For many, the hardest part of Saturday’s recall elections and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung was not the outcome itself, but the perception gap and sense of helplessness when the majority seemed to endorse views different from their own.
Supporters of extending the plant’s service life focused on energy security, economic growth and a stable power supply. Opponents pointed to the dangers of nuclear waste and earthquakes, while stressing the importance of environmental sustainability.
Both sides marshaled experts and data, yet neither could persuade the other. That revealed a harsh truth: Public policy is never determined by science alone, but is also shaped by values, sentiment, fears, identity and the competing interests of many stakeholders. Once opinions harden, they seldom change, regardless of the evidence.
The recall votes showed a similar dynamic. Many felt the social atmosphere shift once the results were announced. Those who had openly taken a stand and devoted themselves to advocacy were left frustrated, disappointed, even ashamed and isolated. Believing they had acted rationally, they nevertheless found themselves beset by self-doubt when confronted with reality, and some began to question their ability to engage in dialogue with the wider public.
However, a majority vote does not necessarily equate to the right outcome. Collective decisionmaking involves many factors beyond rational judgment. Scientific evidence does not lose its value simply because it is disregarded in the moment. What is dismissed today — data, risk assessments, reasoned arguments — might be re-examined tomorrow.
Social consensus evolves. Being in the minority today does not mean a turning point will never come.
In light of this, those disappointed by the results should consider shifting their role from debaters to witnesses. By preserving evidence and keeping careful records, they ensure that today’s choices can be judged anew in the future.
They should also seek out like-minded allies to avoid isolation in moments of frustration, and should not withdraw from engaging with public issues. By fostering ongoing dialogue and advancing rational, science-based perspectives, society can gradually narrow the perception gap and build a more mature consensus.
Lu Chun-wei is a dermatologist and an assistant professor at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital.
Translated by Fion Khan
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS