Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), whose online influence has waned, has made another startling remark. Ko criticized President William Lai’s (賴清德) request for a constitutional interpretation of the opposition parties’ controversial “legislative reform” bill, saying that Lai’s move “undermines the Constitution and disrupts the nation’s governance.”
Ko further asserted that, historically speaking, countries have perished not because of natural disasters or plagues, but because of crazy leaders such as Adolf Hitler. Ko was clearly insinuating that Lai is a modern-day Hitler, and he defended this comparison by saying that Hitler came to power through a “democratic constitutional system.”
Independent Legislator May Chin (高金素梅) made a similar comparison before, criticizing the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) by citing Hitler’s “persecution of the communist party on the way to dictatorship.”
Public figures set a bad example when they misinterpret history, especially for students who are not yet mentally mature and might get the wrong idea.
Most historical events had their distal causes, proximal causes and triggers, rather than being isolated events that happened all of a sudden. One cannot really understand them without understanding their context. Ko’s superficial interpretation of events without regard for their context is of course a misinterpretation. Ko did not talk about how the Nazis incited populism or how they seized power through violence against their opponents, nor did he say how they expanded their power through the Enabling Act, which in turn resulted from the Reichstag Fire, in which the Nazis set fire to the German parliament. This sequence of events was the key to Hitler’s monopoly of power and the death of the Weimar Republic.
Even if you have never studied history or have forgotten what you once learned, you can use artificial intelligence and ask: Who is now following the pattern set by Hitler? Most people would have a fair idea of what the answer is.
International affairs professor Zheng Yongnian (鄭永年), Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) so-called national policy adviser, recently said that the US would turn to fascism if former US president Donald Trump wins the election in November, and it would trigger the same series of events in some European countries. This is China’s usual tactic of using labels to rationalize everything it does, just as it suppresses Uighurs and Hong Kongers in the name of fighting “terrorists” and “separatists” respectively. In each case, China’s rulers use one-sided, decontextualized and unsubstantiated statements to fan up populist support for whatever they do.
The false analogies made by Ko and Chin are not just aimed at getting free publicity, but also at smearing the ruling DPP and labeling the nation’s elected president a “dictator.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the TPP have repeatedly labeled the DPP and its “pan-green” allies as “green communists,” the “green Taliban,” “Hitler” and so on — all for the purpose of rationalizing their attacks of the “pan-greens.” They do not hesitate to do this even if it harms Taiwan’s democracy, freedom and the rule of law, and even if it means being colonized by Beijing. The same applies to the KMT’s and the TPP’s claim that their legislative power-expansion bill is aimed at “investigating corruption,” “reforming the legislature,” etc.
The silliest label the two parties use is “green communist.” If the KMT and the TPP think communism is so evil, why do they keep sucking up to the Chinese Communist Party? The things they say are really an insult to the public’s intelligence.
Hong Tsun-ming is a specialist in the Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s international section.
Translated by Julian Clegg
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If