Accusations that the Taiwanese member of the South Korean pop group TWICE, Chou Tzu-yu (周子瑜), was a “pro-Taiwanese independence” activist has caused China’s Huawei Technologies Co (華為) to demand LG Uplus drop Chou from endorsing its Y6 chain of cellphones.
Hey, remember that "1992 Consensus" -- the one which allows that there's only one China, but China & Taiwan are both free to define that One China however they wish?
You didn't really believe that fairy-tale bullshit now, did you?
If you were stupid enough to believe it, just picture poor little 16-year-old Chou Tzu-yu, who in her innocence, thought it was OK to define One China as Taiwan, and wave her country's flag.
Let us return to learn a little more about Huang An, shall we?
Huang, despite being Taiwanese by birth, began developing his career in China in the late 1990s. Huang has made a name for himself in recent years by informing the Chinese government and netizens about what he regards as pro-Taiwanese independence individuals and their activities.[emphasis added]
Bravo, Huang An. It's not everyone who can boast of possessing Taiwan's most punchable face:
(Backpfeifengesicht Huang An, hard at work naming names to Communist China's secret police. Ka-ching!)
Once Huang's treachery became known, he immediately ran under the skirts of "former" Taiwanese mob boss Chang An-le.
Because, you know: punchable face.
Meanwhile, Huang has returned to Taiwan ahead of the Lunar New Year holiday and is said to be fearing for his safety [from angry Taiwanese]. Huang has reportedly written to former Bamboo Union (竹聯幫) gang leader Chang An-le (張安樂), known as “the White Wolf,” asking for protection.
There is a story - probably apocryphal - which says that some years after sentencing Socrates to death, the citizens of Athens repented of their decision. Unable to restore life to the old man after the fact, they did the next best thing: they shunned one of his prosecutors.
This was more severe than it sounds, for it went beyond mere social disapprobation. As part of this informal punishment, they refused to have anything to do with him -- not even buying or selling or engaging in the simplest of commerce.
Under these conditions, the prosecutor of Socrates was unable to procure so much as a crust of bread to sate his hunger, and is said to have starved to death within a week.
Just throwin' that out there...
UPDATE: A stunned and pallid Chou Tzu-yu bows and apologizes, lifelessly reading a scripted self-criticism straight out of the Mao Tse-tung era.
It's like watching an ISIS captive ritually denouncing his home country at gunpoint. About the only thing missing is her eyelids blinking out in Morse code:
T-H-E-Y H-A-V-E M-Y F-A-M-I-L-Y
Of course, I don't know Morse code, so maybe I missed it.
UPDATE #2: Huang An represents Chinese nationalism at its finest.
Call me crazy, but I don't think the Communist Party's brutal decision to demand this the day before Taiwan's presidential election is going to win the CCP's preferred candidate Eric Chu (KMT) any votes.
This is the "friendly" cross-Strait relations the KMT has been bragging about?
UPDATE #3: Like many other snakes, Huang An has a detachable lower jaw. In this photo, the ophidian Huang illustrates the girth of the Chinese Communist phalluses he routinely fellates.
The Foreigner has always maintained that website (or Facebook page) owners have the absolute right to treat comments as leniently or as strictly as they see fit.
Now in general, I see no earthly reason why the average site owner would allow their site to be hijacked by 80,000 anti-democratic messages from the Chinese Communist Party apparatus. But in this case, Tsai's decision to leave their anti-democratic screeds online is no doubt the correct one.
After all, it reminds Taiwanese voters who their enemies are.
UPDATE (November 12 / 2015): From today's Taipei Times:
Ma said nothing in response [to Xi's contention that China's missiles were not targeted against Taiwan]. He did not point out the obvious: Taiwan is the only nation in sight in the direction and range of China’s nearly 1,600 short-range missiles along its coast across the Taiwan Strait.
If, as Xi claims, the missiles are not aimed at Taiwan, what are they aimed at? Xi cannot possibly be suggesting that the missiles are targeting bluefin tuna off the coast of Pingtung County or humpback dolphins of the coast of Changhua County, can he?
Over the past 10-15 years, other observers have noticed the similarity between Taiwan's KMT and cargo cultists -- particularly as the KMT touted economic relations with China as a panacea for curing all of Taiwan's woes.
After nearly 8 years with Ma in the presidency, voters don't believe Chinese manna's going to fall from heaven anymore, so the KMT's cargo cult has morphed from the economic to the political realm.
Got a tough election coming up?
The correct response isn't to fight a tough campaign or even prepare to retrench in the face of potentially-large losses at the polls.
No, the correct response is to go crawling to Beijing for a contentless photo-op with China's Communist dictator.
'Cause remember those 500,000 people who marched last year against closer trade relations with China? Well, when they see Ma shaking hands with Xi, they're gonna have a complete change of heart and demand MOAR ONE CHINA.
Now personally, I would be inclined to vote against the KMT for pulling a stunt like this to influence the outcome of an election only 2 months away. (Recall how bitterly the KMT bitched and moaned for 4 years about "sympathy votes" after an assassination attempt prior to the presidential election of 2004. Now however, the party seems positively smug about DELIBERATELY manufacturing a "November Surprise".)
But that's just me. I very much want to see how Taiwanese voters react.
Parents and politicians on Tuesday were infuriated when they found a government-sponsored educational Web site to promote national defense concepts showing a video of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) on parade, along with about 40 World War II movies that were produced by the Chinese [Communist] government.
Faced with criticism, the Kuomingtang backed down and removed the Chinese Communist Party's videos, blaming a nameless assistant for the "misunderstanding".
Meanwhile, a solitary figure in KMT Central Headquarters was heard muttering:
UPDATE (Oct 1 / 2015): What's truly ironic is that the China Post continues to push a policy which is responsible for the KMT's current abysmal showing in the polls.
It's as if they've learned absolutely nothing this past year-and-a-half.
...the Chinese travel agency organizing the tour demanded that the Taiwanese travel agency stop showing anti-Communist documentaries on tour buses carrying Chinese tourists, ... [and] it also demanded that Taiwanese guides refrain from expressing points of view different from their Chinese clients. [emphasis added]
Fortunately, the Taiwanese Tourist Bureau told the CCP to get bent. Whether it would respond similarly under a Hung Hsiu-chu administration however, is a question we will fortunately never have the misfortune of ever having to answer.
The opposition party has been bullying the Hong Kong-born Kuomintang president since he was first inaugurated in May 2008. The bully preys on those who are afraid of him. As they show fear, the bullying gets all the more overbearing. It's a vicious cycle.
[...]
He has been a pushover for more than seven years, in addition to being labeled as an incompetent president. Actually, he isn't incompetent. He is a victim of the bullying.
Which leads to the inevitable question: If President Ma really is the spineless coward that Joe Hung declares him to be, why is it so difficult for his supporters to imagine that he'd capitulate to Communist China?
(Or is Joe Hung so divorced from reality as to believe that the Chinese Communist Party is a lesser bully than the DPP and the Sunflower Movement?)
“The Taiwan issue will not remain unresolved for a long time. We will not abandon the possibility of using force; according to the law, it is also an option to resolve the issue by military means if necessary,” said Liu [Jingsong], a former president of the influential Chinese Academy of Military Sciences. [emphasis added]
Using members of the Taiwanese mafia, no less - for plausible deniability. That PhD in law from Harvard sure does come in handy sometimes.
With a bloody face, a wound on his forehead and blood-stained clothing, Liang Po-chou (梁伯洲) told reporters at the square in front of the temple that he was assaulted by five or six people using steel blowpipes.
Liang said he was there with his father, Changhua County Councilor Liang Chen-hsiang (梁禎祥) of the Democratic Progressive Party, and other people trying to show Zhang posters with slogans against the cross-strait service trade agreement and slogans that the future of Taiwan is a matter for 23 million Taiwanese people to decide.
The “gangster-like people” began beating him when he was trying to argue with executive officers of the temple because he was angry that they asked staff to set off firecrackers on the streets in an attempt to disperse people who refused to leave, Liang said.
We will never be brothers Neither countrymen, nor blood brothers. You don’t have the freedom breath - We can’t be even stepbrothers. You have called yourselves “elder brothers” - We would like to be younger brothers, but not yours. There’re so many of you, but you all are faceless. You are huge, but we are great. You press… you trudge, You will choke on your envy. You don’t know what freedom means, You all are encased in chains from childhood up. Silence is golden in your home, And we burn Molotov cocktails, Yes, there’s warm blood in our hearts, What sort of blind “relatives” are you for us? We all have fearless eyes, We are dangerous without any weapons. We grew up and became courageous We all are at the shooters’ gunpoint. We were forced to our knees by the hangmen – But we revolted and corrected everything. The rats are hiding and praying for nothing – They will wash themselves with their blood. You have new instructions – And there’re revolt lights here. You have your Tsar, but we have Democracy. We will never be brothers.
"What is this doing on a blog mostly about Taiwan?" you might ask...
Curiously enough, no KMT members were ever arrested when they broke the law in 2006 while protesting against former Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian.
But, I guess the law just doesn't apply to you if you're a KMT man...
With the implementation delay of the Cross-Strait Trade in Services Agreement, many countries have placed a hold on their current trade negotiations with Taiwan, said Economic Minister Chang Chia-juch (張家祝) yesterday.
The current dispute over the cross-strait service trade agreement would not negatively affect the US’ position on Taiwan’s bid to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesman Mark Zimmer said.
Former Executive Yuan spokesperson Hu Yu-wei (胡幼偉) has recently come under fire for posting a message on Facebook saying that students who participated in the Sunflower movement [a protest movement against a service trade agreement made between the KMT & the Chinese Communist Party] could face job-hunting difficulties due to their “perceived anti-establishment tendencies.”
Hu...said several high-level managers at private corporations had told him they planned to include questions such as “Did you participate in the student movement?” and “Do you support the student protesters’ anti-establishment behavior?” into their list of routine job interview questions.
Know your place, peasants. You may think you have some sort of right to "free-speech" and "freedom of assembly"...but pro-Communist Red Fat Cats will do their damndest to make sure you'll never work in Taiwan again!
Hu Yu-wei has done the people of Taiwan an enormous favor by this frank admission. But he would do them an even greater favor if he were to name which companies have adopted this policy of Communist repression.
That would provide democracy-loving Taiwanese the information they need to boycott traitorous freedom-hating companies and bankrupt them.
Punch back twice as hard.
Postscript: Of course, there is no need for the thuggish Hu Yu-wei to name names.
All that is necessary is for but a single student to be asked an irrelevant political litmus test question during a job interview, and the 500,000-strong student movement can arrange the rest.
...the Sunflower students, who violated the law by hijacking the parliament and storming the government house of the Executive Yuan,[conducting a peaceful sit-in at government buildings against an economic surrender agreement with Communist China] have succeeded in imposing their “people's democracy” on Taiwan. Theirs isn't democracy. It's monocracy. [Emphasis added]
Guess that old trope about Asians being really good at math was just a myth...
Oh, but wait, the best part comes at the end of the China Post's latest editorial:
The last card President Ma may play may be to invoke the Statute Governing the Relations between the People in the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area to have the trade in services agreement go into force by an executive order. [emphasis added]
..it's probably the only way to ensure Taiwan's economic survival.
Evidently, the only way for Taiwan to avoid the dangers of monocracy...is for its president to govern by dictat!
...will the grandiose Sunflower activists call it quits? They believe they are tough and strong, but there is another interpretation of “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.” It means: when the situation becomes almost impossible, those who are truly strong are wise enough to pull out, rather than being totally decimated.
Perhaps Joe Hung refers to a facetious screwball interpretation however, which suggests that apathy and cowardice are preferable to perserverance and resolution.
Understandably, such an aphorism holds greater appeal to a man who's sold his soul to the Communist Party of China:
(Half-a-million Taiwanese protest a KMT-Chinese Communist Party service trade pact which they fear will strip them of their liberties. Image from the Taipei Times.)
Almost everybody knows that the signing of the [services] trade agreement [between Taiwan and Communist China] is the right thing to do. [Emphasis added]
That would be true...if "almost everybody" was defined as "34% of everybody". From the Asia Times:
A survey of 1,008 Taiwan adults released in late July by Taiwan Indicators Survey Research found that 48% opposed signing the services trade pact [with Communist China], while 34% were in favor. [Emphasis added]
To the editors of the China Post: 34% << "Almost everybody".
I know math is hard, but you could at least try a little.
1,600 Chinese missiles targetted on Taiwan, ready to rain terror down on its citizens at any time...yet Taiwan's China Post distracts its readers with a jeremiad against American drones somewhere off in far-flung Yemen, or Pakistan, or wherever.
Been a while since I last checked the blog, and I noticed a comment on my Tsai Eng-meng post.
For those unfamiliar with Tsai Eng-meng, Tsai Eng-meng is a Taiwanese food magnate. Got his start in Taiwan, but made it big in China.
Upon returning to Taiwan, Tsai bought up some Taiwanese news media organs. And changed their editorial stances to more Communist-friendly positions.
But around the beginning of 2012, Tsai caused a stir in an interview with the Washington Post, remarking that the Chinese Communists were jolly good fellows who just couldn't possibly have killed very many people at Tiananmen Square. His reason for thinking so? Because the driver of a single tank hesitated to run over the iconic "Tank Man" of Tiananmen Square.
(As I recall, he also expressed scorn for Taiwan's hard-won democratic freedom, which he derided as a poor substitute for a walletful of Chinese redbacks.)
And so, without further ado, I submit my replies to one of Tsai's comradely supporters.
Jon: Not to side with Tsai here...
The Foreigner: Here it comes...
Jon: ...but he was citing the fact that the "Tank Man" lie [sic], which is often perpetuated in western media.
The Foreigner: Can I interrupt to say that it suits you? The whole passive-aggression routine, I mean.
If experience is any guide, I do believe you're fishing for some kind of groveling apology.
Jon: For example a supermajority of Americans believe falsely that the "Tank Man" at Tiananmen was run over by those tanks.
The Foreigner:Bullshit.
A cursory web check of the New York Times, Newsweek and Time reveals nothing of the kind. NONE of them declare that Tank Man was definitely run over by tanks at Tiananmen.
Furthermore, I find it exceedingly difficult to believe anybody wasted good money to poll Americans about "Tank Man". But, assuming for the moment that it IS true, you forgot to mention that the Chinese DID run over at least one man (Fang Zheng) with their tanks. (To this day, the Communist propaganda ministry maintains that Fang Zheng lost his legs in an everyday, run-of-the-mill "traffic accident".)
So perhaps Americans' beliefs are a perfectly understandable result of mistaken identity:
Tank Man gets photographed in front of limb-crushing tanks.
Fang Zheng is photographed minus a couple of limbs (compliments of Tsai Eng-meng's Communist benefactors).
Mental conflation of Tank Man (who was NOT run over by Chinese tanks) with Fang Zheng (who WAS run over by Chinese tanks).
But here's a crazy PR suggestion: if the Chinese don't want Westerners to think they run people over with tanks...MAYBE they should stop running people over with their tanks!
Jon: He is still alive according to most accounts and the "conspiracy theory" sites claim he died months later.
The Foreigner: It is, of course, a red herring to bring up the fate of any one single individual (Tank Man) in the face of a massacre of thousands. Tsai's hasty generalization is that since Tank Man MAY have survived, then "not that many [Chinese demonstrators] could really have died."
And if Anne Frank were to turn up alive tomorrow, would this Communist quisling then argue that the Jewish Holocaust never happened?
Also, it's patently untrue to say Tank Man is still alive according to "most accounts". Wikipedia -- hardly a "conspiracy theory" site -- points out the conflicting stories on that score.
If he IS alive, let him come forward to say so to the media.
Oh, that's right. He can't. Because if he comes forward, the Chinese government will kill him.
Golly. Maybe the Butchers of Beijing really AREN'T the nice, harmless guys Tsai Eng-meng claims they are. Ya think?
Jon: As for "democracy-hating", there is nobody who truly loves ALL democracy. For example, the Weimar Republic elected Hitler.
The Foreigner: The "Weimar Republic" didn't vote for Hitler. The political system known as "democracy" didn't vote for Hitler.
MEN voted for Hitler. Men who hated democracy, and wanted it abolished.
Men such as Tsai Eng-meng. And yourself.
It was Germany's great misfortune that these men got what they wished for.
Jon: The French Republic massacred women and children (guillotined them).
The Foreigner: Straw man. Democracy, as a term describing a form of government advocated in the modern world, does not include the French revolutionary model lacking constitional safeguards (formal and informal).
But allow me to make a further rebuttal to your line of thinking. Around the time of the French revolution, doctors carried out a host of unproven treatments, some of which were either ineffective or even downright harmful to their patients (blistering of the skin or confinement for psychological problems, bloodletting, enema use, frontal lobotomies, "spermatorrhoea" prevention, homeopathy, and purging).
On the other hand, they also pioneered procedures which have stood the test of time, such as vaccinations, percussion-based diagnosis, and various surgical techniques.
Only an ignoramus would argue that modern doctors should be loathed and present-day medicine rejected out-of-hand simply because doctors of the past once used some questionable practices.
By the same token, only the genuinely infantile reject modern liberal democracy simply because 200 years ago, some long-dead Frenchmen didn't recognize the importance of checks-and-balances, the necessity of constitutionalism, and the limits to the perfectability of man.
The Foreigner: Excuse me while I look that up in the latest edition of the Oxford Chinglish Dictionary.
Jon: ...a million Filipinos in the Philippine-American War, where the US conquered and annexed an independent nation, destroying their Republic, even though the Philippine Republic used the US constitution.
The Foreigner: I believe the number is closer to 250,000...and it's debatable whether it was a deliberate genocide.
But rather than argue about numbers, I'd like to point out that most of the casualties were caused by out-of-control military officers who went far beyond what the civilian leadership ever intended. It's a cause for celebration that modern democracies have matured and figured out that their militaries need to be kept on a much tighter leash.
Why and how did this maturation take place? It occurred because democracies are blessed with a built-in feedback mechanism: the free press. In short, American anti-imperialist papers were free to report atrocities, and thereby helped bring them to an end.
Which is something that doesn't ever happen in Tsai Eng-meng's glorious Communist utopia.
Or in Tsai Eng-meng's pro-Communist newspapers, for that matter.
Oh, one last thing before we move on...you neglected to mention that America went to the Philippines with the ultimate goal of granting it its independence. Which it did, in 1946.
Poor Tibet should be so lucky!
Jon[referring to dead Philippinos]: Rather funny. Democracy is a joke.
The Foreigner: Number of Chinese murdered (or, in your parlance, "genocided") by the anti-democratic doctrine within the last 50 years: 36,000,000. Number of Chinese killed by democracy within the last 50 years: 0.
Which of those two numbers is greater than the other, Jon?
I'll allow you to take your time to figure that out. Math is hard.
But since you're fond of jokes, here's a riddle for you:
Q: What do you call an Uncle Com who tries to bamboozle people into thinking the Chinese don't run their citizens over with tanks, when he's fully aware that they DO run their citizens over with tanks?
A: A lying asshole.
But I guess you've probably heard that one before.
Jon: If you go to any of the 200 democratic countries of the world...
The Foreigner: Which "world" are you referring to? Here on planet Earth, there are only 78 democracies.
Jon: ...everyone on the street will say it's a democracy, but ask them if they can be president or a congressman, and the average folk always say "no", and ask why, and they say because they lack money or influence.
Basically democracy only elects the aristocracy (wealth or fame).
The Foreigner: Have you ever heard of a guy named Barack Obama (D)? Or Bill Clinton (D)? Or Ronald Reagan (R)? [Apr 10 / 2013 Update: Or Richard Nixon (R)?]
Word on the street is that they all came from fairly modest beginnings...
But you labor under a misconception. Liberal democracy entails the consent of the demos. It does NOT mean that everyone gets to be president for their fricken' birthday.
Money and influence help in life. If you don't have 'em, you may have to set your immediate sights a little lower. Run for dog catcher. Or the PTA. Or city commissioner.
Bust your ass at it. Do a good job. Don't steal from the public purse. Don't get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.
Do all that, and you just might get further than you ever thought you could.
But even should you fail there's one final thought you may yet still console yourself with: your well-meaning efforts have not landed you in a urine-soaked Communist political prison.
Jon: Aristotle hated democracy for this reason and preferred monarchy.
The Foreigner: Was that the reason? Or was it because he was born an aristocrat, and was quite naturally predisposed towards the form of government under which he was privileged? (Or, along similar lines, was it because he worked for Alexander the Great, and knew which side his bread was buttered?)
Nevertheless, I understand Aristotle also believed that there were some men whose very natures destined them for slavery. Never much cared for the notion, although I'm perfectly willing to admit he may have been right..about individuals such as yourself.
Aristotle: "The principle that the multitude ought to be supreme rather than the few best is one that is maintained, and, though not free from difficulty, yet seems to contain an element of truth.For the many, of whom each individual is but an ordinary person, when they meet together may very likely be better than the few good, if regarded not individually but collectively, just as a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse. For each individual among the many has a share of virtue and prudence, and when they meet together, they become in a manner one man, who has many feet, and hands, and senses; that is a figure of their mind and disposition. Hence the many are better judges than a single man of music and poetry; for some understand one part, and some another, and among them they understand the whole." -- Politics, Book 3.11
I'm not sensin' any of that "hate" you were talkin' about. He may have had his druthers, but unlike Tsai Eng-meng, he was at least honest enough to give democracy its due.
(And he certainly deserves credit for his intuition about the Wisdom of Crowds, long before anyone ever coined the phrase.)
Jon: And ALL of the Greek philosophers disagreed with elections, but rather preferred representatives to be chosen at random.
The Foreigner: It should then be a relatively simple matter for you to name at least five of them who held this opinion.
(Shaky camera-work alert. To listen, click PLAY and scroll the video off the screen.)
Update (Nov 8/2012): Tsai Eng-meng finds himself in the fine company of notable ancient Greek philosopherMahmoud Fraudmadinejad.
Update (Dec 7/2012): What's that, Ari? You'd like to weigh in on the subject of democracy again? Why certainly, be my guest...
"The basis of a democratic state is liberty; which, according to the common opinion of men, can only be enjoyed in such a state; this they affirm to be the great end of every democracy." --Aristotle, Politics Book 6.2
So, to paraphrase Jon's philosophical hero, Aristotle: "Liberty is the great result of every democracy."
Which just might be why would-be tyrants hate it so.
Update (Jan 9/2013): Jon averred:
"Basically democracy ONLY elects the aristocracy (wealth or fame)." [Emphasis added]
I gave 3 examples disproving this assertion. But this refutes the claim even more convincingly:
The chart plainly shows that half those in the U.S. Congress AREN'T wealthy. That works out to about 267 people (535 members of Congress / 2 = 267.5).
If someone has evidence that these 267 non-wealthy people are all incredibly famous (and yet, for some reason, not millionaires), then I'd be very interested in seeing it.
So it seems that there is a system in which only the rich and famous obtain political power. However, the evidence shows that that system is not democracy, but the one beloved by Tsai Eng-meng: Chinese Communism.
Update (Jul 24/2015): Yet more evidence that Communists always lie. What was that Jon said?
"the Philippine Republic used the US constitution"
The style of the document is patterned after the Spanish Constitution of 1812, which many Latin American charters from the same period similarly follow.
The ROC Military Supreme Court sentenced former Maj. Gen. Lo Hsien-che to life imprisonment July 25 for selling secrets to mainland China and jeopardizing national security.
(Major General Lo Hsien-che image from Taiwan Today.)
SinoDaily describes the information Taiwan's Turncoat General is said to have passed along to China:
. . . documents Lo handed over to China included details of the Po Sheng (Broad Victory) command, control and communications system that Taiwan is buying from US defence contractor Lockheed Martin for US$1.6 billion.
They said Beijing is believed to be extremely interested in learning more about the project, which gives the Taiwanese military some access to US intelligence systems.
Other information leaked by Lo reportedly covered the army's procurement of 30 Boeing-made Apache AH-64D Longbow attack helicopters and the army's underground optical fibre network.
Others may speculate that he was merely doing some "eventual reunification" freelance work. As some Chinese Nationalists have occasionally been known to do.
From their grotesque opposition to defensive weaponry for Taiwan, to their sly anti-Dalai Lama rhetoric, to their enthusiastic support of the Politburo's demeaning "Chinese Taipei" appellation for the R.O.C., down to their unseemly cheerleading for the modern Chinese economic model (& on occassion, its political leadership as well) -- all these stances for several years now have made the paper's sell-out apparent to all.
But I'd always chalked-up the KMT mouthpiece's new-found pro-Communist leanings to the sentiments of Chinese ultranationalists who had made their peace with 'Communism' (if not 'communism'). How wrong I was.
As the paper was once fond of saying, cui bono?
That's Latin for, "Who benefits?" Or in the modern vernacular, "Follow the money".
A wonderful line from one of the China Post's recent editorials (inadvertently) illustrates the absurdity of Taiwan basing its China policy on a "consensus" supposedly formulated by two unelected bureaucrats sent by Taiwan & China to negotiate with one another back in 1992:
Although the Chinese communists and the nationalists cannot agree on what was actually agreed on in their 1992 talks . . .
While I do not spend much time contemplating the sound of one hand clapping, or pondering what the definition of the word 'is' is, something this inane simply must be immortalized. Not with mere words, but by taking quill to parchment, and committing lyric to verse.
Snatch the pebble from my hand, Grasshopper:
Can we agree an agreement is still an agreement, if those in agreement cannot agree upon what was agreed in the agreement?
It would be par for the course to find metaphysicians and mystics answering in the affirmative. However, it is tantamount to professional malpractice when the president of a country -- someone supposedly well-schooled in contract law -- maintains such a proposition holds true.
Time was when China would lure Taiwan's diplomatic allies away from Taiwan. But back in 2008, Ma Ying-jeou of the Chinese Nationalist Party was elected president of Taiwan. And the hemorrhaging suddenly stopped.
Whether rightly or wrongly, President Ma was able to take some kind of credit for that.
So it must have come as quite a slap to the face when China sandbagged Ma. Only instead of swiping one of Taiwan's allies, as was its previous custom, this time it seized 14 Taiwanese citizens on foreign soil instead. And had them extradited to the P.R.C. to stand trial.
There are some who might not call this an improvement.
Postscript:"Beijing Bob", at Taiwan's China Post, predictably characterizes China's effrontery as, "No loss of Taiwan's national sovereignty."
Which merits a Swiftian-style Modest Proposal: If Taiwan truly doesn't suffer any loss of national sovereignty when its citizens are tried in Chinese Communist courts, then wouldn't Taiwanese interests be even better-served by simply abolishing its own law courts entirely and subsequently shipping all of its criminals to China? Think of the time, effort, and most importantly, the MONEY that could be saved.
And the best part is, there would be no downside. Consider:
a) There would be no loss of national sovereignty, as the China Post -- the most honest newspaper in the history of the world -- assures us.
b) Only vicious Sinophobes question the integrity, political neutrality and fierce commitment to the rule of law that is the solid bedrock of the Chinese judicial system.
c) As people of Chinese descent (and members of the Chinese "race-nation"), Taiwanese can rest easy that they will be treated more-than-fairly under Chinese law. After all, "blood IS thicker than water" . . . and the judge and prosecutors in the courtroom will be "son's of the Yellow Emperor", too.
(Where Lien can share the podium with the previous winner -- General Chi "Mahatma Gandhi" Haotian. A tireless warrior for peace, who issued the courageous order to flatten Tiananmen Square protesters with 30-ton tanks back in 1989.)
Nah. For China to publicly out their unpaid $15,000 agent would simply be too good to be true. Chairman Wormtongue is much more useful behind the scenes, cutting shadowy deals with Saruman.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague."
On second thought, this is Lien Chan of Taiwan's Chinese Nationalist Party we're talkin' about. And the man has his priorities. When someone of his ilk has to choose between standing up for democracy advocates or bringing pandas to Taiwan, there's really no contest.
(All my panda-huggin', all my panda-kissin', you don't know what you've been a-missin'...) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for Japan, we'll see. On the one hand, Prime Minister Kan seems willing to bend over backwards to appease the PRC. On the other, his poll numbers seem to be tanking as a result:
Public support for Prime Minister Naoto Kan's Cabinet has plunged 14.9 points since early October to 32.7 percent, reflecting growing frustration with the government . . . reflect[ing] public dissatisfaction with the government's handling of Japan's row with China and a political funds scandal dogging ruling party kingpin Ichiro Ozawa.
The China Post (Taiwan's pro-Communist newspaper of record) frets that the greatest menace to peace in Asia is . . . Japan. Beware a second Pearl Harbor, the editors darkly warn.
LOL. The chances of PACIFIST Japan pulling Pearl Harbor II anytime during our lifetimes ranks somewhere between an attack by trident-wielding Mer-people and a Zombie Apocalypse.
UPDATE: China now matches the number of attack submarines (63) that Japan had when it struck at Pearl Harbor. Funny coincidence, that. (Modern Japan has only 16.)
Some other facts the Chinese ultranationalist editors of the Post may be aware of:
China has nuclear weapons. Japan has none.
China has over a thousand missiles targetted onto Taiwan. Japan has none.
China has offensive weaponry. Japan is constitutionally prevented from possessing same.
China maintains the largest number of territorial disputes (somewhere between 19 and 26) in all of Asia.
China has recently laid expansionist claim to the entire South China Sea. Japan has not.
China's military has enjoyed double digit budgetary increases for several years now. While on the other hand, high Japanese vehicle costs mean that Japan's military expenditure in real terms is roughly on par with South Korea or Taiwan.
And finally, China routinely ranks among the 10 worst countries in the entire world when it comes to press freedom. Maintaining strict media censorship, the government indoctrinates the population with ultranationalist propaganda, just as Imperial Japan once did.
(Far more difficult to imagine the Japanese being similarly brainwashed since Japan has the world's 11th freest press.)
So 2,500 Japanese marched in downtown Tokyo in defiance of Chinese bullying over the Senkaku Islands. Big deal. With a population of 128 million, that's a 0.002% turnout.
Reckon more people showed up for the latest "Tentacle Pride" rally . . .
UPDATE (Oct 26/2010): A profile of those Japanese "wildmen" Taiwan's China Post is so afear'd of.
"You are an excellent tactician Captain. You let your second in command attack, while you sit and watch for weakness."
-Khan Noonien Singh, ST:TOS
Perhaps that's the only explanation I have for China's relatively mild reaction to the recent incident off the coast of Japan's Senkaku Islands. I mean, think about it: Japan arrests a P.R.C. fishing boat captain for violating Japanese waters, and what does Beijing do?
It blusters, dresses down the Japanese ambassador a few times, cancels a few underwater resource meetings, and sends a SINGLE fishery escort vessel. (For good measure, it also leaves open the possibility that it "may not be able" to control anti-Japanese mob action.)
A relatively measured response, given that it's Communist China we're talking about.
Shortly thereafter though, Taiwan does a curious thing. Remember, absolutely none of its mariners are cooling their heels in Japanese detention. Yet despite this, President Ma Ying-jeou reacts far more militantly than the P.R.C., making the "independent" decision to dispatch not one, but twelve --- 12! --- coast guard ships to the Japanese islands.
Like the man said, the second-in-command plays the heavy.
Story at the Taipei Times. The press in Taiwan is still mum though, on how much the irredentist president's gunboat diplomacy has cost the nation -- not only in precious taxpayer NT dollars, but in squandered international credibility as well.
One need not speculate what world reaction would have been had Ma instead dispatched 12 Taiwanese coast guard vessels into CHINESE waters. So that a "civilian" fishing boat could attempt to raise the Republic of China flag on P.R.C. soil. Because the answer is clear: the world would have regarded it as an outrageously dangerous provocation.
A very REAL provocation, quite unlike any of the phony "provocations" the previous Chen administration was accused of.
UPDATE: Citing irrelevant history, Beijing's mouthpiece newspaper in Taiwan urges Japan to quietly give in to the divinely-ordained territorial encroachments of the KMT-Chinese Communist Party alliance.
Saw THAT comin'...
UPDATE #2: Japan's ambassador to China has reportedly informed the Chinese government that Beijing should "take the necessary measures to avoid a worsening of the situation."
Good for him. I'm rooting for scrappy little Japan the way I used to for Taiwan. (Before the KMT surrendered body-and-soul to the Chinese Communist Empire, that is.)
(Hu Jintao & his "very special" KMT friend. Image from Life Magazine.)
(Taiwanese victim of the Chinese Nationalist Party police-riot of 2008. Image from the Taipei Times)
UPDATE #4: Perhaps I was too hasty in dismissing the relevance of the history the China Post presented. Because the Beijing - Taipei axis certainly seems busy manufacturing "incidents" and pretexts for war in 2010 the very same way Imperial Japan did in the 1930s...
[That last story also mentions that Captain Ramboat's grandmother passed away in China during his incarceration for violating Japanese waters. Which is sure to calm the passions of Chinese jingoists.]
4) Taiwanese KMT legislator fans the flames: "“Without government support on both sides of the Strait, efforts by civilian associations of [Taiwan, China and Hong Kong] alone will not be enough and will be to no avail [for Taiwan to help seize the Senkaku Islands from Japan]."
Er, just what are the odds that that "civilian association" [Hong Kong's "Action Committee for Defending the Diaoyu Islands"] is actually a Chinese Communist Party front group? Leading everybody down the garden path to war?
Which come to think of it, strongly resembles their campaign over at Topix:
When the Hokklo Taiwanese came from China 400 years ago they didn't learn the Aboriginal languages!!! Why???
When the Hokklo Taiwanese came from China 400 years ago they didn't learn the Aboriginal languages!!! Why???
It's the way of the future . . . the future . . . the way of the FU-ture . . .
Whoops, sorry. **Phew** Well, that's a good question I asked. I mean, you -- YOU asked! ...Uh, three times. Anyhoo. Anyhoo, I'll tell you why. They didn't learn the aboriginal languages because they're nothing but a bunch of no-good racists!
No-good racists, you say? I did not know that, my clean-shaven friend.
Shouldn't Beijing then discipline those wayward, spoiled children? As they say in the Han race-nation, blood is thicker than water. So why, oh why, don't the Chinese invade and mass deport all of those Taiwanese racists back to China?
Ethnically-cleanse all 23 million of them? As punishment for not learning a language 400 years ago?
Hmmm . . . That's tough, but fair . . .
I second the motion! A capital idea! And then, once the People's Liberation Army promptly leaves (as we can surely trust them to do) then we can set up a Naruwan aboriginal Republic under UN auspices!
Hee-hee! With my amazing Moktar Stealth Haze, no one can tell they're all just me! Do da do da do . . . Just a wild and crazy anarchist -- like that V for Vendetta guy! (Images from Patterico.com)
Bravo, Topix.com, for a site that's so bad it's actually kind of awesome.
UPDATE 2: Unrelated, but fun nonetheless. Feng shui: Is there anything it CAN'T do?
Amid allegations over his relationship with a convicted double murderer and former Nantou County gang boss, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) yesterday said he would resign if the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) could provide any evidence of irregularities in their relationship.
[...]
The DPP has continued to question the premier’s links to Chiang since local media on Wednesday reported Wu and his wife were caught on camera vacationing in Bali with Chiang and Lee Chao-ching.
(There he is, clean as a whistle. Taiwan's KMT Premier, Wu Den-yih. When he's not taking vacations in Bali with his double-murdering, Chinese mafia pals. Image from Daylife.com.)
And in more recent (and somewhat related news), World Uygher Congress president Rebiya Kadeer has received a second invite to visit Taiwan. Saturday's Taipei Times has the story, and recaps how Chinese Nationalist Party sycophants in Taiwan prevented her visit last year in order to curry favor with their Communist Party overlords. (And note that "sycophant" is employed here in both the modern and ancient meanings of the word.)
The government [in 2009], however, denied Kadeer entry to Taiwan on the grounds that her visit would harm the national interest.
At the time, Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said Kadeer, president of the World Uyghur Congress (WUC), should not be allowed into the country since she had “close relations to a terrorist group.”
So my question is: If Kadeer's entry in 2009 was deemed harmful to Taiwan's national interest because she had "close relations to a terrorist group" *, shouldn't Taiwan's second highest political office-holder be similarly blacklisted from the halls of government for his PROVEN close relations with a double murdering gangster?
"The new administration will push for clean politics and set strict standards for the integrity and efficiency of officials."
-- Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou's Inaugural address. May 21, 2008
Epic fail on those "strict standards for integrity" there, Hoss.
The ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) of Taiwan has made it abundantly clear that foreign activists devoted to the cause of human rights in China are NOT WELCOME in the island nation. First, there was the sorry case of the Dalai Lama last month, who was originally told not to visit, and finally slapped with a government-issued gag order when he was grudgingly permitted to enter the country. Then to top things off, only a few weeks later the KMT placed the head of the World Uigher Congress, Rebiya Kadeer, also on their rapidly-growing blacklist.
Contrast that with the KMT's treatment of PRC zoo animals with annexation-oriented propagandistic names. Why, those are hailed and welcomed by the current Taiwanese government with open arms. Because THEY'RE not political !
Tiananmen Square demonstrators, can you take the hint? In Ma Ying-jeou's Taiwan, Orwell's dictum now applies. Four legs good, two legs bad.
On September 25th, Taiwan's Chinese Nationalist Party attempted to rationalize their blacklist in this way:
KMT spokesman Lee Chien-jung (李建榮) said US President Barack Obama had recently decided not to meet the Dalai Lama during his trip to the US to protect the country’s national interests. Japan had also prevented visits by former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) for the same reason.
“The decision made by the government today [to bar Rebiya Kadeer] is based on national and public interests,” he said.
Gee, only three days before Confucius' birthday, and the KMT demonstrates that it has a firm handle on the ethics of eight-year olds:
"Chinaaa hit me in the hallway! But he was too BIG for me to hit back, so that's why I hit little Rebiya instead!"
Perhaps though, they were merely following the Confucian Silver Rule. For who among us is unfamiliar with the Great Sage's moral imperative:
"Do unto others, as the Chinese Communist Party would do unto you."
Or something like that. The Analects tend to lose a little in the Chinese Nationalist translation.
To be perfectly accurate, there'd be a subservient KMT goon there helping the butcher from Beijing. Oh well. (Cartoon by Cox and Forkum via Kai Chen Blog)
. . . in order to please Communist China. From Taiwan's China Post:
. . . ruling Kuomintang (KMT) Deputy Secretary-General Chang Jung-kung, who handles the party's ties with China, warned [the mayor of the southern Taiwanese city of Kaohsiung] of the risks of screening [a film about Chinese Uigher leader, Rebiya Kadeer].
He said the mayor should give top priority to the public interest of her city, and should “think carefully” if the move affects Kaohsiung's [influx of Chinese tourists].
Mr. Deputy Secretary-General, free speech IS the public interest of Kaohsiung. And Taiwan too, you miserable butt-wipe.
By Ma-llah, the Compassionate! No wonder the KMT begrudged the Dalai Lama's granting succor to typhoon survivors -- why, that Tibetan outlander was stealing the limelight from their Sultan of Sympathy, their beloved Ayatollah Ying-jeou. (Holy Keeper of the Sixteen Percent Approval Rating.)
Step aside, Dalai. Taiwan's Second-Handsomest-Man is out to spread the love. Sixteen Percenters everywhere can rest assured that the mere appearance of the Ma-ssiah's golden visage will turn those typhoon showers into September flowers.
(President Ma Ying-jeou image from the China Post)
(Inquiring minds would like to know, though: Did the departed here lose their lives because of the storm, or because of SUPREME LEADER Ma Ying-jeou's criminally-inept response to it? * )
* A relative of mine called me one week after the typoon hit, and asked me why Taiwanese were still trapped up in the mountains. "Doesn't Taiwan have loads of helicopters to transport troops to the beaches in the event of a Chinese invasion? It's been a week already -- why aren't they USING those?" he asked.
No answer from me. I was outside the country and internet-less. Imagine my surprise though, to read last week that Taiwan's Commander-Of-The-Faithful only dispatched ONE rescue chopper the day after the storm . . . and took FOUR DAYS to authorize the use of the big helicopters.
No, not all of 'em. (Duh!) But the reaction of a number of them to the Dalai Lama's visit last week following Typhoon Morakot left a lot to be desired. From the Aug 30th edition of the Taipei Times:
This is not an appropriate time for the Dalai Lama to come,” said Master Ching Liang (淨良法師), chairman of the Buddhist Association of the Republic of China.
Cheng Ming-kun (鄭銘坤), vice chairman of the Jenn Lann Temple (鎮瀾宮) in Taichung County’s Dajia Township (大甲) . . . said that while many local religious groups have been working diligently to help victims, the move “erases local religious groups’ credit.”
Fo Guang Shan Monastery (佛光山), a Kaohsiung-based Buddhist monastery that helped many storm victims, declined to comment, while the spokesman for the Buddhist Compassionate Relief Tzu Chi Foundation (慈濟), another organization that has been helping victims, could not be reached for comments as of press time.
Granted some of these may be Sino-imperialists in the Chinese Communist Party's pocket, but Taiwan's China Post alluded to another dynamic at work -- good old-fashioned religious parochialism:
Buddhists in Taiwan are Mahayanists, not tantric Vajrayana followers. They, along with the Taoist majority, do not think tantric mantras and mudras would bring peace to the dead as well as the living. They are not pleased because they believe their priests can do a much better job than the Dalai, who could have stayed in Dharamsala and said as many masses as he pleased for the people of Taiwan.
Here the Post suggests opposition on the part of the laity where little actually existed, since it turns out that 75% of ordinary Taiwanese supported the Dalai Lama's mission to bring comfort to the survivors of the deceased.
Still, it stands to reason that the local CLERGY would believe that they could "do a much better job" than an outsider. Which reminds me of a story:
About a week after returning to the Old Country, an elderly uncle of mine died. Now, in his will he stipulated that an old fishing buddy of his (who happened to a minister) should be the one to give the service. These last wishes were complicated however, by the appearance of another minister, the man who apparently took excellent care of my uncle at the hospice. (I understand that the last few weeks were agonizing, once the cancer began attacking the nerve endings.) So this minister too, seemed to have good grounds for wanting to say a few words at the funeral.
The two might easily have come to an accomodation had it not been for yet ANOTHER minister. My uncle lived in a small town, where there was only ONE church of his denomination. And the head of this church was bound and determined that neither of these two interlopers would be given the opportunity participate in a ceremony on HIS home turf.
This crazy situation was only resolved when the family grew completely disgusted by the local minister's intransigence, and threatened to hold the service in the community center instead of his church. THAT made the local guy see reason -- real fast.
True story, that. Seems to me that Taiwanese Buddhist clergy (and Christian preacher-men!) bring discredit upon themselves during times of tragedy when the best they can do is act like mutts peeing on fence posts to keep the other dawgs out of their territory. A quick reminder to clerics of any religion: When people die and families are grieving, it's not all about YOU.
A while back, Taiwan's China Post took one of its usual swipes at the Dalai Lama, calling him a "one-time theocrat." True enough, I suppose, but it got me to thinking: Couldn't the "theocrat" appelation be applied with equal accuracy to Taiwan's current Chinese nationalist president, Ma Ying-jeou?
After all, in November of last year, Ma refused to permit the Dalai Lama into the country for the simple reason that the Tibetan religious figure doesn't kneel at the sacred high altar of Sino-imperialism. Then last week, when Ma was forced by political reasons to allow the Dalai Lama to visit on a religious mercy mission, Taiwan's Supreme Leader again assumed the role of religious tyrant by issuing a government gag order on the Buddhist pontiff.
Politics and economics should be separate, Ma tirelessly preaches from his pulpit. But politics and religion? Not a word from hizzoner on that score . . .
Taiwanese Falun Gong followers -- I'd be afraid if I were you right now. There's no telling how many of your rights Taiwan's self-declared high priest of religious orthodoxy is prepared to sacrifice in the name of enjoying "good relations with Beijing".
Seemed like a pretty innocuous mission. The man comes to Taiwan, says a few prayers for the dead, comforts the surviving kin. Who'd object to that?
Beijing, it goes without saying. But to outsiders it would appear remarkable that the governing Chinese Nationalist Party of Taiwan ALSO objected to a visit by his Holiness. Taiwan's China Post had this to say:
But the timing [for the Dalai Lama to come to Taiwan] isn't right for Taiwan, this time around. Taiwan is trying what it can to improve relations with China. It is relying ever more heavily on the other side of the Taiwan Strait for getting out of its current economic downturn and the global financial crisis.
Fortunate it is for the China Post that the KMT recently legalized prostitution in Taiwan. Now the paper's editors can rent themselves out to the Communist Party nightly -- without any fear of ever being arrested!
So my question for the Post is this: If 500 dead Taiwanese aren't ENOUGH reason for a religious mercy mission from a world-renowned religious figure, what would be?
1000? 10,000? 100,000?
Exactly how many MORE bloated corpses buried in the fetid mud would the China Post and the KMT have liked there to have been before they'd have welcomed the Dalai Lama without reservation?
On Tuesday it was revealed that Paul Sun, Taiwan's former Minister of Agriculture, had hired himself out as an unpaid adviser to a Chinese Communist Party agricultural organization. The response to his conflict of interest was swift and bi-partisanly negative, and rightfully so. The KMT is going to have to crack down hard on people like Sun, or else they fully deserve the charge of, "Sellout!" every time it's leveled at them.
“We shouldn’t see agricultural technology as sensitive material; instead, it
should be a public asset. China has large stretches of land and a good plant
diversity, and can be seen as an extension of Taiwan’s farmlands,” he
said.
About 5,900 Taiwanese farmers or businessmen in the farming
industry are in China, Sun said.
“If you view it positively, you can see
it as helping Taiwanese farmers become more professional. If you view it
negatively, then you can make many criticisms. From the positive side, I feel it
is something worth promoting,” he said.
Taiwan’s agriculture should not
be shut behind closed doors. Instead, people should open their minds to what is
out there, he said.
Here he seems to be saying six thousand Taiwanese farmers in China should be helped at the expense of tens of thousands of Taiwanese farmers back in Taiwan. And for that, he deserves every bit of criticism that he gets.
However, there is one part of the story that seems to have been overlooked. After serving as Agriculture Minister, Sun went to work as chairman of Taiwan's Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center (AVRDC), which is a non-profit INTERNATIONAL institution. Yes, it receives money from Taiwan's national government. But it also receives money from the Bill Gates foundation and numerous other countries as well.
Now, if the AVRDC was a national institute, this would be an open-and-shut case. Taiwanese taxpayers contribute to fund the center, and they expect Taiwan's agricultural sector to bear the fruits of whatever research goes on there.
But since it's an international research center, the benefits of its research are supposed to be shared globally. Its mission statement isn't, "To help Taiwanese farmers," -- its mission statement is, "To alleviate poverty and malnutrition in the
developing world through the increased production and
consumption of safe vegetables." And in fact, AVRDC has field offices in countries such as Thailand, Tanzania, India, Mali, Uzbekistan, South Korea, Camaroon, Madagasgar, Indonesia, Laos and the Solomon Islands.
There's another conflict-of-interest going on here, that I've just alluded to. As Agriculture Minister, Sun's job was to strengthen Taiwan's agricultural industry. But as chairman of AVRDC, his job is to help strengthen OTHER COUNTRIES' farm industries. Those are two very different sets of hats. The CEO of Monsanto has every right to quit and pursue his life-long dream of becoming the next Johnny Appleseed. Monsanto however, has every right to be concerned that its former Chief Executive Officer may be giving away proprietary information.
Same deal applies here. An investigation should be conducted into Mr. Sun, because during his stint as Ag Minister, he had access to techniques and cultivars developed by national institutions, which were intended to benefit Taiwanese farmers only. If that's what he gave to China, then he's harmed Taiwan greatly. But, if he only gave them techniques and cultivars developed by the AVRDC, then he was only doing his job of diseminating the Center's research to the world.
(And, just to reiterate, whatever the outcome of that investigation, he should still be punished for taking a job in the PRC, creating an obvious conflict of interest.)
No, not the old TV show. Turns out the Los Angeles zoo built an enclosure for some golden snub-nosed monkeys from China, only to have the deal go sour. Now the zoo is left with a 7.4 million dollar boondoggle.
I'm tempted to say that the reason is that American officials blanched when Beijing tried to designate their country, "Chinese L.A." But the real reason is more prosaic than that:
"[The Chinese] were resentful that federal policy on importing any endangered species
required that any money exchanged for that animal had to be used to conserve the
habitat and wild population of that species," said David Towne, a Seattle-based
consultant who helped broker the original deal. [emphasis added]
The Chinese certainly have point here. The zoo was supposed to pay $100,000 a year for the simians, and none of it was supposed to grease the palms of Chinese Communist Party apparatchiks?
Since I don't read Chinese, I don't really have any personal stake in the debate Taiwanese president Ma Ying-jeou started a few days ago about whether Taiwanese should learn the Simplified Chinese characters that are used in China, or whether Chinese should learn the Traditional characters used in Taiwan.
Nonetheless, the fact that the topic is being broached now gives the lie to Ma's claim that his "One-China Trade Market" is an economic issue only. Because if China truly is Taiwan's economic savior and an agreement is reached, then some sort of linguistic harmonization is going to take place. Business between the two countries will need to communicate intelligibly with each other. As foreigners we're all aware of the efforts Taiwanese make to learn English -- similar efforts to learn Simplified script may someday also be undertaken.
Without making any value judgments about this, it's clear that the Chinese Nationalist Party's "One-China Trade Market" is not just an economic issue, but a cultural issue as well. Will the Taiwanese be permitted to have anything to say about a policy which affects these two areas?
Not if the KMT has anything to do with it. The unwashed proles mustn't be allowed to vote on issues already decided upon by their political betters.
The Simplified vs. Traditional character proposal also finds its origins in the Chinese Nationalist Party's "One-China Educational Market" as well. Once Taiwanese students begin studying in China, they'll need to be able to write using Simplified characters, while Chinese students in Taiwan will need to be able to read Traditional characters. And it's dishonest for anyone to claim that this isn't going to have a cultural impact.
Postscript: An even more dishonest argument that's being made is that opening Taiwan's educational system to Chinese will increase the number of students in Taiwanese universities.
Well, of course the number of CHINESE students in Taiwan will increase, but since Taiwanese students will also leave the country to study in China, the number of TAIWANESE students here will necessarily decrease.
Whether there'll be a net gain or loss is anybody's guess. *But what's truly maddening is that the same people who loudly trumpet the GAINS from an influx of Chinese students are noticibly quiet when it comes to mentioning the LOSSES from the expected China-bound exit of Taiwanese students.
Which suggests that those in favor of the "One-China Educational Market" aren't really interested in the net result at all, and that they're actually arguing in bad faith . . .
* Did I say anybody's guess? Leaving aside the issue of the difference in tuition rates, there was an interesting story recently that the Taiwanese government would like to raise the educational requirements for university entrance.
Of course, no one wants to climb up on a soap box and speak in favor of low educational standards. But raising entrance requirements will inevitably lock some Taiwanese students out of the Taiwanese university system.
Leaving them with nowhere to go, but less picky universities in the People's Republic of China. Or as the KMT calls it, "Mother China".
Passivity is fatal to us. Our
goal is to make the enemy passive. - Mao Tse-Tung
Looks like Taiwan's Chinese Nationalist Party president Ma Ying-jeou's year-old diplomatic "truce" with China is breaking down. It was always an unstable affair, based as it was upon narrow Sinocentrism. The two "interpretations" or "regions" of China will be better off if they both agree not to poach each others' diplomatic allies away from each other, Ma argued. Both "sides of the Strait" will save heaps of money by not engaging in dollar diplomacy. It'll be Win-Win.
Perhaps he should have instead asked himself, "But is it Win-Win-WIN?" Let's grant that Taiwan wins. And that China wins. But do Taiwan's diplomatic allies ALSO benefit from an arrangement which (quite frankly) brings them less dough while perpetually denying them the freedom to choose which "China" they can maintain diplomatic relations with?
Pretty damn arrogant, really. We, Chinese, WE will decide amongst ourselves which incarnation of China you foreign governments will be permitted to deal with. Whether you like it, or not.
Like Nicaragua, Panama is chomping at the bit to switch diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing.
Fortunately, Joe Hung (Taiwan's very own Fifth Columnist . . . columnist) has a splendid solution: Curl up and die.
Taipei and Beijing are tacitly agreed that they won't vie against each other to win diplomatic allies.
Any diplomatic sally President Ma makes will have adverse effect[s] on relations between Taipei and Beijing. China certainly does not want Ma to show the flag around in a very quick succession.
Ma has to remember Beijing's patience will wear thin if he continues to make state visits to several of the 23 states with which Taiwan still maintains diplomatic ties.
And thus did Mao Tse-Tung achieve his goal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postscript: Hung sneers at the "irrationality" of supporters of Taiwanese independence AND run-of-the-mill Republic of China sovereigntists:
. . . it's simply an expression of Taiwan's collective thymos [spiritedness, or desire for recognition] to cheer for President Ma's foreign ventures like those of his predecessor Chen Shui-bian.
Thymos drives people to anger when their worth is not recognized by others. President Chen made most of the people thymotic. They wanted their country recognized throughout the world either as the Republic of China or Taiwan.
Spiritedness? Who needs THAT?
Apathy, spiritlessness, numbness . . . passivity. That's the rotgut of choice for the purveyors of sell-out and surrender !
Ironically though, we find that Hung drinks from the same thymos bottle as the rest of 'em. Because the old boy sure got a mite tetchy after Mr. Ma's worth was snubbed by Nicaragua:
Of course, Ma was right in refusing to meet with Ortega. He couldn't and shouldn't demean himself by begging for a meeting.
[...]
Even if Ortega . . . apologized, Ma shouldn't change his mind and meet him in Managua.
Such a snub as Ortega handed to Ma cannot be tolerated.
Just to put this in perspective: Daniel Ortega postpones a meeting with Ma for 4 or 5 hours, and Hung calls that intolerable. Absolutely unforgivable.
Meanwhile, China aims 1,500 missiles at Taiwan, and where's Hung? Down on all fours, licking Hu Jintao's boots.
The [two visits Taiwan's president has made to Central America in the past month] have nothing to do with long-term friendship, they are salvage missions to try and fix the damage Ma's attitude has done to Taiwan's relations with its diplomatic partners.