[Warning: This is a serious post. If you've already seen the Jan 2 entry, you might want to take a cold shower or something before giving this a read.]
Taiwan's vice-president feels the need to ask the electorate to forgive her party's recent missteps. Which would seem to augur poorly for her party's chances, given that the legislative elections are only 12 days from now...
Vice-President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) yesterday blasted the
Ministry of Education over its "manhandling" of the re-emplacement of the
inscription at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall, saying she was sorry the
project had been handled without consideration of public sentiment.
At an election rally in Jhonghe, Lu, the first Democratic Progressive Party
(DPP) heavyweight to criticize Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng's
(杜正勝) decisions regarding the hall, said the minister should
be blamed for DPP's recent waning popularity.
"From my observations, the ministry's mishandling of the former CKS Hall
issue was a major blow to the party's support over the past few months. Tu must
apologize to the public for not handling the matter in a more genteel and
agreeable manner," she said. [emphasis added]
Time to play pin the tail on the scapegoat. Yes, Tu engaged in some regrettable and counter-productive name-calling,
but there are plenty of other people responsible for the independence
party's fall in fortunes - not the least of whom would be Lu's boss,
President Chen Shui-bian. (Bit hard for her to blame the big guy in
public, though.)
Anyways, let's not forget the circumstances here. Recall that the Taiwanese Central Government:
- paid for 240,000 meters of prime real-estate in central Taipei *
- paid for the construction of a monument to Chiang Kai-shek
- paid yearly for the maintenance and upkeep of said monument
Then one day, after making this sizable investment, the national
government decided it wanted out of the dictator-glorification
business. So it tried to rename the hall. At which point, the Taipei
City government said, not so fast. We love CKS, and we WANT
him glorified. But instead of making the national government a
fair market-value offer on the property so that the monument could continue to
send this message, the city government decided to take the
cheap and confiscatory route instead:
We hereby proclaim Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall to be a temporary
historical site, they said. The national government may still "own" it
in some kind of legalistic sense, but from now on, we in City Hall, WE
will control it. Don't even think of damaging or desecrating this
ancient (27 year-old) artifact - not a SINGLE nail may be used to hang
a new sign, nor a single old name-plate be removed. And just to
show you we mean business, we'll call out the police and set up road blocks
to prevent anybody from doing so.
(My, political speech sure is grand. And cheap too, when it's on someone else's nickel!)
At this point the central government said, playtime's over, and sent
the national police to protect the folks sent in to change the name on
the door.
In a nutshell, THOSE were the circumstances under which Tu said what he
said. He may not have been "genteel and agreeable," but it's not
always easy being "genteel and agreeable" when you're in the middle of
a good, old-fashioned showdown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSTSCRIPT:
During the standoff, I often thought that both sides should have asked
a court to decide who has jurisdiction over the monument. (Based on
purely libertarian principles, I think the national government had the
stronger case.) Surely that should have been the FIRST step, instead
of the face-saving FINAL one, taken by City Hall only after it had
already backed down.
(On the other hand, you might argue it was wise the courts weren't
involved. Because no matter WHAT the judge's ruling, someone was bound to be
disappointed, and the court's political impartiality would have been
subsequently questioned by one side or the other.)
Leaving that aside, I wonder whether this affair hasn't filled
Taiwanese businessmen with a certain sense of unease. After all, they
just witnessed City Hall arbitrarily declare the Chiang Kai-shek
Memorial Hall a temporary historical site. They know Taipei was busy
spending big bucks finding a panel of "experts" to testify in favor of
that ruling. And if those businessmen happened to be CKS fans, no doubt
they were busy applauding.
But here's the thing: if City Hall can do that to a 27 year-old
monument belonging to the national government, why can't it do the same
to a 27 year-old FACTORY belonging to YOU as well?
Just think of the shakedown possibilities here: "Hello Mr.
Businessman, we'd like an especially LARGE campaign contribution from
you this year. And if we don't get it, maybe we'll announce your shop
is a temporary historical site. (We've done it before, you may have
noticed.) Now, don't let the process worry you - we'll just spend THE NEXT
YEAR assembling a group of "experts" who'll decide whether or not to
make that status permanent. In the meantime, please don't forget you're forbidden by law from making ANY changes to the building's interior
or exterior."
"Terribly sorry if that puts a crimp in your operations, old bean, but this is our precious historical heritage we're talking about!"
As
I see it, the only defense a businessman would ever have in that
scenario would be public opinion. And were I in his shoes, I'd be very
uncomfortable having my investments protected by anything so fickle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Or stole. Stole it fair and square, the KMT will have you know!