Even on the eve of the presidential inauguration and with the Capitol under lockdown, many people in the US are wondering: What happened to America’s democracy?
What is the proper response to the storming of the Capitol in Washington?
In Taiwan, a photograph comparing a Taiwanese student protester freely drinking beer in the Legislative Yuan to US Capitol Police pointing guns at rioters lying face down on the ground has gone viral.
Taiwanese media have portrayed the US response to the Capitol riot as having a forceful police presence, while the Sunflower movement protests in the Legislative Yuan are seen as having a soft police response. These comparisons spark concerns that the police response to the Sunflower movement sit-in in Taiwan might have been too weak.
The slant of the media might be what makes the Capitol Police’s response seem stronger. Despite the locations being equivalent, the two events should not be equated.
In the US, the media highlighted rioters’ clown-like acts and police reactions. Photos of people occupying the US vice president’s seat and putting their feet up on US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s desk have become the images of the event.
However, when these pictures get taken out of context, it paints a completely different idea of what happened and what the Capitol riot means.
The storming of the Capitol was an angry response to the results of the presidential election. Supporters of US President Donald Trump believed that “illegitimate” votes were threatening democracy, flipping states blue, and suppressing their voices. Upset by the reality that Democrats would have control of the White House and both chambers of the US Congress, they stormed the Capitol on the day of the electoral vote confirmation.
Based on some of the images that have gone viral in Taiwan, it would appear that the rioters were just acting the clown, and that police were forceful in protecting the Capitol and its people.
In reality, rioters were armed with guns and bombs. They tarred and feathered effigies of representatives, while the Confederate flag — a symbol of white supremacy and racism — was carried into the building. Legislators hid amid the confirmation count of electoral votes.
The riot endangered the continuation of the democratic process and free elections. A lack or lapse of law enforcement contributed to the appalling behavior.
While some officers fought to protect the Capitol and Congress, many opened doors and let protesters in. Such officers, who are designated to protect Washington and government officials, did little to stop rioters from trespassing and burglarizing the Capitol, committing battery, and threatening the lives of elected members of Congress and employees.
Law enforcement failed to enforce the law.
On the other hand, in the Sunflower movement sit-in of the Legislative Yuan in 2014, demonstrators occupied the building in protest of the passing of the cross-strait service trade agreement in 30 seconds without a clause-by-clause review.
The addendum to the 2010 Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement with China reduced tariffs and commercial barriers between the two countries.
Student-led protesters feared that an increase in economic dependence on China would threaten Taiwan’s businesses, freedom of expression and national security.
When police initially cracked down on the protesters with batons and water cannons, they faced a huge public outcry. People empathized with the students’ desire to protect their economic opportunities and civil liberties, and supported them throughout the occupation.
Aspects of Chinese history, such as the military crackdown in Tiananmen Square, made law enforcement violence against students unacceptable to the public. It would have sent an anti-democracy message.
Many higher-ranking politicians who ordered the police crackdown were asked to resign, and either apologized or disappeared from the political sphere. Their disappearance from the media allowed the initial brutality of the event to be forgotten. Throughout the rest of the 24 day sit-in, police seemed to take a hands-off approach. Protesters sat, sang and gave speeches defending their cause.
Now, many cite the movement as a prime example of civil disobedience for true democracy.
The restraint that police showed in response to the Sunflower movement sit-in made their response powerful.
The reasons behind the Sunflower movement protesters’ and Trump supporters’ actions were fundamentally different. One was a protest, calling for the protection of people’s rights, the other was an attempt at insurgency and a threat to democracy. Such distinctions define the appropriateness of the responses of law enforcement personnel in the two situations.
The Capitol Police’s response to the rioters might have appeared forceful to Taiwanese media, but considering the rioters’ actions and the level of force normally used by law enforcement in the US, the response was abnormally lenient.
The Capitol riots should be remembered for the acts of terrorism and blatant disrespect for the democratic process, and as a time when the law enforcement response was weak and did not match the threat to democracy.
The Sunflower movement should be remembered as it already is: a mostly peaceful protest where restraint was shown by police, and a testament to the power of democracy.
Jeannette Wang is a junior at Los Altos High School in California. Jamie Wang is a freshman at the University of California, Los Angeles.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS