Religion and politics have much in common. Within both exist different arguments and creeds.
From a scientific perspective, religion is a classic example of a “constructive world,” as it creates a set of principles by which it interprets the world and everything in it. At the same time, it is a “virtual world,” consisting as it does of purely subjective philosophies and ideas that are difficult to replicate or prove, especially when it comes to concepts such as life after death. This is why many religions resort to complex, intricate rituals or theologies to prove the existence of a god or gods.
Malaysia is a Muslim country. To visit it is certainly to come with being intrigued by a call to prayer resounding from the mosques dotted throughout the country. Muslims pray five times a day, facing Mecca, and once a year observe the holy month of Ramadan. However, non-Muslims living in Malaysia can also worship their own gods. Those in the Indian community can observe their Hindu beliefs and Shiva worship.
It is only in religiously diverse countries such as Malaysia that it can be observed how religions construct their own worlds, and how these are mutually exclusive. That is to say, a person cannot believe in both Buddha and Allah. As a result, mutual respect and peaceful coexistence are very important founding principles within religiously diverse countries, for without them disaster would ensue.
Taiwan at election time is like a microcosm of its domestic politics, and it is at election time that it becomes most apparent just how much like a religion politics here has become. It is a little excessive to say that people cannot trust a certain political party or candidate, but if it is seen as a religion, then the sentiment can be understood.
If politics in Taiwan really is like religion, then it is a classic constructive world — even a virtual world. Everything that happens in politics at this time, all of the election activity, is anti-intellectual, exclusive and unprovable. Therefore, all the political parties and candidates are essentially engaging in religious activity, albeit in a bid to gain power. They have no need to account for themselves, or to offer evidence for the points of faith they peddle, they just need their “political followers” to believe them.
Just before the election, a candidate from the south said in one ad that if he were to be elected, he would create 200,000 jobs and raise the starting salary of young people to NT$32,000. If economics were really that simple, and if he were able to deliver on his campaign promise, he would be a shoo-in for the Nobel Peace Prize in Economics. And yet you hear this kind of thing over and over in Taiwan.
Taiwanese politics is already very much like a religion and for this reason rational debate about it is impossible. For many candidates, the point of campaign rallies is to create religious events. They are held to allow their supporters — their believers — to bolster each other, to give vent to their emotions and to have a cathartic, reaffirming experience.
Talk of the Republic of China (ROC) being consigned to oblivion, or promises of donating huge sums of money to a city should a certain person be elected mayor there, are akin to promising: “He who believes in me, even though he dies, will live.”
It is pure fantasy, it is constructing a world that does not exist, and yet, people should still respect different beliefs, though there is no need to respond to expressions of divergent beliefs. Mutual respect and peaceful coexistence should be applied as a founding principle for politics in Taiwan.
The main reason for the state of politics in Taiwan is the failure to establish an honest, rational and just society. Another reason is that the “political rate of return” for candidates is excessive should they be elected, so parties and candidates think they can do as they please.
People have to rise above their superstitions and not let themselves fall prey to pernicious doctrines. They need to rely instead on becoming enlightened and wiser, and on the steady development of civil society. The development of civil society of such a high caliber is a long way off. All that can be done is to ask, when people vote, that they first put their religious beliefs to the side. If they do, it will bring untold benefits for the future and the next generation.
Huang Der-hsiang is a professor in the Graduate Program of Professional Development in Education at Dayeh University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS