Taiwan’s democratization is the result of a long-term struggle and social movements. All sorts of democratic developments — be they elections, removal of the ban on political parties and newspapers, the re-election of the National Assembly and direct presidential elections — were all fought for by the public.
The democratic achievements that Taiwan enjoys today were possible only because countless people in previous generations brought protests to the streets, shed sweat and even blood. The momentum of democracy was completely driven by the public; not one bit came about through the magnanimity of the party-state and the dictatorship.
During the Martial Law era, any form of protest or social movement was met with the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) accusations of their being communist spy activities, propaganda for Taiwanese independence, conspiracies, subversion or anything considered a threat to national security. Those who took part in such movements or protests were deemed, without exception, to be insurgents threatening social stability.
Even after martial law was lifted, when a group of academics, led by former Academia Sinica member Lee Chen-yuan (李鎮源), formed the Action 100 Alliance to promote the annulment of Article 100 of the Criminal Code through peaceful and nonviolent protests on the street, they were depicted in the media as rioters.
However, the growth of the Internet and transparency of information has made it difficult for some media outlets to interpret facts as they see fit. The use of the term “riots” has become less credible. So a new word was selected to replace the old terminology — populists.
The pan-blue media and politicians no longer seem able to make a comment without using this word. What they want to imply is that the public is a group of rioters who lack the ability to debate, who make decisions and blindly follow others based on emotional impulses instead of calm cool reasoning. They attribute all of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) failures to the new scapegoat, the populists.
Although their use of terminology to counteract social movements has improved with time, what remains is the KMT elite’s mentality of superiority and entitlement. As for the real causes of the problems in this nation, they usually just stick their heads into the sand like ostriches.
However, by reviewing the past some interesting occurrences can be seen. After the pan-blue camp lost the 2000 presidential election, groups of people illegally gathered and surrounded the KMT’s headquarters and the presidential residence. In 2004, despite the coalition between former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), the pan-blue camp lost the presidential race again, after which pan-blue supporters illegally protested on Ketagalan Boulevard for 21 days, even burning cars, throwing stones, attacking the police, hitting civilians, throwing Molotov cocktails and the like. If that was not populism, or rioting, I do not know what is.
In 2006, before former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was even put on trial and found guilty of corruption, a group of people in red shirts illegally rallied on Ketagalan Boulevard and at Taipei Railway Station to try to pressure the judicial system through extra-legal means. If this was not populism, what is?
The terminology has gone from “rioters” to “populists,” but it seems the real problem that Taiwan’s democracy suffers from is the KMT’s habitual use of language to stigmatize those who disagree with it.
Steve Wang is an assistant professor in the Institute of European Studies at Nanhua University.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
RSS