Who is Shamed when Arrogant Rulers demean Ordinary Citizens?

Who is Shamed when Arrogant Rulers demean Ordinary Citizens?
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 12, 2007

For members of the public to complain about government right to the president and vice president's faces has virtually become a fashion. "Charlie" is a small businessman whose company recently went under. "Pearl" is a struggling meat vendor at a traditional farmer's market. The two have been in the public eye recently for daring to complain openly about the economy in front of the president and vice president. The real eye-opener however was President Chen and Vice President Lu's reaction. Chen and Lu referred to them as "members of the Red Shirt Army." They said they were "being used," that their remarks were scripted, and that they were part of a "conspiracy." Chen Shui-bian added that "The Pacific Ocean doesn't have a lid on it. Anyone who thinks China is so wonderful can swim over there." Ruling DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh said "Red Shirt Army and Deep Blue supporters shouldn't disguise themselves as ordinary citizens." Government Information Office spokesmen referred to citizens who dared to raise a voice against the government as "phony" and "affected."

What is going on here? Democratic Progressive Party leaders have long prided themselves on being close to the people, as those political leaders who were most in touch with the mood of the public. So why are they having fits of apoplexy when members of the public summon up the courage to criticize them to their faces? Why are they going so far as to reflexively label anyone who voices a complaint "members of the Red Shirt Army" and dismissing their impromptu protests as "staged?" Will demonizing everyone who complains really expunge the DPP's embarrassing political record?

In order to consolidate her credentials as a leader who "loves the people" our vice president filled her daily schedule with photo ops, during which she would be close to the people. But do you really wish to be close to the people? Do your really wish to take the public pulse? Are you really willing to listen to the people's feelings? Or do you merely wish to bask in public adulation? Unfortunately upon hearing these expressions of discontent, Frank Hsieh's "I feel your pain" posture completely vanished, and he openly challenged the identity of the protesters, saying that many of them didn't look like "ordinary members of the public." Suppose for the sake for argument that some of the protestors have "Red Shirt Army" or "Deep Blue supporter" backgrounds? Does that mean they are no longer members of the public? Aren't they tax-paying citizens? Don't they have the right to "The Pursuit of Happyness?" Do they somehow deserve to be harangued by the president? To have suspicion cast upon their character by the DPP presidential candidate? To be insulted by the Chief of the Government Information Office?

Think about it. If ordinary citizens' were content in their lives, why would they criticize the national leader to his face, at the risk of being forcibly removed by secret service agents? If every one of these critics of the government were "shills planted by conspirators" why do their vocal protests receive such a sympathetic response among the public? Is the ruling regime truly unaware that the people feel they can no longer survive? Or is it merely pretending to be unaware that this is the way most people feel today?

Face up to reality. You can talk up a storm. You can fabricate statistics. But objective reality cannot be covered up indefinitely. Hasn't the Directorate General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics insisted that consumer prices have remained constant? Yet even legislators belonging to your own party can no longer remain silent. Haven't you been compelled to sharply revise consumer price statistics upward? Hasn't President Chen said that Taiwan's competitiveness exceeds South Korea's? Yet the latest international competitiveness reports clearly indicate that South Korea's competitiveness has surpassed Taiwan's. Past DPP misrule was blamed on "the mess left behind by the Kuomintang," on older generation Kuomintang civil service officials. You have now been in power for nearly eight years. You have all new DPP civil service officials. Do you intend to continue blaming your poor performance on others?

Besides, no matter how rosy your numbers, no matter how clever your sophistry, you cannot obliterate the public's direct experience. Do high-ranking officials living "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" have the faintest idea what ordinary citizens must do to get by? They must stretch their paychecks, only to find they are fighting a losing battle against rising prices. Shop owners must reduce their overhead, only to find that the rent they must pay increases month by month. Taxi drivers must economize, only to find that they cannot catch up with rising fuel costs. Do these officials know how many members of the public dare not complain about earning too little, for fear that what little they have may be lost? Tens of thousands of universities graduates must fight tooth and nail over some low paying entry level job. Not to mention countless citizens so desitute they are considering committing suicide by means of carbon monoxide. They ask only to get by on three meals a day. Are they all shills planted by the opposition? Are they all part of some vast conspiracy? Are their heart-rending lamentations all "phony" and "affected?"

One can only shake one's head and sigh at these exchanges of verbal fire between the head of state and ordinary citizens. High-ranking Green camp officials wielding the machinery of the leviathan state, using political rhetoric normally reserved for ideological battles with Blue camp spokespersons, against ordinary citizens, questioning their motives, accusing them of being shills, engaging them in verbal duels. For a national leader to take advantage of his bully pulpit to shout down an ordinary citizen who voices the simplest of complaints is hardly something to be proud of.

Neither "Charlie" nor "Pearl" are politicians. Like you and me, they are ordinary citizens, laboring away each day at their posts, whose lives are increasingly difficult day by day. They care nothing about the election prospects of the Blue or Green camps. They merely want to survive. They merely conveyed the public's sentiments to the nation's leaders. Their reward was vicious character attacks. These images, these words, will forever be carved in the consciousness of the Taiwan public.

中時電子報
中國時報 　2007.11.12
領導人傲慢對應民情 到底羞辱了誰
中時社論

　民眾當面衝著元首、副元首嗆聲，最近彷彿成為一種風潮，「嗆聲查理」、「肉販阿珠」短時間內爆紅，但被嗆的陳總統與呂副總統的反應，倒真的令人大開眼界。除了一再回嗆他們是「紅衫軍」，是「被利用」、「被設計」外，陳水扁還說出「太平洋又沒加蓋，覺得中國好就游過去啊！」的語言，執政黨總統候選人謝長廷則說「紅衫軍、深藍支持者不要再假扮一般民眾」，政府發言人更是將嗆聲民眾形容成是「矯情、虛偽」。

　這究竟是怎麼回事？一向自許為最貼近民眾，最能捕捉基層民眾心聲的民進黨領導人，面對民眾直接的嗆聲，為什麼會這麼氣急敗壞？甚至反射性就將嗆聲的民眾直接標籤為「紅衫軍」，都是「被設計的」，難道說將所有嗆聲民眾都「汙名化」，就能抹去「政績難堪」的事實嗎？

　為了營造「親民」、「愛民」的形象，咱們的正副總統每天都排滿了貼近民眾的行程，但既曰「親近民眾」、「探求民隱」，難道只想領受「萬民擁戴」的假象，卻不願傾聽民眾真實的告白嗎？最令人遺憾的是謝長廷，聽聞這些嗆聲，原有「視民如傷」的情懷完全不見了，直接就質疑嗆聲民眾的身分識別，好似有不少人在他看來根本不屬於「一般民眾」，試想：嗆聲民眾中就算部分人真有「紅衫軍」或「深藍支持者」的背景，難道他們就不算是「一般民眾」？他們都不是納稅的公民？他們就沒資格要求過更好的生活？他們就活該可以被總統詛咒？被總統候選人質疑？被新聞局長羞辱？

　嘗試想想：尋常百姓若是覺得日子過得安穩，何至於須要冒著被安全人員架離的危險，當面去向國家元首嗆聲？如果這一切都是「有心人士在幕後設計」，那為何「嗆聲的」反而得到共鳴？執政高層究竟是真不知道，還是假裝不知道，「日子快要過不下去」，早已是今天最多數民眾內心最真實的感受？

　面對現實吧！口舌可以逞強，數據可以編造，但客觀的真相終究是掩蓋不了的，主計處的數據不是一路強調民生物價都很平穩嗎？現在連自己同黨立委都看不下去一致痛批，還不是得大幅往上修正！陳總統不是說台灣的競爭力贏過韓國嗎？最新的國際競爭力報告直截了當的公布，韓國的競爭力早已經超越了台灣！過去施政不佳，不是全推給國民黨留下的爛攤子，就是推給國民黨留下的舊官僚，如今執政快八年了，全換成是新官僚了，怎麼還是爛攤子的執政成績呢？

　更何況，再好看的數據，再銳利的口才，終究掩飾不了民眾尋常生活的切身感受吧！那些平日錦衣玉食的高層可曾知曉：今天有多少民眾再怎麼精打細算，也拚不過日益高漲的物價？有多少店家再怎麼減少開支，也付不起日漸高漲的租金？有多少個計程車司機再怎麼撙節，也追不上攀高的油價？而更多的民眾如今早就不敢抱怨薪水領太少，而是擔憂連這份微薄的薪資都快領不到！成千上萬的大學畢業生為一分低薪低就的職缺擠破頭，更不必提無數窮到想燒炭的家庭，每日但只求三餐糊口了，請問這一切的一切，能怎麼事先「設計」？又能怎麼去表現「虛偽、矯情」呢？

　目睹這些一而再、再而三的「元首與民眾互嗆」的畫面，最令人搖頭嘆息的地方，是這些操持國家機器的綠營高層們，竟把那些平日用來與藍營打口水戰的語言，整套搬來施加在一般民眾身上，質疑他們的動機，扣他們帽子，跟他們去比言詞機鋒。講實在話，一個國家領導人，利用優勢的發言位置，口舌上辯贏一個升斗小民最素樸的抱怨，有什麼值得自傲呢？

　查理與阿珠都不是政客，他們與你我一樣都是尋常老百姓，每天辛勤的守在自己的崗位上努力工作，卻感覺生活越過越苦，他們才不管你藍綠什麼選情，只想生活過得下去。他們向國家領導人「訴說民情」，換來的卻是這樣近乎羞辱的回嗆，這幅畫面，這種語言，台灣人真該銘記在心裡！