with opposing positions hide their differences due to social, political, or moral pressure. Both types of consensus are empty and transitory. If we continue to pursue such consensuses, the Taiwanese people will only feel increasingly insecure and confused about the direction of their future.

  Anti-nuclear groups held a march on Nov. 12, in which tens of thousands of people demonstrated in support of the scrapping of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant construction. Their appeals to the public relied on the ideas of "a safe living environment in Taiwan" and "our responsibility toward our future generations." The opposition parties remained silent, while the ruling party took on a new position by calling for rationality. I believe that the march should be seen as a means of educating the public, not merely as a means of expressing an anti-nuclear point of view. It is time we thought about what is the fastest and safest way to turn Taiwan into a "nuclear-free homeland" (非核家園). This is the only way by which the social movement can push for any substantive consensus.

  A "nuclear-free homeland" has become a mainstream ideal among Taiwan residents. The major goals of the anti-nuclear movement are to awaken the environmental awareness of an even greater number of people, as well as to condemn the damage done to our soil through blind economic development. Surveys indicate, however, that many Taiwanese people continue to support the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant. The dispute over the project has ignited the current political crisis. Our discussion of the matter must therefore be done rationally, rather than in a manner which silences the pro-nuclear camp by labeling them "unpatriotic." Otherwise, any consensus reached would be empty and illusory.

  To be fair, many supporters of the plant are not entirely supportive of nuclear energy, just as opponents of nuclear power are not necessarily anti-business. In fact, supporters of the plant believe that plans for alternative energy sources should be implemented as soon as possible before gradually abolishing nuclear energy entirely in order to make the dream of a "nuclear-free homeland" a reality. In other words, they disagree that scrapping the plant is the only way to achieve the goal of a "nuclear-free homeland." They feel that scrapping the plant would destabilize the economy, increase the difficulties of finding alternative energy sources, lengthen the life of the existing three nuclear power plants without decreasing the amount of nuclear waste produced, and increase safety issues. The crux of the matter therefore is really that the supporters feel that alternative energy sources are workable only under stable economic conditions, for which construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant is a precondition.

  It is useless to try to convince the pro-nuclear camp by repeatedly stressing the danger of nuclear plants and nuclear waste. The best strategy is to provide reliable and convincing evidence to prove that, without the additional nuclear plant, economic development will not be jeopardized and all the alternative plans will be feasible.

  The Executive Yuan has ignored the fact that what many supporters of nuclear power actually want is a steady energy supply. As a result, many people continue to support the plant's construction despite a trend in favor of "a nuclear-free homeland." The issue is not who is right or wrong, but how to educate each other, against a backdrop of different standpoints. If we do not attempt to understand each other and continue to question each other's motives, polarization will be aggravated, creating even more obstacles to communication.

  Although Taiwan's political parties claim that their positions on nuclear power are backed by the public, they actually fail to see that the public backs neither extreme. The people simply differ on their sense of logic. Since our political parties have neither effectively communicated with each other nor educated their supporters, anti-nuclear demonstrations should make up for these inadequacies by educating the public and encouraging the political parties to jointly establish a "nuclear-free energy policy." Irrespective of what the ruling of the Council of Grand Justices turns out to be, the march will have a place in history if it can push for a consensus on a "nuclear-free energy policy" among different political parties.

  James Hsueh is a professor of the Department of Sociology at National Taiwan University.

  Translated by Eddy Chang
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Bukele proposes prisoner swap with Maduro

  • 2

    HK, Macau residency rules tightened

  • 3

    Mexican baseball’s growth starting to rival soccer clubs

  • 4

    New missile system to be used in US-Philippines Balikatan joint exercise

  • 5

    KMT officials to be questioned for illegal assembly