In 1996, in the midst of the US’ 53rd presidential race, Taiwan was gearing up for its first-ever direct presidential election. Since then, Taiwan has grown into a vibrant democracy with an average voter turnout of 76 percent in free and fair elections.
Despite its youth, Taiwan is, like the US, undeniably a democracy. Yet these two democracies, in the face of COVID-19 and balancing safety with freedom, have reacted differently and thus had drastically different outcomes.
As of today, there have been 5,923 cases per 100,000 people in the US, compared with only 3.39 cases per 100,000 people in Taiwan. Differences in cultural values, outside of the shared values of liberty and freedom, could be part of the reason.
American patriot Patrick Henry said in 1775: “Give me liberty or give me death.”
On a placard at a protest last year, the famous quote had evolved into: “Give me liberty or give me COVID-19.”
The protection of civil liberties has been integral to the US since its founding. During a pandemic, it is no different. Although admirable, the value of liberty proves to be an impediment in the containment and mitigation of COVID-19.
Current strategies for limiting the spread of COVID-19 require frequent testing, contact tracing and quarantines, which threaten people’s immediate sense of privacy, confidentiality, autonomy and personal freedom. Many Americans do not accept them.
Comparatively, liberty is a new concept in Taiwan. The nation became a vibrant democracy just 25 years ago, after a long history of occupation and martial law.
While some movements, such as the Wild Lily student movement and the Sunflower movement, have demonstrated civic engagement for the protection of liberty and economic freedom, such engagement is not at the forefront of the COVID-19 response.
As shown by adherence to mandatory quarantines and mask mandates, Taiwanese are willing to sacrifice some personal liberty for public safety and societal freedom.
The US’ pioneering and cowboy mentality has allowed it to become a bright and innovative nation, but in the context of COVID-19, this mentality is detrimental to the success of public health measures.
A culture of questioning authority and pushing beyond limits, during times when a strict adherence to regulations is needed, results in anti-mask and anti-restriction protests.
Paired with public distrust of the US government — stemming from incidents such as the Tuskegee syphilis study, the excessive use of force by law enforcement against blacks and the highly divisive political rhetoric in last year’s presidential campaign — mask-wearing, stay-at-home orders and other scientifically backed approaches to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 are often perceived as additional threats to civil liberties.
Distrust in government has also manifested as an unwillingness by Americans to get vaccinated. An Associated Press-NORC poll conducted in May last year found that only half of the US public, including 37 percent of Hispanics and 25 percent of African Americans, are willing to get vaccinated against COVID-19. More recent Pew Research polls have found only a slight increase to 60 percent.
Taiwanese, who are traditionally more conservative, emphasize obedience and filial piety, rather than pushing beyond limits. These values have boosted the effectiveness of the government’s response.
For example, filial piety: “Respect for elders” translates into Taiwanese wearing masks to protect themselves and older people from COVID-19. This proves to be crucial as, culturally and economically, Taiwanese are more likely to live in multi-generational households or frequently visit older relatives.
Obedience, which is heavily emphasized in Taiwanese schools, makes Taiwanese more compliant toward government guidelines without major backlash.
On the other side of the Pacific, the introduction of masks in the US was, at first, received similarly to school dress codes. Traditionally, demanding that other people cover up has not been well received by the US public. Much like the backlash against bans on bra straps or shorter skirts in schools, for fear of “distracting the boys,” many are disgruntled by mask-wearing mandates.
They question: “Why should I wear a mask if it is uncomfortable?”
The US’ individual-focused, pioneering culture, which can place it out in front of other countries in scientific and technological races, proves to be a hurdle in public health and safety.
By contrast, mask-wearing was a cultural norm in Asia, including Taiwan, before the COVID-19 pandemic hit.
This was in part due to air pollution, but mostly, it was to make others feel safe, especially after the SARS outbreak in the early 2000s, which made Asian nations like Taiwan more cautious about the spread of infectious diseases.
A cultural need to make others feel comfortable has also affected how religious groups in Taiwan have responded to COVID-19, with Buddhist groups voluntarily postponing their annual pilgrimage around Taiwan proper, because they value “not making the goddess Matsu worry.”
This is a sharp contrast to the US Supreme Court ruling that blocking religious gatherings during the pandemic is unconstitutional.
The effects of these cultural differences in the US — not democracy — might have contributed to the country’s 21.9 million COVID-19 cases and nearly 369,000 deaths.
Ironically, the US’ response has been far more imposing on personal liberties than Taiwan’s, as many US states have imposed on-and-off stay-at-home orders indiscriminate of COVID-19 status.
In Taiwan, the government only requires arrivals to the nation, as well as people who have tested positive and their contacts, to quarantine.
Overall, Taiwanese enjoy far greater liberty and are happier with their government’s response than Americans.
To enforce public health orders, the US needs to offer consistent messaging based on science, not politics. To mitigate the level of distrust in government, it needs to address disparities rooted in racism, while preserving the individualism that its culture demands.
To mount an effective public health response, a sense of social solidarity is needed, because everyone is in this together.
As the pandemic continues to evolve globally in unexpected ways, Taiwan must stay vigilant. It must be prepared for danger in the face of comfort and safety — and continuously adapt new strategies to stay ahead.
Taiwan’s public health practices are good, but they need to be “better” than a virus that continues to mutate.
Jeannette Wang is a junior at Los Altos High School in Los Altos, California. C. Jason Wang is an associate professor of pediatrics and director of the Center for Policy, Outcomes and Prevention at Stanford University.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under