Social media have for the past two weeks been on fire with topics such as sexual harassment, the alleged drugging of children at a New Taipei City preschool and Taiwanese traffic being a “living hell” for pedestrians.
These issues all concern individual rights and welfare, and affect Taiwanese regardless of their political affiliation, as they are structural issues that can befall anyone. Since the issues are mostly associated with long-term gender inequality, labor, economy and culture, politicians tend to give them a wide berth as they cannot be solved in the short term.
As these are long-term structural issues, examples could rear their ugly heads during any politician’s tenure, regardless of political affiliation. Therefore, when such incidents happen, the public should use the opportunity to put incumbent politicians to the test, to see whether they can propose solutions to rectify the situation and address underlying problems.
However, what we see more often is that politicians tend to say these issues are “historical” in nature as an excuse to avoid reform, or to resort to “what aboutism” and point similar blunders by the opposition party as an excuse, or even worse, divert the public’s attention with other issues.
As each person is part of society, there are things that they have to take into their hands to address long-term issues and prevent their rights being ignored.
One way is to keep themselves updated and follow up on issues, so that elected officials know the needs and requirements of voters.
To prevent people from being led by the nose by media framing, they could look at the trending issues on social media platforms in the following ways:
For issues that are regarded as “historical,” people should bear in mind that every incumbent politician, whether a civil representative or official, has the responsibility to bring about reform, instead of pointing fingers at others or arguing how the issue came to be.
If a politician says that only cities under the governance of a certain party would have such issues, or accuses the party in charge of another city or county as doing an even worse job, they are evading responsibility and are waiting for the next issue to come along and divert the public’s attention.
Next, as the saying goes, “actions speak louder than words.” People should monitor what actions politicians take to address issues, and not take their word for it. They need to see whether they have led constructive debate on the matter or promoted actions that facilitate change. If they only came up with a slogan, but did not flesh it out with substantive proposals, people would know that they are only wheedling the electorate.
Further, people should avoid falling into ideological traps. Some would frame issues as an ideological conflict between supporters of different parties, for example by contending that supporting women’s rights means oppressing men and traditional values, so only those with leftist and anti-capitalist sentiments would say yes to childcare, or that fighting for pedestrians’ rights is bullying drivers and storeowners.
Such discussions that incite division and hinder reform also help politicians get away with not fulfilling their duties and responsibilities. Unfortunately, it usually takes certain people’s sacrifice or major accidents before such issues get properly addressed.
However, if people can prevent getting distracted and keep on pressing issues that need to be tackled, then the victims’ tears and blood would not have been shed in vain.
Chang Yueh-han is an adjunct assistant professor in Shih Hsin University’s Department of Journalism.
Translated by Rita Wang
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several