The smoke has cleared from Taipei Main Station, but the fog of confusion remains. As Taiwan mourns the four lives lost and the 11 injured in the Dec. 19 attacks, the nation once again performs the grim ritual of asking “why?” The familiar answers are already circulating: Taiwan needs more metal detectors, better police presence and increased mental health screenings. These are logical, comfortable responses. They are also, as history demonstrates, insufficient.
To truly understand the tragedy of Chang Wen (張文) — and to prevent the next one — Taiwanese must be willing to look at the uncomfortable evidence that contradicts our most cherished social values. The most terrifying detail in the reports is not the smoke grenades or the length of the knife; it is the description of the killer by those who knew him.
He was not a known delinquent or a chaotic disruptor. He was, by all accounts, a “good student”: obedient, civic-minded, helpful and the recipient of more than 20 commendations.
The profile demands an unorthodox and unsettling conclusion: Our definition of a “good citizen” — compliant, quiet and academically successful — is not just a poor metric for mental health; it might be camouflage for deep pathology.
In Taiwan’s high-pressure, conformist culture, the quiet ones are rewarded. We praise the student who does not cause trouble, who gets good grades and who “interacts harmoniously.” We assume that silence equals stability. Chang’s descent from a commended student to a drunk-driving military dischargee and finally to a mass murderer suggests that silence was not peace, but suppression. By valuing obedience over expression, young men such as Chang drift into a void where their only connection is with the dead.
It is chilling that Chang did not just snap, he followed a script. Police investigations revealed he was “invested” in the 2014 Taipei metro attacker, Cheng Chieh (鄭捷), researching him extensively and empathizing with his isolation.
Chang reportedly wrote: “If Cheng Chieh knew someone was willing to listen to him, maybe the tragedy would not have happened.”
It creates a paradox that policy experts and parents must confront. Chang found more kinship with a deceased murderer than with society around him. He sought a mentor in a monster, because the “normal” world — the one that praised him for being quiet — likely offered him no language for his pain. When he fell out of the structured loops of school and military service, becoming unemployed and estranged from his family, the “good student” identity collapsed, leaving a vacuum that only a violent narrative could fill.
The National Union of Counseling Psychologists encouraged witnesses of the attack to seek “mutual support.” It is necessary, but reactive. True prevention requires a cultural shift that is far more difficult than installing security cameras.
Society must stop viewing “introversion” and “obedience” as inherently virtuous when they come without genuine social connection. We need to be as wary of the child who never speaks as we are of the one who screams.
An “infrastructure of loneliness” in modern cities is efficient at processing bodies through metros and schools, but terrible at anchoring souls. To stop the next Chang Wen, we cannot just look for weapons; we must look for the “good students” who are disappearing into the silence they were taught to keep. We must interrupt their isolation before they find their only validation in the history books of horror.
Last month’s tragedy is not just that Chang killed; it is that he felt he had to become a monster to finally be heard. Until we learn to listen to the quietest among us, we will continue to be deafened by their violence.
Y. Tony Yang is an endowed professor at George Washington University.
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on Monday announced that she would dissolve parliament on Friday. Although the snap election on Feb. 8 might appear to be a domestic affair, it would have real implications for Taiwan and regional security. Whether the Takaichi-led coalition can advance a stronger security policy lies in not just gaining enough seats in parliament to pass legislation, but also in a public mandate to push forward reforms to upgrade the Japanese military. As one of Taiwan’s closest neighbors, a boost in Japan’s defense capabilities would serve as a strong deterrent to China in acting unilaterally in the
Taiwan last week finally reached a trade agreement with the US, reducing tariffs on Taiwanese goods to 15 percent, without stacking them on existing levies, from the 20 percent rate announced by US President Donald Trump’s administration in August last year. Taiwan also became the first country to secure most-favored-nation treatment for semiconductor and related suppliers under Section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act. In return, Taiwanese chipmakers, electronics manufacturing service providers and other technology companies would invest US$250 billion in the US, while the government would provide credit guarantees of up to US$250 billion to support Taiwanese firms
RSS