When Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) was invited to Soochow University to give a talk to students, what should have been a prime opportunity for a free and open discussion soured.
In an incident that quickly became something of a public relations disaster, she dismissed several questions from teachers and students, calling them “brainless” or saying they were “clearly followers of ‘San-min-zi’ media” — a nickname for Sanlih E-Television, Formosa TV and the Chinese-language Liberty Times (sister paper of the Taipei Times). University campuses are meant to be spaces for rational dialogue, but Cheng’s choice to resort to snide remarks begs the question: Has the KMT lost even basic respect for the right to free public debate?
After Cheng’s talk, Chen Fang-yu (陳方隅), a political science associate professor at the university, who had given a robust rebuttal during Cheng’s talk, published a lengthy response that meticulously evaluated the content of her talk, and added historical background and factual reference material, true to form for an academic engaging in questions of public policy. From his contributions, the issue is clear.
Students and teachers presented clear and specific questions, so why could Cheng not engage meaningfully and directly?
Questions that should have led to discussions on issues such as political party assets, national defense, or the democratic process were instead dismissed with unfounded assumptions about the speakers’ political alignment or media preferences.
When one chooses to engage in a public discussion in this way, it leaves no room for an open dialogue and can only exacerbate the political polarization that is making rational debate in this country so problematic.
From a political science perspective, this incident represents the fracturing of deliberative democracy, which posits that public decisionmaking should be a product not only of voting outcomes, but of an open and rational debate. This practice appeals to reason and responds to concerns, allowing the public to understand the logic behind different positions.
Campus lectures and question-and-answer sessions are prime examples of such settings: Teachers and students raise questions and politicians explain policy choices to bridge any gaps in understanding. Instead of explaining her position, Cheng chose to question her audience’s motives and intelligence. She sought not to persuade, but to suppress.
Political science research has long been clear that this labeling-and-derailing approach may be able to bring together like-minded groups in the short term, but undermines democratic legitimacy in the long term. It results in people ceasing to understand the substance of a matter or why something is done through debate, instead only focusing on which side someone is on.
So, how should politicians face questioning from the younger generation? University students have traditionally been the most uncontrollable and the most willing to challenge authority — the lifeblood of a democratic society. Politicians who are unable to take pointed questions and resort to humiliation or labeling in response compromise their entire party’s credibility in the arena of public discourse.
Eason Chen is an engineer.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
Is a new foreign partner for Taiwan emerging in the Middle East? Last week, Taiwanese media reported that Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) secretly visited Israel, a country with whom Taiwan has long shared unofficial relations but which has approached those relations cautiously. In the wake of China’s implicit but clear support for Hamas and Iran in the wake of the October 2023 assault on Israel, Jerusalem’s calculus may be changing. Both small countries facing literal existential threats, Israel and Taiwan have much to gain from closer ties. In his recent op-ed for the Washington Post, President William
Taiwan-India relations appear to have been put on the back burner this year, including on Taiwan’s side. Geopolitical pressures have compelled both countries to recalibrate their priorities, even as their core security challenges remain unchanged. However, what is striking is the visible decline in the attention India once received from Taiwan. The absence of the annual Diwali celebrations for the Indian community and the lack of a commemoration marking the 30-year anniversary of the representative offices, the India Taipei Association and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center, speak volumes and raise serious questions about whether Taiwan still has a coherent India
A stabbing attack inside and near two busy Taipei MRT stations on Friday evening shocked the nation and made headlines in many foreign and local news media, as such indiscriminate attacks are rare in Taiwan. Four people died, including the 27-year-old suspect, and 11 people sustained injuries. At Taipei Main Station, the suspect threw smoke grenades near two exits and fatally stabbed one person who tried to stop him. He later made his way to Eslite Spectrum Nanxi department store near Zhongshan MRT Station, where he threw more smoke grenades and fatally stabbed a person on a scooter by the roadside.
Recent media reports have again warned that traditional Chinese medicine pharmacies are disappearing and might vanish altogether within the next 15 years. Yet viewed through the broader lens of social and economic change, the rise and fall — or transformation — of industries is rarely the result of a single factor, nor is it inherently negative. Taiwan itself offers a clear parallel. Once renowned globally for manufacturing, it is now best known for its high-tech industries. Along the way, some businesses successfully transformed, while others disappeared. These shifts, painful as they might be for those directly affected, have not necessarily harmed society
RSS