Montesquieu once noted that the full realization of a constitution demands that it is burned into the hearts and minds of every individual.
What a pity it is that due to certain historical factors of the political culture, Taiwan’s constitutional democracy bears all the markings of a representative democracy, and yet the path to its continued progress is plagued with obstacles. This is most recently evident from the blue and white camps’ aggressive pushing through of ill-thought out “reform” bills by dint of their slight legislative majority. In crisis comes opportunity, and we need only look to the Bluebird movement as an evolution of the Wild Lily and Sunflower movements.
First came the decentralization of power and ridding ourselves of personality cults, which, together with an overall healthy democracy, are important prerequisites.
Second, with the Bluebird movement taking flight across Taiwan, high-school students talk freely about the movement. There is a consensus that slogans on protest signs and placards such as “No discussion, No democracy” are core values of a democracy.
It is quite moving to witness this attitude of frank discussion of the matters at hand, but perhaps more encouraging is the constitutional tussle the executive and legislative branches are engaged in, providing lessons in constitutional law and democracy to the public.
Among other lessons, the centrality of constitutional knowledge, regardless of whether the result furthers one’s own agenda, and being concerned instead with the proper exercise of power and the importance of dialogue above and beyond overt confrontation or enmity, provides an excellent comparison with the arbitrary rule of China’s feudalistic despotism and of the casting down of anything the party does not agree with, and of the lack of any guarantees of freedom of expression to be found in that nation under that system.
Miles Yu (余茂春), senior fellow and director of the China Center at the Hudson Institute, has said that the Tiananmen Square protests that happened in China in 1989 are an unfinished revolution. Taiwan’s Bluebird movement, on the other hand, is developing opportunities to deepen Taiwanese democracy, evolving into a kind of “democracy, rule of law and human rights” 3.0, including the honing of a “constitutional consciousness,” as well as welding this consciousness into the hearts and minds of the public. Even more, it includes democratic discussions on the reliance on law and reason, and discussing matters as they actually are.
This would allow us to brush off vestiges of arbitrary rule of law, and get us to appreciate and cherish the democracy we have in Taiwan.
Lin Jui-hsia is director of Taoshan Salon and Humanity and Arts Institute in Chiayi City.
Translated by Tim Smith
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS