China: Protest in Taiwan criticized as democratic violence
Mainland China envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) flied back to Beijing 7, Nov after his 4-day “ice-breaking” visit to Taiwan.
As the chairman of China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS), Chen, led the highest-ranked official delegation ever from mainland to Taiwan, to negotiate for new deals that set down agreements on direct shipping and flights, mail services and food safety. It's said to be a historic leap on cross-strait tie.
In spite that Chen allegedly came to for the peaceful and constructive purpose that is to “enhance the economic cooperation across the strait”, people sided with the “one China, one Taiwan” principle viewed it more than abhorrent. Even though as many as 20000 police were dispatched to guard the visitors, swarms of Taiwanese numbered by 100,000, most of them mobilized by the present out-party Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), still flowed to wherever Chen showed up to brandish their topmost hostility. It goes without saying to be a straightforward political demonstration to mainland that “you are not welcomed, F**K off!”
But the firepower is not only directed at the visitor. The Taiwan president Ma Yingjiu, has been railed against in these days for the crackdown of protests, speech freedom black-out, and the downgrading of Taiwan's sovereignty.
During the “Action of Seige” designed by DPP to trap the envoy Chen in the hotel, city police responded, unfortunately, in a way to catalyze it into a violent clash. On 4, Nov, when Lian-zhan, the Honor President of KMT was dining Chen at Yuanshan hotel, the alerted police guarding outside forced a shop across the street to shut down the “Song of Taiwan” being played aloud. People exhibiting Taiwan's national flag and emblem were dispersed and blocked from the hotel, and speeches like “Taiwan doesn't belong to China” were muzzled.
The bloody clash finally broke out at the night when the present KMT president Guo-Boxiong dined Chen on another hotel. The police were confronted by a group of thousands of agitated people, including a few aldermen. Stones and clubs were hurled, barricades were pulled down, and gasoline bombs were fired. More than one hundred police were injured, many of them sent to hospital, while the opposing party suffered as well, scores of the protesters injured or arrested. Chen is thereby trapped in the hotel for 8 hours until midnight, a quite embarrassing situation to the host. The Democratic Progressive Party played a major role in the incident by a fanfare mobilization.
In the days following, Taiwan witnessed a mutual accusation. The president of Republic of China, Ma-yinjiu, criticized DDP of irresponsible ,who rebutted that they were just calling for a protest against the government's crackdown upon speech freedom.
Taiwan bloggers gave enthusiastic responses. A GV post by Taiwan author I-FAN shows the native bloggers’ anger with the way police restrained people's legitimate right to protest. Some of them moaned the value of democracy is lost.
Meanwhile, a broadcast is on air to record a sit-in of college students and scholars in Taipei, against the resurgence of marshal law and violent authority in Taiwan.
But the other side of voices is not out of its momentum.
Blogger Xinhua posted his opinion on Duowei blog, analyzing the motive behind DDP's action
民进党为了摆脱其深陷“阿扁门”贪腐案而无法切割、民意极其低落的困境，企图抓住陈云林到达台湾的机会，发动如影随形的抗议行动，动员绿营支持者“上街”抗争，重新制造岛内族群对立，以挽救其不断沉沦的态势。
民进党街头闹事、诉诸暴力的作为被国际社会看作是民主之耻，也遭到岛内舆论的普遍谴责…甚至台湾一些大学生不去质疑民进党的街头暴力，反而到台“行政院”门前静坐示威，抗议警察维安行为过度。显示出这些大学生对于“民主”的幼稚理解。
民主包含了和平、和解、和谐，包含着宽容、谅解、妥协，包含着沟通、协
商、谈判，恰恰没有街头抗争、聚众闹事，更不容许诉诸暴力。所以，民主首先是一种包容对方、严以律己的素养；“街头”运动显示一种浮躁不安，往往孕育着对抗与冲动，常常出现非理性、
无约束的行动，当自己的诉求久久实现不了时，会作出过激的反应，狂躁地向对手、向社会宣泄自己的情绪，导致社会动乱。
Without constraint, excessive action will be made when appeal is not satisfied, resulting in a tumultuous society.
没有法制，也就没有民主。你可以聚会、游行、自由表达，但必须在法律允许的限度内进行，必须依法申请，在规定的路线或场合进行，不得
妨碍公共秩序，不得影响交通，不得妨碍、更不得伤及他人，更不得威胁社会、乃至国家安全。
He conclude that, there is not a slight of democracy in DPP's actions.
On youtube, a comment was made following the footage of the clash:
台灣的民主已經到了人民濫權的地步
不是暴民的選民應該站出來
不能再容忍這些假藉民主之名
卻破壞法治 欺負善良百姓的流氓
Those non-mob voters should stand out not to withstand such hooligans any more.
Now a critical question: is Taiwan over-democratic? Is citizen disobedience allowed to such an extent of violence?
Whatever clash is left on the island, CPC this time made itself a big gain. It wins popular support, embarrasses the Taiwan authority so that it can further pressure it near the mainland, and signs treaties with practical meaning. That might be why the chief of State Office of Taiwan, Wangyi, praised the home-coming Chen Yunlin: You don't disappoint your mission.
20 comments
Hi, Anrew: care to read Wikipedia about Taiwan? There are many more sources if you want to learn more. You may have an opinion or two about this topic, but you facts are wrong.
Hi Doris:
Now, both sides of strait begin communicating. People will begin to understand each other better. The two sides will integrate step by step. This is what most people want, a peaceful reunion. The DPP and the independent minded people are scared and cornered. They will bark the loudest. Good for them. But does it work?
If DPP (provided they would be back in power) declares independence, then everybody knows what is going to happen. Chinese people are doing whatever they can to prevent this from happening. Only some brainwashed laggards and enemies of Chinese will promote hatred between the two sides and an eventual war. These people ignore the consensus of the international community and the will of 1.3 billion Chinese people. You say: they are still fighting, I say: why fight, let’s talk.
In his presidential election campaign, Ma Ying-jeou advocated that the Taiwan’s sovereignty will be decided by 23 millions people live in Taiwan. How are we going to know what most people want? There is a legal term, REFERENDUM! Just like Quebec Canada, let the majority of people decide. However, I have not seen a referendum in Taiwan and do not know what the most people want.
Mr Charlie1111, I never said that you cannot express your own personal opinion. What I asked you not to do is “unless you have proper and accurate evidence to prove it is the opinion of the majority, please restrain from using the terms ‘what most people want’”. Your voice only count one, there are still 22,999,999 voices yet to be counted. The best way to count the voices, my personal opinion, is “referendum”.
By the way, is there any one here can help me understand this:
under which law, the Taiwanese policemen could behave the way I witnessed in the week of 11/3-11/7, please see the in list in my previous response?
Thank you very much for your opinion.
Charlie you should be the one reading wikipedia as here is a quote directly backing up my statement regarding the fact that 80% of the Taiwanese descended from the Taiwanese that were in Taiwan before 1947 have aboriginal ancestory see below Charlie it is as clear as day.
“The human leukocyte antigen typing study and mitochondrion DNA analysis performed in recent years show that more than 88% of the benshengren population have some degree of aboriginal origin (Sim 2003).”
I have also spoken to a Taiwanese girl and she voiced the same opinion regarding the wide spread presence of malayo-polynesina DNA amongst the Taiwanese population. So there you are Charlie that fact is as sound as ever.
What’s more Charlie I found another direct quotation from Wikipedia backing up my statement about the ongoing development of a collective Taiwanese national identity. See below
“In a poll released in December 2006 by the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), 57% of people on Taiwan consider themselves to be Taiwanese. 23% Chinese and 20% both Chinese and Taiwanese (China Post, 2006). The sense of a collective Taiwanese identity has continued to increase despite fluctuations in support for pro-independence political parties. This has been cited as evidence that the concept of Taiwanese identity is not the product of local political manipulation, but an actual phenomenon of ethnic and sociopolitical identities (Corcuff 2002:137-149, 207; Hsiao 2003:157-170).”
Once again Charlie my claims are rock solid. Like I said it is your information which seems to be based on blind indoctrination and self opinionated arrogance.
I find your ongoing insistance that “it is the unflinching desire of the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese to be united with the Chinese motherland” pure comedy. I mean lets face it if this really was true it would make perfect sense for the C.C.P. to encourage the Taiwanese to hold a internationally monitored binding referendum on their future. With the C.C.P. not resorting to threats, inimidation or economic blackmail.
So ask yourself why is the C.C.P so against giving the Taiwanese be given a clear choice on their own future? I could undermine more of your unfounded claims but I really need to go now.
Hi, Andrew:
The one you referred to sounds like a DPP propaganda. I am not really trust that one. Try to read this one:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan.
There are some things that you need to realize:
1. If you have seen the map of the ROC, you should know that ROC includes the whole of China, just like a map of PRC. Both sides are still technically at war with the same goal of unifying China.
2. Both sides share the same culture, religion and language. They enjoy the same food, the same leisure and even the same joke. The Taiwanese language is one of the dialects on Mainland. Guo Yu is the mandarin used on Mainland. Every dialect in Taiwan are from mainland with the exception of the 2% minority. The written language is the same.
3. Only a few years ago most of the people considered themselves Chinese. But recently more people consider themselves Taiwanese. This is not because their ethnic status has changed. This is due to DPP’s brainwash as evidenced in the file you refer to.
4. Huamns share 98% of Chromosomes with Chimpanzee. The DNA analysis has little to do with the topic at hand.
5. I think referendum is not an option at least for the time being. As I said, both sides have been at war for the past 60 years with the same goal of unifying China. Why nothing has been achieved, both sides have tried their best to vilify each other. So a referendum now will only generate irrational results. The current development is encouraging. Both sides should engage and be friends from now on. Maybe after another 60 years, may be less, people can really decide what to do to solve the issue. Only then can people really make a decision not based on emotion, but rationality.
The DPP is scared to death of the current development because they have a blind goal of independence. They don’t care the well being of the people. If they dare to declare independence, I am sure they are the ones who run out of Taiwan the fastest.
The current president’s action is unconstitutional, he must discuss with the congress (sort of like the congress) before he can sign this international trade treaty.
Also, the polices’ actions are unconstitutional as well.
1. People have the right to their bodily safety and freedom and property.
– The police are arresting people during protest, taking their property without warrants (scooters and flag).
2. Freedom to travel.
– Also the police stopped college students in the middle of the road just because they went pass the hotel Chan stayed at. The students should have freedom to travel.
3. Freedom of expression.
– the people can say whatever they want without any pressure at all from the government.
– Song of Taiwan should be played freely.
4. Freedom of assembly
– students can assemble and protest. The violent protest was only ONE incident during these series of events, yet the later protests were stopped and the students dismissed for the fear from the police of another violent protest, the police attacked first.
5. Right to life, work and property.
– again, they are deprived of their property during protests.
6. Right to elect, impeach……
– if the people want they can impeach the president!!!!!
Both the president and the police forces violated the constitution, they should be tried in court.
If Taiwanese people are considered to be “Chinese” because of DNA, and inheritance, then America should be considered to be the United States of England (or Britain). Taiwan has their own Constitution, president, laws, and even military. China does not tax, rule or protect Taiwan, they do not have rightful rule over Taiwan.
they must fix the constitution, why include china part of the taiwan….?!?!or even mongolia?!?!
same culture, food, language, doesn’t matter
Americans and the British has the same language, but they are different country, in fact, the language Taiwanese originated from cave-man chinese thought it was influenced by Japanese during WWII and many other factors.
“Guo Yu” means “national language” if u r referring to “G-on wen” then its different, but then again, two countries can share a language, just like Britain and America, Spain with Latin America, and Portugal with Brazil. Well, then Canada is shared between France and Britain……Not to mention the middle east where most people know Arabic but doesn’t make all of them the same country.
Charlie
Love your attitude. You recomend I read wikipedia which I do and then you rubbish what I find because it doens’t conform with your beliefs.
Anyway your beliefs seem completely unfounded and biased firstly. Where exactly do you get this idea that there is a universal befief amongst the people of Taiwan that they want to be part of the P.R.C. If that really is the case why did President Ma campaign on the principle
of “No Unification” and “No independence” If there really was evidence of widespread desire to be a vassal of the P.R.C. then surely the K.M.T and President Ma would have campaigned on the principle of “Yes to imminent unification”. So why didn’t Ma campaign on the principle of unification??? Surely the best way to find out what the Taiwanese want is for them to have a referendum as opposed to allowing the C.C.P to decide for them. I guess if they did have a referendum in Taiwan which indicated a desire for independence it would be most convenient for you to decide it as irrational. So on what basis exactly do you claim to know what the people in Taiwan want?
You speak of D.D.P brain washing but forget to mention C.C.P brainwashing do your really believe that the P.R.C has a freer media or greater freedom of speach than Taiwan like I said Taiwan is ranked 30th while the P.R.C
is ranked well over a hundred places behind. According to Reporters Without Borders (RWB) which is also critical of the U.S.A before you claim that RWB is a lackey of the U.S.A
Anyway I find it completely farcical that you speak of D.P.P brainwashing but fail to mention C.C.P brainwashing. I see far more evidence of brainwashing in the P.R.C than in Taiwan. For example it is easy to see numerous media mocking and criticising both green and blue parties along with their policies. There is no such variety of expressin allowed in the P.R.C. all the state controlled media does there is pump out the same repetitive message of how great the government is and how much everyone loves the C.C.P and that everyone is happy being part of the P.R.C. which is kind of akin to brainwashing.
Anyway if you look at the number of protests that were allowed during the D.D.P’s reign against the then President Chen then you would have to logically conclude that there is a greater expression of a greater variety of ideas than in the P.R.C. I mean do you serioiusly think people in the P.R.C could so openly criticise Chairman Hu and the C.C.P. Anyway under the D.P.P varying political groups in Taiwan were given immensely greater freedom to express various political opinions including pro-unification that would be unimaginable than in the P.R.C. Ask yourself what is more likely for someone in Taiwan under the D.D.P to be allowed to express pro unification sentiment or someone in the P.R.C to openly speak of genuine autonomy for Tibet, East Turkestan or Inner Mongolia. If you have any sense you would agree that accusing the D.D.P of brainwashing while claiming the C.C.P is innocent of such charges defies logic.
In regards to the D.D.P’s lack of sincerity in the welfare of the Taiwanese people. Who was it that prevented Taiwan from accessing the World Health Organisation during the S.A.Rs epidemic and endangered not only the health and safety of the people of Taiwan but also the greater Asian Pacific region. That’s right the C.C.P whom decided that forcing Taiwan to yield their self determination was more important than protecting them from the SARs epidemic.
Anyway like I said ethnicity and custom does not equate to nationality. Like I said if “culture religion and language” form the basis of forming a nation state then logically the Innner Mongolia should be joined with the Republic of Mongolia as they have the same “culture religion and language”
Finally the R.O.C constitution is completely archaic as it includes the Republic of Mongolia, parts of the central Asian states and Russia so to use it as a point of reference is completely irrelevant. Remember Taiwan was never governed as part of the R.O.C proper anyway
Hi, Andrew:
I did mention brainwashing from both sides for the last 60 years. And after reading your comment about Tibet etc., I know I need to give up and wish you luck. I and many others in and outside of China debated many issues including Tibet before and after the Olympics. This debate died down considerably as many of our western friends, well fed yet ignorant, shifted their focus back to their 401ks. Even our vice president candidate, Sarah Palin doesn’t know Africa is a continent. I am not saying you are one of them. And I respect your persistence with your opinion. But this debate leads to nowhere as the Chinese may know better about themselves than you.
Like I said, the time is not right for referendum. Ma’s campaign of three “No”s reflected this situation. The current development is encouraging. Let Taiwan and mainland work it out. Be patient.
Tibet is part of China and will always be. Dalai can give up all of his outrageous claims and go back to his temple. Or he can remain a fugitive in India.
Mongolia got independent when China was in chaos and Russians forced it upon China. We accepted that and will work with our Mongolia friends.
What East Turkestan? Never was a country, never will in China.
If number of protests are an indicator of democracy, then China will be the one as we have hundreds a day (largest population in the world). If survey indicates the government support, then this shows China has the highest: http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/261.pdf. If economic growth is an indicator, then China has been the leader for the last 30 plus years and will be for some time to come. If contribution to world economic growth is an indicator, then China contributes 27% of world economic growth last year, more this year and beyond.
From the perspective of promoting democracy (in whatever form that works) in mainland China, Chen has been a disaster. Democracy as practiced in Taiwan–granted it is young and immature–has impressed many people in mainland China as something not to be taken seriously (think of the physical attacks some legislators indulge in). With his alleged misconduct, Chen has strengthened the stereotype among mainland Chinese that democracy in Taiwan is a farce when the example of democracy in Taiwan could serve as a rallying cry “Yes we can” to people on the other side of the strait who share the same cultural traditions. It is a shame that such a narrow-minded and self-absorbed demagogue like Chen Shui-bien has led Taiwan for so many years. Impartial prosecution of him should help redeem some of the credentials of democracy with the Chinese people at large.
Any way, ideology aside, let Taiwan and mainland have peaceful dialogue a chance to know each other, let the people from both sides of the strait work more closely together to fight this global economic storm. Let brothers be brothers and sisters be sisters and let’s reject those who want to divide us.
Dear Bob,
Actually, I don’t think those news in such websites like aboluowang are not convincible.
P.S. Bob you know who I am.
Looking forward to your reply in my xiaonei.