Johnny winds up ...
Dear Johnny,
After reading your column entitled "Forget 228? You mythed something" (March 3, page 8), I admit it, Johnny -- you are right. I really do think I "missed something." Namely, who are the "Researcher," the "Mayor" and the "Journeyman" in this story? What or where is this "community under scrutiny"? Is this supposed to be a true story? Is it a "myth" you've created to illustrate some elusive point?
I realize this is just your "opinion." But something seems off to me here. With the complete lack of names or any other details whatsoever, it seems like total unabashed fabrication. You criticize these mythical people for plagiarism, demonization and what you insinuate to be propaganda, while the very story you've concocted is a kind of propaganda tool for you. At least the plagiarism you describe was based on research. Your opinion piece seems to be based on nothing but myths.
Maybe the title for this story should have been: "Forget Lu Xun! Johnny Neihu mythed something." Or maybe I've missed something?
Justin Robinette
Johnny replies: Propaganda distorts the historical record; at the very least it uses exaggerated language to unbalance that record. But if you look at the history of the 228 Incident, you will see nothing extraordinary in what I described. If I were a propagandist, why would I not take one of the grisly stories on the record and milk it dry instead of one where names of people and places are struck out? Think, man.
There are reasons why I did not name the parties involved. Here's two: A source asked me not to until legal action ends, and I'm more interested in processes of autocracy rather than outing a bit player in a complex history of injustice. But I'll say this: Any competent person with a bit of history under his belt and access to the Internet has a good chance of piecing it all together given the information in the article. Perhaps you're not that person.
But, of course, this is not the real reason you wrote to me. Oh, and I'm thrilled that you think plagiarism has some value as long as it's based on research. Silly me: I always thought it was theft, pure and simple.
... and lets one go
Dear Johnny,
You write: "The political culture of shamelessness and misanthropy that the KMT brought did not die, dear reader. It exerts itself in subtle ways, even now."
Well, yes. You have a point there. I would argue that your insistence on hiding behind a pseudonym like "Johnny Neihu" is part of that continuing unfortunate political culture of shamelessness and misanthropy. I don't have a problem with the fact that you have some opinions and want to express them. To express them under a pseudonym though is actually a defeat for democracy. I would urge you to write under your real name, or not write at all.
NAME WITHHELD BY REQUEST
Johnny replies: "A defeat for democracy"? I never realized I was so powerful! And of course there isn't a more fundamental democratic safeguard than writers like you telling others to stop writing, right?
Editorials are written in the newspaper's name. Every paper does it, and some papers publish authors with known pen names, sometimes others who are anonymous or who use a mysterious nom de plume. Weird, isn't it, how all of these people escape your censure?
Breathe easy, because whether or not Johnny Neihu is a pseudonym, I'm responsible for what I write -- to my readers, to my publisher and to the law of the land. This isn't the damn Internet.
I see you have been writing in Taiwan for many years -- for the Central News Agency, travel magazines, the American Chamber of Commerce in Taipei publication Taiwan Business TOPICS and even the Taipei Times. But you think I should be denied a voice simply because you object to the content of my articles. Thanks, cuz.
Together, you and "Justin Robinette" think that using a pseudonym and deliberately withholding identifying information are necessarily marks of a charlatan propagandist who should be silenced. Breathtaking logic, gentlemen. Proceed to the dispensary.
Ever watch CNN, old chap? It has a station promo where some pundit says: "Journalists instinctively go for freedom of expression." Why don't you give him a call and break his heart?
Taiwan faces complex challenges like other Asia-Pacific nations, including demographic decline, income inequality and climate change. In fact, its challenges might be even more pressing. The nation struggles with rising income inequality, declining birthrates and soaring housing costs while simultaneously navigating intensifying global competition among major powers. To remain competitive in the global talent market, Taiwan has been working to create a more welcoming environment and legal framework for foreign professionals. One of the most significant steps in this direction was the enactment of the Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals (外國專業人才延攬及僱用法) in 2018. Subsequent amendments in
The recent passing of Taiwanese actress Barbie Hsu (徐熙媛), known to many as “Big S,” due to influenza-induced pneumonia at just 48 years old is a devastating reminder that the flu is not just a seasonal nuisance — it is a serious and potentially fatal illness. Hsu, a beloved actress and cultural icon who shaped the memories of many growing up in Taiwan, should not have died from a preventable disease. Yet her death is part of a larger trend that Taiwan has ignored for too long — our collective underestimation of the flu and our low uptake of the
US President Donald Trump on Saturday signed orders to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China effective from today. Trump decided to slap 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada as well as 10 percent on those coming from China, but would only impose a 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy products, including oil and electricity. Canada and Mexico on Sunday quickly responded with retaliatory tariffs against the US, while countermeasures from China are expected soon. Nevertheless, Trump announced yesterday to delay tariffs on Mexico and Canada for a month and said he would hold further talks with
For Taipei, last year was a particularly dangerous period, with China stepping up coercive pressures on Taiwan amid signs of US President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, which eventually led his Democratic Party to force him to abandon his re-election campaign. The political drift in the US bred uncertainty in Taiwan and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region about American strategic commitment and resolve. With America deeply involved in the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, the last thing Washington wanted was a Taiwan Strait contingency, which is why Biden invested in personal diplomacy with China’s dictator Xi Jinping (習近平). The return of