Today’s world is said to be a post-truth environment. That is a melodramatic response to today’s information overload, but the essential message holds merit. The trend can be seen in politics, especially in the run-up to November’s mayoral elections. Facts are facts, but they are routinely manipulated by politicians, and voters must evaluate what they are told.
The politicians, of course, are betting they will not, human nature being what it is.
When Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Wang Hung-wei (王鴻薇) in July accused then-Hsinchu mayor Lin Chih-chien (林智堅) of contravening the Copyright Act (著作權法) in a thesis submitted to Chung Hua University in 2008, she set off a string of plagiarism allegations. Almost immediately, accusations were leveled at Nantou County Council Speaker Ho Shang-feng (何勝豐) of the KMT, Hsu Shu-hua (許淑華), the KMT’s candidate for Nantou County commissioner, and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Legislator Tsai Pi-ru (蔡壁如). Soon, plagiarism became a handle on which to hang political manipulation.
On Sept. 3, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Keelung mayoral candidate Tsai Shih-ying (蔡適應) denied plagiarism accusations, and on Tuesday, TPP Legislator Ann Kao (高虹安), the party’s candidate for Hsinchu mayor, defended herself against media reports that she plagiarized two studies, which she had coauthored, for her doctoral dissertation.
During a news conference, Kao cited an e-mail from Jane Strasser, senior associate vice president for research and research integrity at the University of Cincinnati, where she obtained her doctorate, saying that Kao “has entered the political arena, which may be the motivation for the allegations (or not).”
Strasser got that right.
Kao subsequently committed an unforced error by revealing her academic elitism, belittling Chung Hua University — where Lin received his degree in 2008 and which is in the city Kao wants to govern, therefore damaging her chances of succeeding.
However, the allegations, for now, hold little water.
Late last month, former premier Simon Chang (張善政), the KMT’s candidate for Taoyuan mayor, was accused of plagiarizing reports commissioned by the Council of Agriculture during his time at Acer Inc. He is still working to refute those allegations, and held a news conference on the issue yesterday morning.
Chang might well be exonerated, despite lingering questions about his integrity, in a way that Lin will probably not be: The National Taiwan University academic ethics committee confirmed that he had plagiarized content for his 2017 master’s thesis and recommended that his degree be revoked.
Many plagiarism accusations are politically motivated, but this does not mean they are unfounded.
In July 2020, Kaohsiung City Councilor Jane Lee (李眉蓁), then the KMT’s candidate in the Kaohsiung mayoral by-election, was accused of plagiarizing content for a master’s thesis she submitted to National Sun Yat-sen University. She denied the allegations and called them politically motivated.
However, an investigation found she had plagiarized 96 percent of her thesis, and her degree was revoked. Lee said she “accepted the decision” and apologized for her “personal failings.”
Plagiarism is rife, and it goes across the board of Taiwan’s political parties, but that does not mean all politicians are guilty as charged. Denial is a symptom of the disingenuousness of a political class that believes an apology and wringing of hands absolve responsibility, and that denials are a sufficient hedge — because supporters will believe them, and detractors will not, whatever the facts. Plagiarism allegations are the flip side to this, and once made, politicians will refute them.
Voters must take a critical view and seek to see through the political manipulation, not just allow the political parties to make unfounded claims to damage their opponents.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS