Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), who is said to have an IQ of 157, has come up with a “rough estimate” that only 6 percent of Taiwanese could be classified as either “deep blue” or “deep green” as far as political loyalties go, and said that this 6 percent of partisan diehards have very loud voices and have “kidnapped” Taiwan.
Ko once described himself as “dark green” and, in his former role as a physician, he signed a certificate confirming that jailed former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the pan-green Democratic Progressive Party was seriously ill, which led to Chen being released on medical parole.
If the deep greens have “kidnapped” Taiwan, then given Ko’s record of “dark green” affiliations, he must also be a “kidnapper.”
He later wrote a book about “the power of the color white,” in which he theorized about a social power that was neither “deep blue” nor “deep green.” Apparently he was able to “kidnap” this other 94 percent of “white” voters to get elected mayor.
Given that the bulk of his support came from this white sector, why is he now saying sorry to deep green supporters?
Taiwan’s younger generation is said to be “naturally pro-independence,” while the generations who have lived through hardship recognize that Taiwan and China are independent of each other, and that if they want to merge, Taiwanese should have the final say.
Such a standpoint would be quite natural and in keeping with democratic principles, but Ko cannot bring himself to say it. When confronted with the issue, he would rather deal with it by playing word games and talking nonsense.
Speaking at the twin-city forums in Shanghai in 2015 and again last year, Ko said that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family,” but he has since apologized for saying so.
The disagreement between Taiwan and China is actually not one of “family” and “enemy,” but one of “one” or “two” — that is to say whether they are one country or two.
Now Ko says he spoke rashly because he “only wanted to get over the problem.” However, he not only chose to talk about a “family,” but also called it “one family,” using the key word “one” that China was so keen to hear from him.
This is an important matter that concerns the nation’s existence or disappearance, but the childish wording he used — “just to get over the problem” — expressed the standpoint of the other side.
That is not the power of white, but “red power” or even a new kind of “White Terror.”
This is such a serious matter that definitely more than just 2 or 3 percent of the population — Ko’s estimate of the deep greens — were upset by what he said.
It is a question of the speaker’s basic ideas and credibility.
However, Ko’s apology was half-hearted and insincere. He only said sorry to get over the problem.
Then he started babbling about how some people on his team were very “upset” about that particular sentence of his, and his response was to say: “Whatever you want to hear, I will say it for you.”
If Ko really means to apologize for his careless statement, it cannot be dismissed with a mere “sorry” as if it were just a petty quarrel between friends.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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
RSS