Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood.
Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote that a true apology is more like Lian Po’s (廉頗) humble apology. The Qin Dynasty general “strapped thorny branches to his bare back when issuing an apology.”
Admitting fault is risky to a government or leader. On the one hand, the person to whom the apology is addressed might use it to attack them. On the other hand, people within their own camp might try to rake up old grievances. The consequences could get out of hand, shaking the legitimacy of the apology.
Nevertheless, Nan Fang Shuo recognized the power of apology. He said that in Western theology, a leader’s mistake is like an offense to God, and only by confessing and repenting can they be redeemed and reconciled with their people.
He cited as examples the late South African president Nelson Mandela and the late Czech president Vaclav Havel, who regarded offenders’ apologies as a farewell ceremony to the past. Because of this, the two heads of state were able to lead their countries toward a new future.
Huang is likely to run for New Taipei City mayor or even president. Since Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) has praised him as the fierce — albeit disloyal — ancient warrior Lu Bu (呂布) of the Three Kingdoms era, Huang should display his potential for becoming a world-class warrior like Lu. How hard can an apology be?
Jane Ywe-hwan is an associate professor at National Pingtung University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS