Protect social rights
Eugene Lin's equation of social rights with dictatorial government ("Avoid socialist temptation," Letters, page 8, Aug. 3) is not only false but also harmful to poorer members of society. As someone involved in promoting socio-economic rights, I feel it is my duty to reply.
The whole UN system of human rights works as a whole. It is unhealthy to opt for civil rights, for instance, while neglecting cultural rights, or choose social rights but not political rights. The ROC helped draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which includes rights in five areas: civil, political, social, economic and cultural. The ROC also signed the two covenants which enshrine these rights in international law.
Claiming a right does not mean, as Liu thinks, depending on the government to provide education, shelter, and health care. The government has the responsibility to ensure that these things are provided in the country and must step in directly for the poorest people who need help, but a government can allow for private schools, medical care and insurance as well as what is provided directly by the state. This is the case in Taiwan today. Nonetheless, social groups are right to stress socio-economic rights at times when they could be forgotten. Workers suffer when their bosses close factories or move them to other countries. Pure capitalism's belief that the free pursuit of money necessarily leads to wealth for all is not the experience of many poorer people in society.
If a farmer suffers because the country has joined the WTO then the state has a duty to protect his interests since his suffering is a result of a decision by the state. Taiwan can be proud of having a more equitable spread of wealth than some of her neighbors, but if we neglect socio-economic rights that achievement will be undermined and Taiwan will become a society of two cities: the rich and the poor.
Edmund Ryden SJ
Socio-Cultural Research
Center, Fujen University
Hsinchuang
Foreign students beneficial
Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng's (
There are long-term benefits for the people of Taiwan to have students live and study there. Many Chinese-language students now go to China where the cost of living may be cheaper, but the teachers and textbooks are often poor. Impressionable students establish life-long relationships and values during language training.
I greatly benefited from the government's support when earning my graduate degree in Taiwan and can attest to the excellent teachers and educational system at Fu Jen University and National Chengchi University. The government's continued support for language centers and foreign students could further advance Taiwan's long-term interests abroad.
William Carleton Baum
Washington
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS