Sitting in their homes typing on their keyboards and posting on Facebook things like, “Taiwan has already lost its democracy,” “The Democratic Progressive Party is a party of green communists,” or “President William Lai [賴清德] is a dictator,” then turning around and heading to the convenience store to buy a tea egg and an iced Americano, casually chatting in a Line group about which news broadcast was more biased this morning — are such people truly clear about the kind of society in which they are living?
This is not meant to be sarcasm or criticism, but an exhausted honesty. We are witnessing an increasingly common phenomenon — a misunderstanding of freedom, a misuse of free speech and a complete misunderstanding of democracy’s fragility. Even more terrifying is that this ignorance is being cloaked in the guise of “rational skepticism,” but beneath that cloak contains a mockery of the system, a neglect of history and a sad, twisted delusion of having been persecuted.
Allow us to start from an often overlooked reality. Taiwan scored 94 points in the latest edition of Freedom House’s Freedom in the World report, while China scored a nine. You read that right — China earned a single-digit score. These rankings are not based on some abstract criteria, but are a detailed examination of several issues: Can citizens speak freely, practice their desired religion, or choose not to believe in a specific religion or ideology? Are students free from political indoctrination in schools? Is there any chance of getting a fair, unbiased trial in court? Can citizens participate in elections to alter the nation’s power structure?
China scored zero on most of these indicators.
What about Taiwan? We have political clashes in the legislature, protests in the streets, shouting matches on TV programs and political talk shows full of long-winded criticisms. Our freedom is not perfect, but it truly exists — and it was not earned easily.
When someone casually throws around the term “green communist,” do they truly comprehend the historical weight behind the word? Do they understand that in China, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can arbitrarily detain human rights lawyers, install surveillance cameras in places of worship, limit minors from entering churches and remove academic freedom clauses from university charters, thereby reducing all thoughts and ideas to a single voice — party loyalty? Do they fully grasp that in China, criticizing the CCP does not just run the risk of unemployment or silencing — but of disappearance?
If you do not understand how distant that reality is from the one we live in today, you have no one else to blame.
Taiwanese media outlets each have their own political leanings, but we can choose which ones to consume, criticize them as we please or even create our own independent outlets. The Chinese media have only one leaning. All media in China are aligned with the CCP, serve the CCP and follow its lead.
You can be dissatisfied with the Taiwanese government, but to equate a democratically elected administration with an authoritarian regime is just out of touch with reality. It is reckless, historically ignorant and most importantly, outright cruel toward those in societies who have been denied their freedom.
There are also grounds for emotional comparison. China’s economy is developing rapidly, its cities are modern and daily life is full of conveniences — so, why then, can we not we say it is free? This is one of the weakest and most harmful arguments today — reducing freedom to mere consumption and turning society into nothing but a shell for providing convenient shelter and food, all while neglecting to consider whether those living within that shell can speak the truth, question right from wrong, or participate in shaping the system. This is confusing survival for living — such freedom is not true freedom, but the price of obedience.
Taiwan’s democracy is not without issues, but it is those very issues that prove our democracy is still breathing. We can discuss, argue, oppose and be disappointed — yet we never lack the space to speak out.
This is the true face of freedom — not perfection, but the tolerance of imperfection.
Liu Che-ting is a writer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
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
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked
RSS