Mao Zedong (毛澤東) and Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) may have been rivals, but they shared fundamental values. Even in death, both men occupy prime real estate in their capitals, where they continue to overlook and poison the nations they ruled from a splendid memorial hall.
In 2007, the name of Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall was changed to National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall — a symbol of democracy and rejection of dictatorship.
Since his election last year, however, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has ignored public opinion and — true to style — reinstalled the plaque with the memorial’s original name.
Ma said Chiang’s contributions and mistakes should be defined by historians, but by restoring the plaque he is contradicting himself: This decision was made by a government dominated by Ma and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), not historians.
If Ma respects history and historians, he might look at how a Western historian outside the pan-blue/pan-green divide describes Chiang’s status.
Rudolph Rummel, a 77-year-old professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is an expert in this field. He has published 24 books about dictators and mass death and created the term “democide,” which refers to murder by government. In his book Death by Government, he listed the 10 worst dictators of the 20th century — and Chiang was among them.
Rummel’s studies are highly respected and he has received many awards, including a lifetime achievement award six years ago from the American Political Science Association. According to The Associated Press, he has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize several times.
This man’s research and his definition of Chiang can therefore serve as an authoritative judgment.
Even if we view Chiang from a layman’s perspective, we see that in the 50 years from obtaining power as commander-in-chief of the Northern Expeditionary Army in 1926 to his death in 1975, his government held no democratic elections and his word was law. What is this, if not a dictatorship?
Putting aside Chiang’s responsibility for the 228 Incident, he and his son Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) oversaw 38 years of martial law in Taiwan. According to a report by the Ministry of Justice when Ma was minister, “military courts handled 29,007 political cases with approximately 140,000 victims” under the two Chiangs. In 1960 alone, the government listed 126,875 people as “missing” and withdrew their household registration, showing just how many people were executed publicly or in secret. If Chiang, who ruled the nation through violence and political prisons, was not a dictator, then who is?
Just like any other dictator, Chiang loved erecting statues of himself. According to media reports, there were at least 45,000 such statues around Taiwan, making it the country with the highest density of statues of a national leader in the world. In addition, his dozens of villas and items that he used are now treated as historical monuments and relics — even one of his handkerchiefs is on exhibit at the memorial hall.
When the government proposed that the name of the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall be restored, the Washington Post, The Associated Press and other media outlets called Chiang a “dictator” and pointed out the cruelty of his rule. By reinstalling the plaque, the government is publicly challenging democratic values while boosting the name of a tyrant.
Ma was elected KMT chairman on Sunday. With both party and government in his hands, he is leaning toward totalitarian China while praising Chiang and his son. This is a bad omen for Taiwan.
Cao Changqing is a freelance journalist based in the US.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of