William Shakespeare wrote in Romeo and Juliet: “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Following that logic, surrender — by any other name — would remain just as tragic.
When two dogs face off, tucking in one’s tail means submission. There is an even more obsequious gesture: By rolling onto its back and exposing its belly, a dog is not only refusing to fight back, but is also assuring it would not even try to flee. So, in the canine world, “lying flat” (tang ping, 躺平) for peace — which is what the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is suggesting our youth do in the face of threats from China — is nothing less than to surrender in exchange for peace.
At the very least, when someone raises their hands in surrender, they are still standing like a person. Does a “lying flat” kind of surrender even remotely resemble a person with a backbone?
Take a look at how the KMT set the stage for the so-called “vision” and “prospects” of this week’s meeting between KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The party posted a video on its YouTube account in which people were lying on the ground, promoting the slogan: “Only with peace can we lie flat. Peace above all.”
This, coupled with what figures such as Cheng have long extolled — unification — the party’s logic becomes clear: Only through unification — which is effectively just another word for surrender — could there be peace, and only with peace could people “lie flat.”
The problem is that history tells a different story. Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang and Tibet — which signed peace agreements with China’s governing authorities in 1947, 1949 and 1951 respectively — did not escape the outcome of violent repression.
The KMT’s narrative that unification would lead to peace and allow Taiwanese to “lie flat” is an oversimplification that conceals the core premise. The reality is that unification, or surrender, would lead to signing some form of a peace agreement, which in turn would allow people to “lie flat” in a grave, prison, re-education camp or an operating table as their organs are harvested while still alive.
Peace has never been a result of surrender. Rather, tragedy is the only consequence of surrender.
Whether in power or serving as the opposition, the KMT’s philosophy for survival has always been the same. Domestically, it maximizes personal gain while otherwise doing the bare minimum. Internationally, it “lies flat” — opposing military procurement and armament, and refusing to fight. Fully aware that there is no such thing as a “free lunch,” the KMT still indulges in the fantasy of free peace. Is a KMT that touts “lying flat,” an extension of its lazy opportunism, anything other than a malignant tumor that Taiwan urgently needs to remove?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS