A Happy New Year? A Hard Look at the Number of Factory Closings
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 9, 2008
According to a recent investigative report by the China Times, over 40,800 companies folded in the first 11 months last year, a record high. Negative economic growth was even worse than during the SARS crisis. This does not even include the figures for December, the peak season for corporate bankruptcies. Last year 31,000 more companies folded than were founded. Only 604,000 companies remain. The drop established a new low.
Official figures show unemployment at record lows. But the brutal reality is that last November over 120,000 workers lost their jobs due to austerity programs or company bankruptcies. an increase of 9,000 over the same period the year before. This matches the high in 2002.
Statistics are not merely numbers on a page. Every number represents an unemployed worker, Behind every worker is a family. Over 120,000 workers have been laid off or fired due to company retrenchments. This means that over 120,000 households don't know how they will get by in the coming year.
The shrinking number of companies is an unprecedented warning to a ruling regime that yammers endlessly about "Growing the Economy." It is hardly something that a press release claiming that "commercial growth momentum remains undiminished" can whitewash. Especially when corporate bankruptcies have already impacted the job market, and when plant closings have led to an increase in involuntary unemployment for the first time in five years. This is something no political leader with the slightest concern for the people can ignore.
The number of companies is shrinking rapidly. This reflects two major concerns for the economy. One is the disappearance of entrepreneurial energy. The other is a slowdown in domestic demand. "Better the head of a dog, than the tail of a lion" used to sum up Taiwan's spirit of entrepreneurship. From Wang Yung-ching, to Chang Jung-fa, to Stan Shih, to Kuo Tai-ming. Every one an Horatio Alger story, an object lesson for countless entrepreneurs, and a testimonial to Taiwan's economic miracle. The tiny island of Taiwan is home to some of the world's largest multi-focused venture capital companies. It is second only to the US, the world's largest economy, and Israel, the homeland of many Wall Street's tycoons.
But the actual number of venture capital firms fell from 231 in 2005 to only 219 in 2006, because they couldn't find any projects to invest in. In 2006 they even had to return the money to investors. reducing the total venture capital investment to 12.8 billion. This is unprecedented. Venture capital is critical for any nation's economic policy. It indicates the economy's growth momentum. It predicts how many people are able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and replicate Taiwan's economic miracle.
Taiwan's economy is at a critical juncture. It is transitioning from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. During this transition it is subject to the mainland's magnetic field. This presents a formidable challenge. Service industries do not appear out of thin air. Taiwan must develop Singapore and Hong Kong style high-value-added services such as finance and accounting. Like these two cities, it must find a home market. It must allow the free flow of capital. It must eliminate investment limits on industry. Nothing could be clearer.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs estimates that 33% of all local businesses earn more revenue overseas than they do locally. But only 18% of gross overseas revenues acrue to local shareholders. Actual funds remitted are even less. For the past three years, international listings on the Taiwan stock exchange have remained castles in the air. Meanwhile wave upon wave of Taiwan businesses have listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange. Non-urban areas such as Penghu, Taitung, and Hualien need to develop tourism in order to create high value-added enterprises. They need professional business managers. To attract foreign investors and businessmen, they need a steady flow of tourists. Local tourism from the Taiwan region alone is not enough. Besides Taiwan has undergone a brain drain in recent years. According to conservative estimates 500,000 Taiwan business people are living in the Yangtze River Delta region. High consumption tourists have moved to the mainland. Local demand has steadily diminished and has not been replaced. This is the real reason for the record number of bankruptcies last year.
In an era of globalization, no government can close the nation's doors to the outside world. No government can forbid capital to flow out but not enter. No government can allow talent to leave but not return. Taiwan business people have spread out across the world. Professional managers and middle class workers have ventured far and wide to make their fortunes. The government cannot stop them nor should it try. In a globalized world the government should infuse new life into the economy. Ireland was able to put an endless civil war behind it. Hong Kong was able to make a speedy recovery from the Panic of '97. Why can't Taiwan do the same?
No one living on the island wants to badmouth Taiwan. But the hard figures tell us an unpleasant truth. Over 120,000 involuntarily unemployed workers, including recently laid off health instructors at the Alexander health club, tell us that nothing could be more real. A new year has begun. Whom among us doesn't want the coming new year to be a happy new year?
中時電子報
中國時報 2008.01.09
過個好年？正視關廠歇業人數創新高的警訊
中時社論
根據本報日前一項調查報導顯示，去年前十一月台灣解散、撤銷與廢止的公司家數高達四萬八百家，已創歷史新高，甚至比經濟負成長、ＳＡＲＳ時間更為惡化。這還不包括傳統企業倒閉解散旺季十二月的數字在內。因為倒閉家數大於新設家數三萬一千家，去年台灣公司家數不增反減，只剩六十萬四千多家，減幅同樣創下歷史新高。
儘管官方所顯示的失業率數字屢創新低，但淹沒在背後殘酷的實況則是：去年十一月因工作場所緊縮或歇業的失業勞工已超過十二萬人，比去年同期增加九千人。這已是繼民國九十一年的高點後，首度再回到這個高點。
統計絕不僅僅是冰涼的數字而已，每個單一數字代表一名失業的勞工，每個勞工背後牽動的則是一個家庭，超過十二萬因工作場所緊縮或失業勞工，也意味會有超過十二萬家庭今年的年關還不知道將怎麼過。
公司家數萎縮，對一個「拚經濟」不離口的政府而言，絕對是空前的警訊，絕非發個新聞稿宣稱「商業成長動能持續活絡」，就能粉飾太平了。更何況，企業倒閉問題已經波及到就業市場，因關廠歇業非自願性失業的勞工，五年來第一次出現反轉上升的現象，任何一個心中以人民幸福為念的政治人物，都不應再忽視。
公司家數快速萎縮，反映出台灣當前的兩大經濟隱憂：一個是創業動能的消失；一個是內需成長趨緩的痛苦。「寧為雞首，不為牛後」，曾是台灣創業精神的寫照。從王永慶、張榮發到施振榮、郭台銘一個個白手起家的故事，是無數創業者的學習對象，也是台灣奇蹟的見證。台灣蕞爾小島，卻能成為全球第三多創業投資公司的集中地，僅次於全球最大經濟體--美國，華爾街大亨的故鄉─以色列。
但創投業在前年，實際營運家數首度減少，由二○○五年二百三十一家，減少到只剩二百一十九家。因為找不到可以投資的案子，前年創投甚至把錢還給投資人，導致全體創投資本額減少一二八億，這都是從未發生的現象。在各國經濟政策裡面，創投之所以重要，因為這象徵未來經濟的成長動能，預言還有多少人可以白手起家，再演台灣奇蹟。
不容諱言，台灣經濟的確是在轉型的關口，從製造業往服務業走，又要抵擋大陸的磁吸效應，本來就是一項艱鉅的挑戰。但服務業不可能憑空出現，台灣要發展新加坡、香港式高附加價值的服務業，如：金融、會計等，就得像這兩個城市一樣，找到腹地市場，需要資金自由進出，卸除廠商投資上限管制的道理，其實再清楚不過。
但實況卻是，經濟部調查，海外營收大於國內營收的企業比例已達三三％，但海外獲利只有一八％分配給國內股東，資金真正匯回的更少。吵嚷了三年多，台灣的股市國際板仍如空中樓閣，但台商在香港掛牌卻是一波又一波。
非都市地區如：澎湖、台東、花蓮要發展觀光，觀光要朝高附加價值走，必須有專業化的經營與投入。要吸引外資或本國生意人投入，必須要有穩定的客源，絕非國民旅遊就足夠，更何況多年來，台灣一直處於腦力外流的狀態，保守預估五十萬台商定居在長江三角洲一帶，高消費力客群轉往彼岸消費。台灣內需就像水不斷外流的池塘，一直找不到新的活水澆灌，這是國內企業去年倒閉家數創新高的真正原因。
在全球化的時代，已經沒有任何一個國家，可以單方面關起門來。更禁不起資金只出不進，人員只離不來。台商全球布局，專業管理者、中產階級遠赴異鄉打拚，不能擋也擋不了。政府就應該想辦法，在全球化的競逐中，替台灣找到新活水灌注。愛爾蘭能夠擺脫戰亂崛起，香港能夠迅速復甦，誰說台灣不能呢？
對生活在台灣這片土地上的人民而言，沒有人想要唱衰台灣。但結結實實的數字告訴我們，包括亞力山大健身老師在內，超過十二萬非自願失業勞工告訴我們，這是再現實不過的生計問題，也是未來的隱憂。年關又要到了！誰不想過個好年呢？
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Chiang Ching-kuo is not a Chi-Com Fellow Traveler
Chiang Ching-kuo is not a Chi-Com Fellow Traveler
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 8, 2008
January 13th is the 20th anniversary of Chiang Ching-kuo's passing. The ruling DPP regime is attempting to drop the Republic of China and the two Chiangs down their Orwellian "memory hole." Commemorating Chiang Ching-kuo gives us the opportunity to uncover the truth about Taiwan's history, to reconstruct our shared memory, and to provide food for thought.
Chen Shui-bian's ongoing campaign to purge all traces of the Two Chiangs from the island has inspired the public to reminisce and reflect upon the elder Chiang's merits and demerits. The public seldom thought about these political issues in the past. Chen Shui-bian's attempt to demagogue the issue has backfired. Instead, a more balanced consensus has emerged. Most people believe that Chiang Kai-shek had both merits and demerits. They believe Chen Shui-bian's determination to define Chiang as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident" is one-sided and imbalanced. After all, Chiang Kai-shek was a staunch "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan." They cannot allow Chen Shui-bian arbitrarily consign Chiang Kai-shek to the lowest rung of Hell. Even if some people are unhappy with the Two Chiangs, Chen Shui-bian's vicious smear campaign against long dead leaders is not something most people are comfortable with.
Chen Shui-bian and the DPP are guilty of deliberately falsifying and editing history in the service of their partisan political struggle. Chiang Kai-shek was guilty of wrongdoing. But Chiang Kai-shek, the "Enemy of Communism and Defender of Taiwan," also made historic contributions. Chen Shui-bian is attempting to eradicate Chiang Kai-shek's historical status as the "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan." He is attempting to redefine him as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident." This is not historical truth. This is political spin doctoring. History is not the servant of political ends. Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party are trying to make political hay out of their anti-Chiang political campaign. They are attempting to convince the public that "Chiang Kai-shek was Public Enemy Number One" and "did nothing to protect Taiwan." They are attempting to convince the public that "Chen Shui-bian is a Great Man of Taiwan" and "innocent of corruption." Their attempts are in vain.
Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party are struggling to falsify and selectively edit Taiwan's history. They are attempting to drive a wedge between the elder Chiang and the younger Chiang. The DPP's tortured logic is: "Chiang Kai-shek is the Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident. Thefore the Republic of China is an alien regime and sold out Taiwan. Therefore mainlanders are Chi-Com fellow travelers. Therefore the people of Taiwan must oppose Chiang. Therefore the people of Taiwan must oppose the Republic of China. Therefore the people of Taiwan people must oppose mainlanders. Therefore the people of Taiwan must demand Taiwan independence."
This kind of logic is crudely unconvincing. Yet in recent years it has reigned supreme on Taiwan's political scene. Is Chiang Kai-shek really the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident?" Can his historical record as the "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan" simply be deleted? If one hates the elder Chiang, does that mean one must overthrow the Republic of China? Does demanding the overthrow of the Republic of China mean that mainlanders or political dissidents must be classified as "Chi-Com fellow travelers?" Does the need to commemorate the 228 Incident mean that one must demand Taiwan independence? Furthermore, how can one talk about the history of Taiwan, how can one talk about the Republic of China, without talking about Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo? The DPP's torture logic simply cannot stand up to rational scrutiny. The recent wave of anti-Chiang campaigns has given the public the opportunity to reflect.
No one can rewrite history according to his own liking. Yet the DPP has attempted to force fit Taiwan's history into its own Procrustean bed. DPP history seems is apparently frozen at 228 Incident, 1947. Chiang Kai-shek is apparently forever frozen as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident." The DPP has left Chiang's historic contribution as the "Enemy of Communism and Defender of Taiwan" on the cutting room floor. It is doing the same with Chiang Ching-kuo, Chiang Kai-shek's successor. Hence such logical non sequiteurs as equating commemoration of the 228 Incident with demands for Taiwan independence.
The Democratic Progressive Party's version of Taiwan's history cites only the 228 Incident or White Terror. Taiwan's economic miracle, gradual democratization, educational opportunities, economic equality, Taiwan's elevation to the status of the head of the Four Asian Tigers, have all been edited out of Taiwan's history. The DPP's interpretation of national identity and democracy is erected on the quicksand of historical revisionism. That is why the DPP is in its current pickle.
And yet incredibly, Chen Shui-bian is still trying to provoke a political backlash with his anti-Chiang political campaign. He is trying to argue that "We must commemorate the 228 Incident. Therefore we must purge all influences of Chiang. Therefore we must overthrow the Republic of China. Therefore we must purge mainlanders. Since the Republic of China, the KMT, and mainlanders are all representatives of an alien political authority, therefore they are all traitors to Taiwan. Therefore they are all Chi-Com fellow travelers." Chen Shui-bian has been struggling for the past year to purge all traces of Chiang and the Republic of China. But take a calm look at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, which Chen Shui-bian has turned into an ideological garbage dump. The public is getting wise to Taiwan's history, which Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party have been attempting to distort and revise beyond recognition. They are becoming aware of the illogic behind Chen Shui-bian and the DPP's Taiwan independence rationale.
Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo both made valuable contributions and serious mistakes. Their mistakes will be judged by future generations. Their contributions do not need to be deliberately ignored. Chiang Kai-shek naturally bears some measure of responsibility for the 228 Incident. But Taiwan need not forever be torn apart by the 228 Incident. The 228 Incident does not mean we must overthrow the Republic of China or demand Taiwan independence. The two have no causal connection. By the same token, Chiang Ching-kuo also made valuable contributions and serious mistakes. But it is unlikely that anyone living today or in the future will say: "Chiang Ching-kuo did not love Taiwan. Chiang Ching-kuo sold out Taiwan. Chiang Ching-kuo was a Chi-Com fellow traveler."
Since mainlanders and KMT leaders such as Chiang Ching-kuo love Taiwan, are not traitors to Taiwan, or Chi-Com fellow travelers, who precisely are Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party trying to accuse of being traitors to Taiwan and Chi-Com fellow travelers?
蔣經國不是中共同路人
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.08 03:16 am
一月十三日是蔣經國逝世二十周年，在「去中華民國」及「去蔣」的風潮中追憶蔣經國，可以為探索台灣歷史的真相、重建台灣生命共同體的共同記憶，提供省思的線索。
陳水扁「去蔣拆匾」的動作，激起了國人對蔣氏功罪及歷史是非的反芻與省思。國人過去很少細思的這一宗政治公案，經由陳水扁這番撥弄挑激，反而浮現了一種比較平衡公允的社會認知。一般認為，蔣介石功罪兼之，但陳水扁片面欲以一句「二二八元凶」論定，委實有失平允，畢竟蔣氏畢生「反共保台」，不能聽任陳水扁一筆抹殺；再者，即使有些人對蔣氏銜恨不滿，但像陳水扁做到這般鞭屍及羞辱陵墓的地步，此種政治操作亦非一般人所能苟同。
陳水扁及民進黨的罪孽是在為了政治鬥爭而刻意偽造歷史、剪裁歷史。蔣介石的確有錯，但蔣介石「反共保台」亦的確有功。陳水扁一筆抹殺蔣介石「反共保台」之功，只想用「二二八元凶」的帽子扣住蔣介石；這不是歷史真相，而只是現世的政治鬥爭。但歷史終究不是政治的附庸，陳水扁及民進黨欲藉「去蔣拆匾」的動作，求得「蔣介石是台灣罪人，保台無功」，及「陳水扁是台灣偉人，貪腐無罪」的社會結論，自屬枉然。
陳水扁及民進黨在偽造剪裁台灣歷史時，最傷神處是必須將老蔣與小蔣區隔。民進黨的命題邏輯是：蔣介石是二二八元凶→中華民國是外來政權及賣台集團→外省人是中共同路人→所以，台灣人要反蔣→台灣人要反中華民國→台灣人要反外省人→所以，台灣人要主張台獨。
這類的命題邏輯極其粗糙，卻在近幾年主導了台灣的政局，試問：蔣介石「只是」二二八元凶嗎？其「反共保台」的事蹟可以一筆抹殺嗎？憎恨老蔣，就要推翻中華民國嗎？要推翻中華民國，就要將外省人或民主異議者說成中共同路人嗎？還有，「紀念二二八」，就一定要主張台獨嗎？再者，談台灣史，談中華民國，又豈能只論蔣介石而不論蔣經國？這類命題根本禁不起理智思考，這次「去蔣拆匾」風潮正好給了國人一個思索的機會。
尤其，歷史長河，無人可以在事後將之截斷。民進黨卻將台灣歷史，從縱線及橫面上依其政治偏見而刻意加以剪裁。從縱線上，民進黨的台灣歷史彷彿一直停留在一九四七年二二八，因此蔣介石也就永遠停格在「二二八元凶」的階段；自此以後，「反共保台」的蔣介石被民進黨裁掉了，接續蔣介石的蔣經國也被民進黨剪掉了……。因此，才會出現「紀念二二八 →所以要台獨」之類的偏激論述。
另從橫面看，民進黨的台灣歷史，也只見二二八或白色恐怖而已，剪掉了經濟奇蹟、漸進民主、教育公平、均富政策，及登上亞洲四小龍等等。正因民進黨將國家論述及民主思維建立在其變造的台灣史上，所以民進黨的國家治理及民主表現，才會錯亂到今日這種無法收拾的地步。
不幸的是，陳水扁如今竟仍欲藉「去蔣拆匾」的動作，嘗試再次挑撥「紀念二二八→所以要去蔣→去中華民國→去國民黨→去外省人→因為中華民國、國民黨、外省人皆是外來政權 →皆是賣台集團→皆是中共同路人」。然而，歷經陳水扁過去一年翻天覆地的「去蔣／去中華民國」，如今冷靜下來看一看中正紀念堂大廳被陳水扁搞成這幅政治垃圾場一般的猙獰場景，國人還不警覺台灣歷史的真相已被陳水扁及民進黨扭曲切割得面目全非嗎？還不警覺陳水扁及民進黨的命題邏輯之荒誕錯謬已極嗎？
蔣介石及蔣經國皆有功有過。其過，足昭後世炯戒；其功，亦不必故意抹殺。固然，蔣介石應對二二八負一定責任；但無論如何，台灣似乎不必因二二八就必須永遠撕裂，不必因二二八就非得推翻中華民國，就一定要台獨；因為，其中根本沒有必然的因果邏輯。同理，蔣經國亦有功有過，但恐怕今日及後世不會有任何一個有理智的台灣人會說：蔣經國不愛台灣，蔣經國是賣台集團，蔣經國是中共同路人。
如果蔣經國那樣的外省人與國民黨，既愛台灣，又不是賣台集團及中共同路人，陳水扁及民進黨該找誰來做賣台集團及中共同路人呢？念二二八→所以要去蔣→去中華民國→去國民黨→去外省人→因為中華民國、國民黨、外省人皆是外來政權 →皆是賣台集團→皆是中共同路人」。然而，歷經陳水扁過去一年翻天覆地的「去蔣／去中華民國」，如今冷靜下來看一看中正紀念堂大廳被陳水扁搞成這幅政治垃圾場一般的猙獰場景，國人還不警覺台灣歷史的真相已被陳水扁及民進黨扭曲切割得面目全非嗎？還不警覺陳水扁及民進黨的命題邏輯之荒誕錯謬已極嗎？
蔣介石及蔣經國皆有功有過。其過，足昭後世炯戒；其功，亦不必故意抹殺。固然，蔣介石應對二二八負一定責任；但無論如何，台灣似乎不必因二二八就必須永遠撕裂，不必因二二八就非得推翻中華民國，就一定要台獨；因為，其中根本沒有必然的因果邏輯。同理，蔣經國亦有功有過，但恐怕今日及後世不會有任何一個有理智的台灣人會說：蔣經國不愛台灣，蔣經國是賣台集團，蔣經國是中共同路人。
如果蔣經國那樣的外省人與國民黨，既愛台灣，又不是賣台集團及中共同路人，陳水扁及民進黨該找誰來做賣台集團及中共同路人呢？
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 8, 2008
January 13th is the 20th anniversary of Chiang Ching-kuo's passing. The ruling DPP regime is attempting to drop the Republic of China and the two Chiangs down their Orwellian "memory hole." Commemorating Chiang Ching-kuo gives us the opportunity to uncover the truth about Taiwan's history, to reconstruct our shared memory, and to provide food for thought.
Chen Shui-bian's ongoing campaign to purge all traces of the Two Chiangs from the island has inspired the public to reminisce and reflect upon the elder Chiang's merits and demerits. The public seldom thought about these political issues in the past. Chen Shui-bian's attempt to demagogue the issue has backfired. Instead, a more balanced consensus has emerged. Most people believe that Chiang Kai-shek had both merits and demerits. They believe Chen Shui-bian's determination to define Chiang as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident" is one-sided and imbalanced. After all, Chiang Kai-shek was a staunch "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan." They cannot allow Chen Shui-bian arbitrarily consign Chiang Kai-shek to the lowest rung of Hell. Even if some people are unhappy with the Two Chiangs, Chen Shui-bian's vicious smear campaign against long dead leaders is not something most people are comfortable with.
Chen Shui-bian and the DPP are guilty of deliberately falsifying and editing history in the service of their partisan political struggle. Chiang Kai-shek was guilty of wrongdoing. But Chiang Kai-shek, the "Enemy of Communism and Defender of Taiwan," also made historic contributions. Chen Shui-bian is attempting to eradicate Chiang Kai-shek's historical status as the "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan." He is attempting to redefine him as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident." This is not historical truth. This is political spin doctoring. History is not the servant of political ends. Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party are trying to make political hay out of their anti-Chiang political campaign. They are attempting to convince the public that "Chiang Kai-shek was Public Enemy Number One" and "did nothing to protect Taiwan." They are attempting to convince the public that "Chen Shui-bian is a Great Man of Taiwan" and "innocent of corruption." Their attempts are in vain.
Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party are struggling to falsify and selectively edit Taiwan's history. They are attempting to drive a wedge between the elder Chiang and the younger Chiang. The DPP's tortured logic is: "Chiang Kai-shek is the Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident. Thefore the Republic of China is an alien regime and sold out Taiwan. Therefore mainlanders are Chi-Com fellow travelers. Therefore the people of Taiwan must oppose Chiang. Therefore the people of Taiwan must oppose the Republic of China. Therefore the people of Taiwan people must oppose mainlanders. Therefore the people of Taiwan must demand Taiwan independence."
This kind of logic is crudely unconvincing. Yet in recent years it has reigned supreme on Taiwan's political scene. Is Chiang Kai-shek really the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident?" Can his historical record as the "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan" simply be deleted? If one hates the elder Chiang, does that mean one must overthrow the Republic of China? Does demanding the overthrow of the Republic of China mean that mainlanders or political dissidents must be classified as "Chi-Com fellow travelers?" Does the need to commemorate the 228 Incident mean that one must demand Taiwan independence? Furthermore, how can one talk about the history of Taiwan, how can one talk about the Republic of China, without talking about Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo? The DPP's torture logic simply cannot stand up to rational scrutiny. The recent wave of anti-Chiang campaigns has given the public the opportunity to reflect.
No one can rewrite history according to his own liking. Yet the DPP has attempted to force fit Taiwan's history into its own Procrustean bed. DPP history seems is apparently frozen at 228 Incident, 1947. Chiang Kai-shek is apparently forever frozen as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident." The DPP has left Chiang's historic contribution as the "Enemy of Communism and Defender of Taiwan" on the cutting room floor. It is doing the same with Chiang Ching-kuo, Chiang Kai-shek's successor. Hence such logical non sequiteurs as equating commemoration of the 228 Incident with demands for Taiwan independence.
The Democratic Progressive Party's version of Taiwan's history cites only the 228 Incident or White Terror. Taiwan's economic miracle, gradual democratization, educational opportunities, economic equality, Taiwan's elevation to the status of the head of the Four Asian Tigers, have all been edited out of Taiwan's history. The DPP's interpretation of national identity and democracy is erected on the quicksand of historical revisionism. That is why the DPP is in its current pickle.
And yet incredibly, Chen Shui-bian is still trying to provoke a political backlash with his anti-Chiang political campaign. He is trying to argue that "We must commemorate the 228 Incident. Therefore we must purge all influences of Chiang. Therefore we must overthrow the Republic of China. Therefore we must purge mainlanders. Since the Republic of China, the KMT, and mainlanders are all representatives of an alien political authority, therefore they are all traitors to Taiwan. Therefore they are all Chi-Com fellow travelers." Chen Shui-bian has been struggling for the past year to purge all traces of Chiang and the Republic of China. But take a calm look at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, which Chen Shui-bian has turned into an ideological garbage dump. The public is getting wise to Taiwan's history, which Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party have been attempting to distort and revise beyond recognition. They are becoming aware of the illogic behind Chen Shui-bian and the DPP's Taiwan independence rationale.
Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo both made valuable contributions and serious mistakes. Their mistakes will be judged by future generations. Their contributions do not need to be deliberately ignored. Chiang Kai-shek naturally bears some measure of responsibility for the 228 Incident. But Taiwan need not forever be torn apart by the 228 Incident. The 228 Incident does not mean we must overthrow the Republic of China or demand Taiwan independence. The two have no causal connection. By the same token, Chiang Ching-kuo also made valuable contributions and serious mistakes. But it is unlikely that anyone living today or in the future will say: "Chiang Ching-kuo did not love Taiwan. Chiang Ching-kuo sold out Taiwan. Chiang Ching-kuo was a Chi-Com fellow traveler."
Since mainlanders and KMT leaders such as Chiang Ching-kuo love Taiwan, are not traitors to Taiwan, or Chi-Com fellow travelers, who precisely are Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party trying to accuse of being traitors to Taiwan and Chi-Com fellow travelers?
蔣經國不是中共同路人
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.08 03:16 am
一月十三日是蔣經國逝世二十周年，在「去中華民國」及「去蔣」的風潮中追憶蔣經國，可以為探索台灣歷史的真相、重建台灣生命共同體的共同記憶，提供省思的線索。
陳水扁「去蔣拆匾」的動作，激起了國人對蔣氏功罪及歷史是非的反芻與省思。國人過去很少細思的這一宗政治公案，經由陳水扁這番撥弄挑激，反而浮現了一種比較平衡公允的社會認知。一般認為，蔣介石功罪兼之，但陳水扁片面欲以一句「二二八元凶」論定，委實有失平允，畢竟蔣氏畢生「反共保台」，不能聽任陳水扁一筆抹殺；再者，即使有些人對蔣氏銜恨不滿，但像陳水扁做到這般鞭屍及羞辱陵墓的地步，此種政治操作亦非一般人所能苟同。
陳水扁及民進黨的罪孽是在為了政治鬥爭而刻意偽造歷史、剪裁歷史。蔣介石的確有錯，但蔣介石「反共保台」亦的確有功。陳水扁一筆抹殺蔣介石「反共保台」之功，只想用「二二八元凶」的帽子扣住蔣介石；這不是歷史真相，而只是現世的政治鬥爭。但歷史終究不是政治的附庸，陳水扁及民進黨欲藉「去蔣拆匾」的動作，求得「蔣介石是台灣罪人，保台無功」，及「陳水扁是台灣偉人，貪腐無罪」的社會結論，自屬枉然。
陳水扁及民進黨在偽造剪裁台灣歷史時，最傷神處是必須將老蔣與小蔣區隔。民進黨的命題邏輯是：蔣介石是二二八元凶→中華民國是外來政權及賣台集團→外省人是中共同路人→所以，台灣人要反蔣→台灣人要反中華民國→台灣人要反外省人→所以，台灣人要主張台獨。
這類的命題邏輯極其粗糙，卻在近幾年主導了台灣的政局，試問：蔣介石「只是」二二八元凶嗎？其「反共保台」的事蹟可以一筆抹殺嗎？憎恨老蔣，就要推翻中華民國嗎？要推翻中華民國，就要將外省人或民主異議者說成中共同路人嗎？還有，「紀念二二八」，就一定要主張台獨嗎？再者，談台灣史，談中華民國，又豈能只論蔣介石而不論蔣經國？這類命題根本禁不起理智思考，這次「去蔣拆匾」風潮正好給了國人一個思索的機會。
尤其，歷史長河，無人可以在事後將之截斷。民進黨卻將台灣歷史，從縱線及橫面上依其政治偏見而刻意加以剪裁。從縱線上，民進黨的台灣歷史彷彿一直停留在一九四七年二二八，因此蔣介石也就永遠停格在「二二八元凶」的階段；自此以後，「反共保台」的蔣介石被民進黨裁掉了，接續蔣介石的蔣經國也被民進黨剪掉了……。因此，才會出現「紀念二二八 →所以要台獨」之類的偏激論述。
另從橫面看，民進黨的台灣歷史，也只見二二八或白色恐怖而已，剪掉了經濟奇蹟、漸進民主、教育公平、均富政策，及登上亞洲四小龍等等。正因民進黨將國家論述及民主思維建立在其變造的台灣史上，所以民進黨的國家治理及民主表現，才會錯亂到今日這種無法收拾的地步。
不幸的是，陳水扁如今竟仍欲藉「去蔣拆匾」的動作，嘗試再次挑撥「紀念二二八→所以要去蔣→去中華民國→去國民黨→去外省人→因為中華民國、國民黨、外省人皆是外來政權 →皆是賣台集團→皆是中共同路人」。然而，歷經陳水扁過去一年翻天覆地的「去蔣／去中華民國」，如今冷靜下來看一看中正紀念堂大廳被陳水扁搞成這幅政治垃圾場一般的猙獰場景，國人還不警覺台灣歷史的真相已被陳水扁及民進黨扭曲切割得面目全非嗎？還不警覺陳水扁及民進黨的命題邏輯之荒誕錯謬已極嗎？
蔣介石及蔣經國皆有功有過。其過，足昭後世炯戒；其功，亦不必故意抹殺。固然，蔣介石應對二二八負一定責任；但無論如何，台灣似乎不必因二二八就必須永遠撕裂，不必因二二八就非得推翻中華民國，就一定要台獨；因為，其中根本沒有必然的因果邏輯。同理，蔣經國亦有功有過，但恐怕今日及後世不會有任何一個有理智的台灣人會說：蔣經國不愛台灣，蔣經國是賣台集團，蔣經國是中共同路人。
如果蔣經國那樣的外省人與國民黨，既愛台灣，又不是賣台集團及中共同路人，陳水扁及民進黨該找誰來做賣台集團及中共同路人呢？念二二八→所以要去蔣→去中華民國→去國民黨→去外省人→因為中華民國、國民黨、外省人皆是外來政權 →皆是賣台集團→皆是中共同路人」。然而，歷經陳水扁過去一年翻天覆地的「去蔣／去中華民國」，如今冷靜下來看一看中正紀念堂大廳被陳水扁搞成這幅政治垃圾場一般的猙獰場景，國人還不警覺台灣歷史的真相已被陳水扁及民進黨扭曲切割得面目全非嗎？還不警覺陳水扁及民進黨的命題邏輯之荒誕錯謬已極嗎？
蔣介石及蔣經國皆有功有過。其過，足昭後世炯戒；其功，亦不必故意抹殺。固然，蔣介石應對二二八負一定責任；但無論如何，台灣似乎不必因二二八就必須永遠撕裂，不必因二二八就非得推翻中華民國，就一定要台獨；因為，其中根本沒有必然的因果邏輯。同理，蔣經國亦有功有過，但恐怕今日及後世不會有任何一個有理智的台灣人會說：蔣經國不愛台灣，蔣經國是賣台集團，蔣經國是中共同路人。
如果蔣經國那樣的外省人與國民黨，既愛台灣，又不是賣台集團及中共同路人，陳水扁及民進黨該找誰來做賣台集團及中共同路人呢？
Monday, January 7, 2008
The 2008 Economy: Awaiting a Leader
The 2008 Economy: Awaiting a Leader
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 7, 2008
Wave goodbye to 2007. Look forward to 2008. Last year the world economy rode a roller coaster. We screamed all the way. Will we be able to get off and catch our breath this year? At the moment it looks as if the economic anomaly of 2007 is over and we are back on track. But Taiwan's economy still has a real obstacle to hurdle, both internally and externally. Its future leadership and tone of government have not been set. Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, statisticians for the major economies, and independent researchers in academia all predict slower global economic growth in 2008. Major reasons include: the effects of the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States are continuing to make themselves felt, oil prices remain high, supply and demand for raw materials remains unresolved, and preventing recession has been given priority over preventing inflation. The most important reason however is experts sharply disagree about whether the US economy is in recession, and whether a soft landing of mainland China's economy is possible. Among the many variables are movements in the dollar and RMB exchange rate and changes in consumer demand, and their impact on the major economies' economic policies. The government brims with confidence, but the public is wracked by anxiety. The efficacy of their policies can be seen by the impact of economic globalization on their economies.
Making economic forecasts is a difficult and thankless task. But it must be done. A clear economic forecast is an important tool governments, organizations, and businesses use to allocate limited resources. Not only to make up obvious shortfalls, but also to achieve ones' goals and visions. Unfortunately, real historical changes are often the result of totally unexpected events. This is the main reason economic forecasts must often undergo major revisions. For example, the Asian financial crisis triggered heavy criticism of the Thai Baht. The 9-11 terrorist attack and the SARS crisis derailed the economy. Last year's subprime mortgage crisis in the United States was initially presumed to be a regional crisis. Who knew it would turn into a financial storm? Not only did it rain on last year's global economic outlook, it is casting a dark shadow over this year's as well.
Taiwan's economic outlook for 2008 should be viewed from two indeterminate perspectives. The first is that based on "known unknowns," it will continue down the path taken in 2007. Obviously, if we look exclusively at outside factors, the evolution of the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States is the number one factor. The subprime mortgage crisis has caused major losses on Wall Street. But even more frightening is the loss of confidence in financial transactions and in the regulatory capabilities of major European central banks. Prior to the restoration of order in the financial market, flexible business management is essential. Mergers and acquisitions must be subjected to controls. It will be difficult for the economy to revive. The once high profile process of globalization has changed into something else. Oil prices are not expected to retreat any time soon. Central bank monetary policy is caught between preventing recession and preventing inflation. These indeterminate factors mean a bumpy ride for the global economy, and enormous uncertainty in Taiwan's increasing external demand.
Internally, Taiwan has many difficult problems left over from 2007, and no short-term answers. It is often said that the stock market is a showcase for the economy. From another perspective, the stock market is the referee of economic performance. According to statistics, Taiwan's stock market grew 8.7 percent last year. It ranked next to last among Asian stock markets. The foreign investor overbought index has reached its lowest point in recent years. The Directorate General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics put last year's economic growth rate at 5.5 percent. The Executive Yuan used its "Benefit a Week Program" to artificially raise the TAIEX to the 10,000 point mark. The stock market has given the government a sharp slap in the face. What's worse, the TAIEX rose 100 points at the end of last year. This year the market often opened up but closed down, fortelling a year of unrest.
Actually, earnings from foreign trade and publicly traded companies were high last year. There was no reason for a bear market. But the presidential election, the restructuring of the Legislative Yuan and the reorganization of financial and economic policies introduced considerable uncertainty. These include cross-strait transportation links, loosening of limits on investment on the Chinese mainland, tax reform, and financial reform. All could lead to dramatically different consequences. These are all political "known unknowns" that affect the economy, and that undermine investor confidence.
2008 has begun. Who the nation's leaders will be remains unknown. Their cabinets have not been chosen. The political arena remains chaotic. No one has set a tone. It is the "unknown unknowns" that will determine the strategic picture.
經濟二○○八：等待指揮家就位！
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.07 03:13 am
揮別二○○七，迎向二○○八，坐著雲霄飛車一路驚叫的世界經濟，能在新的一年獲得喘息的機會嗎？目前看來，要將二○○七變調的經濟情勢拉回成長的軌道，可是「真拚」；內外交困的台灣經濟，在指揮家未就位前，更難定調。這一年，大家可要坐穩些了。
對於二○○八，上至世界銀行、國際貨幣基金，中到主要經濟體國家統計機構，下至各個獨立的學術研究單位，異口同聲地預言今年全球經濟成長會減速，主因美國次級房貸風暴的遞延效應持續發酵、油價依然居高不下、原物料供需緊張之勢未解，預防衰退的優先性已高於防範通貨膨脹。不過，對於最關鍵的美國經濟是否步入衰退、中國經濟能否軟著陸，各方卻沒有一致性見解，甚且是南轅北轍；這是因為對眾多變數的預期出現歧異，例如美元、人民幣匯率走勢、消費需求的變化等；尤其是對各大經濟體間經濟政策的取捨與博弈，官方信心十足，民間卻憂心忡忡，而其成效對經濟的全球化運行卻是動見觀瞻。
預測未來經濟情勢，本來就是件不容易、不討好，卻又一定要做的事；一組立論清晰的經濟預測，是政府、組織及企業使用有限資源的重要依據，不只是補強看得到的不足，更是為了達成所設定的目標與願景。無奈，真正改變歷史運行軌跡的，往往是完全出乎意料的重大事件，這也是經濟預測常做大幅修正的主因；例如引發亞洲金融危機的泰銖重貶、九一一恐怖攻擊、ＳＡＲＳ風暴等，都曾將經濟情勢推離常軌。就像去年的美國次貸危機，原本市場認為不過是個區域性風暴，卻沒想到形成金融颶風，不只吹散去年世界經濟的歡樂，還為今年的經濟罩上重重的陰霾。
因此，對於二○○八的台灣經濟情勢觀察，須從兩個「未知」的層面來看。一個是沿著二○○七走過的軌跡，從「已知的未知」找方向。很明顯的，就外在環境而言，美國次貸風暴的擴散與演變列名第一。次貸危機表面上的傷勢是華爾街各大金融機構虧損累累，但更可怕的是金融交易的可信度下降，以及歐美各大中央銀行的監管能力公信力及侷限性，在金融市場新秩序建立前，需要流動性的企業經營及併購活動都受箝制，經濟難現活絡；再者，原本高調行進的全球經濟變了調，油價回檔的預期又那麼遙不可及，更讓央行的貨幣政策在預防衰退、防範通膨間左支右絀。這些已知的不確定因素為全球經濟定下「動盪中行進」的基調，也為台灣外部需求的擴張帶來巨大的不確定性。
至於在台灣內部，二○○七留下的待解難題實在不少，而且短期找不到答案。常言謂，股市是經濟的櫥窗；換個角度看，股市更是評價經濟表現的第一線裁判。根據統計，去年台股全年上漲百分之八點七，在亞洲股市中倒數第二，外資淨買超金額也是近年最低；對照主計處發布的去年經濟成長率百分之五點五，以及行政院以「一周一利多」欲鼓動的萬點行情，真是狠狠地刷了政府一個大耳聒子。更甚者，去年底大漲百點封關的台股，今年開紅盤日長黑收市，也多少預示了對這一年的不安。
其實，去年台灣對外貿易、上市上櫃公司盈餘都創新高，股市沒有看壞的理由；但是，總統大選、立法院改制重組帶來的財經政策巨大變化，諸如兩岸通航、開放陸客來台、鬆綁西進上限、稅制及金融改革等，都可能出現天差地別的結果；正是這些政治牽動經濟的「已知的未知」，阻卻了投資人投向台股的意願與勇氣。
然而，二○○八畢竟才剛開始。儘管從現今的時空眺望未來的舞台，呈現的是指揮家未就位、團員未整裝、場布道具待重整的凌亂景象，但事在人為，一切仍未定調；尤其，還有「未知的未知」，那也許會是扭轉大局的真正利多。
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 7, 2008
Wave goodbye to 2007. Look forward to 2008. Last year the world economy rode a roller coaster. We screamed all the way. Will we be able to get off and catch our breath this year? At the moment it looks as if the economic anomaly of 2007 is over and we are back on track. But Taiwan's economy still has a real obstacle to hurdle, both internally and externally. Its future leadership and tone of government have not been set. Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, statisticians for the major economies, and independent researchers in academia all predict slower global economic growth in 2008. Major reasons include: the effects of the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States are continuing to make themselves felt, oil prices remain high, supply and demand for raw materials remains unresolved, and preventing recession has been given priority over preventing inflation. The most important reason however is experts sharply disagree about whether the US economy is in recession, and whether a soft landing of mainland China's economy is possible. Among the many variables are movements in the dollar and RMB exchange rate and changes in consumer demand, and their impact on the major economies' economic policies. The government brims with confidence, but the public is wracked by anxiety. The efficacy of their policies can be seen by the impact of economic globalization on their economies.
Making economic forecasts is a difficult and thankless task. But it must be done. A clear economic forecast is an important tool governments, organizations, and businesses use to allocate limited resources. Not only to make up obvious shortfalls, but also to achieve ones' goals and visions. Unfortunately, real historical changes are often the result of totally unexpected events. This is the main reason economic forecasts must often undergo major revisions. For example, the Asian financial crisis triggered heavy criticism of the Thai Baht. The 9-11 terrorist attack and the SARS crisis derailed the economy. Last year's subprime mortgage crisis in the United States was initially presumed to be a regional crisis. Who knew it would turn into a financial storm? Not only did it rain on last year's global economic outlook, it is casting a dark shadow over this year's as well.
Taiwan's economic outlook for 2008 should be viewed from two indeterminate perspectives. The first is that based on "known unknowns," it will continue down the path taken in 2007. Obviously, if we look exclusively at outside factors, the evolution of the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States is the number one factor. The subprime mortgage crisis has caused major losses on Wall Street. But even more frightening is the loss of confidence in financial transactions and in the regulatory capabilities of major European central banks. Prior to the restoration of order in the financial market, flexible business management is essential. Mergers and acquisitions must be subjected to controls. It will be difficult for the economy to revive. The once high profile process of globalization has changed into something else. Oil prices are not expected to retreat any time soon. Central bank monetary policy is caught between preventing recession and preventing inflation. These indeterminate factors mean a bumpy ride for the global economy, and enormous uncertainty in Taiwan's increasing external demand.
Internally, Taiwan has many difficult problems left over from 2007, and no short-term answers. It is often said that the stock market is a showcase for the economy. From another perspective, the stock market is the referee of economic performance. According to statistics, Taiwan's stock market grew 8.7 percent last year. It ranked next to last among Asian stock markets. The foreign investor overbought index has reached its lowest point in recent years. The Directorate General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics put last year's economic growth rate at 5.5 percent. The Executive Yuan used its "Benefit a Week Program" to artificially raise the TAIEX to the 10,000 point mark. The stock market has given the government a sharp slap in the face. What's worse, the TAIEX rose 100 points at the end of last year. This year the market often opened up but closed down, fortelling a year of unrest.
Actually, earnings from foreign trade and publicly traded companies were high last year. There was no reason for a bear market. But the presidential election, the restructuring of the Legislative Yuan and the reorganization of financial and economic policies introduced considerable uncertainty. These include cross-strait transportation links, loosening of limits on investment on the Chinese mainland, tax reform, and financial reform. All could lead to dramatically different consequences. These are all political "known unknowns" that affect the economy, and that undermine investor confidence.
2008 has begun. Who the nation's leaders will be remains unknown. Their cabinets have not been chosen. The political arena remains chaotic. No one has set a tone. It is the "unknown unknowns" that will determine the strategic picture.
經濟二○○八：等待指揮家就位！
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.07 03:13 am
揮別二○○七，迎向二○○八，坐著雲霄飛車一路驚叫的世界經濟，能在新的一年獲得喘息的機會嗎？目前看來，要將二○○七變調的經濟情勢拉回成長的軌道，可是「真拚」；內外交困的台灣經濟，在指揮家未就位前，更難定調。這一年，大家可要坐穩些了。
對於二○○八，上至世界銀行、國際貨幣基金，中到主要經濟體國家統計機構，下至各個獨立的學術研究單位，異口同聲地預言今年全球經濟成長會減速，主因美國次級房貸風暴的遞延效應持續發酵、油價依然居高不下、原物料供需緊張之勢未解，預防衰退的優先性已高於防範通貨膨脹。不過，對於最關鍵的美國經濟是否步入衰退、中國經濟能否軟著陸，各方卻沒有一致性見解，甚且是南轅北轍；這是因為對眾多變數的預期出現歧異，例如美元、人民幣匯率走勢、消費需求的變化等；尤其是對各大經濟體間經濟政策的取捨與博弈，官方信心十足，民間卻憂心忡忡，而其成效對經濟的全球化運行卻是動見觀瞻。
預測未來經濟情勢，本來就是件不容易、不討好，卻又一定要做的事；一組立論清晰的經濟預測，是政府、組織及企業使用有限資源的重要依據，不只是補強看得到的不足，更是為了達成所設定的目標與願景。無奈，真正改變歷史運行軌跡的，往往是完全出乎意料的重大事件，這也是經濟預測常做大幅修正的主因；例如引發亞洲金融危機的泰銖重貶、九一一恐怖攻擊、ＳＡＲＳ風暴等，都曾將經濟情勢推離常軌。就像去年的美國次貸危機，原本市場認為不過是個區域性風暴，卻沒想到形成金融颶風，不只吹散去年世界經濟的歡樂，還為今年的經濟罩上重重的陰霾。
因此，對於二○○八的台灣經濟情勢觀察，須從兩個「未知」的層面來看。一個是沿著二○○七走過的軌跡，從「已知的未知」找方向。很明顯的，就外在環境而言，美國次貸風暴的擴散與演變列名第一。次貸危機表面上的傷勢是華爾街各大金融機構虧損累累，但更可怕的是金融交易的可信度下降，以及歐美各大中央銀行的監管能力公信力及侷限性，在金融市場新秩序建立前，需要流動性的企業經營及併購活動都受箝制，經濟難現活絡；再者，原本高調行進的全球經濟變了調，油價回檔的預期又那麼遙不可及，更讓央行的貨幣政策在預防衰退、防範通膨間左支右絀。這些已知的不確定因素為全球經濟定下「動盪中行進」的基調，也為台灣外部需求的擴張帶來巨大的不確定性。
至於在台灣內部，二○○七留下的待解難題實在不少，而且短期找不到答案。常言謂，股市是經濟的櫥窗；換個角度看，股市更是評價經濟表現的第一線裁判。根據統計，去年台股全年上漲百分之八點七，在亞洲股市中倒數第二，外資淨買超金額也是近年最低；對照主計處發布的去年經濟成長率百分之五點五，以及行政院以「一周一利多」欲鼓動的萬點行情，真是狠狠地刷了政府一個大耳聒子。更甚者，去年底大漲百點封關的台股，今年開紅盤日長黑收市，也多少預示了對這一年的不安。
其實，去年台灣對外貿易、上市上櫃公司盈餘都創新高，股市沒有看壞的理由；但是，總統大選、立法院改制重組帶來的財經政策巨大變化，諸如兩岸通航、開放陸客來台、鬆綁西進上限、稅制及金融改革等，都可能出現天差地別的結果；正是這些政治牽動經濟的「已知的未知」，阻卻了投資人投向台股的意願與勇氣。
然而，二○○八畢竟才剛開始。儘管從現今的時空眺望未來的舞台，呈現的是指揮家未就位、團員未整裝、場布道具待重整的凌亂景象，但事在人為，一切仍未定調；尤其，還有「未知的未知」，那也許會是扭轉大局的真正利多。
Thursday, January 3, 2008
An Election without Issues
An Election without Issues
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 3, 2008
Are the legislative elections important? Of course they are! Because the legislature formed as a result of this election will be making major policy and budget decisions for the next four years. Due to changes in the election system, this year's legislative elections are particularly important. The number of legislators has been halved. Overnight, the influence each legislator has over policy will be doubled. Whether the deadlock that has prevailed in the legislature over the past eight years can be broken will be determined by this election.
Such an important election. Yet when most people are asked how they will vote, say: "I don't know." Either that, or they answer: "I know but I don't care." Why don't they know? Why don't they care? Because they can't be bothered to know. Because they can't be bothered to care. According to most polls, the Legislative Yuan has become synonymous with political evil. Unfortunately, the majority of voters don't care. Their indifference means the quality of the legislature will never improve. It may even go from bad to worse. Unfortunately, legislators themselves do not understand their own power and responsibilities. This means the voters' expectation that the legislature is dysfunctional will remain a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The upcoming legislative elections are so important. Yet the voters are so colossally indifferent. The candidates have been marginalized by the outgoing president and the ruling and opposition party's presidential candidates. No mention is made of the legislative elections. Naturally it has been marginalized. Candidates for the legislature actively or passively rely on the so-called "princes" to endorse their candidacy and increase their exposure. In particular they rely on Chen Shui-bian to stump for them. As a result, all we see in the election arena, from north to south, is Chen Shui-bian denouncing the United States and the two Chiangs. The candidates for the legislature are supposed to be the stars of the show. What have they said? What do they want to say? Nobody cares. Nobody asks.
Among the hundreds of candidates, only smaller party candidates are willing to talk about the issues. Standing in the winter cold, they talk about protecting the environment. Their criticisms are harsh. "If you don't care about environmental protection, don't bother telling us how much you love Taiwan!" But no one listens to them. This election has been about pointless irrelevancies such as "Joining the UN" or "Rejoining the UN." About the single stage vs. two stage balloting procedures. About whether to demolish the plaque over the ceremonial gateway to the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial. About whether to "imprison" the bronze statue of Chiang Kai-shek by surrounding it with iron bars. Night and day controversies rage. The spotlight remains on the president, on the secretary general of the Ministry of Education, on the chief of the Government Information Office, on the hierarchy of the Central Election Committee. Even UMC Honorary Chairman Tsao Hsing-chen's "Cross-Straits Peace Act" has become the object of Chen Shui-bian's attacks, turning Tsao into one of the major players. All that is missing is the candidates for the legislature.
When you think it about, it's really rather sad. If you look at the legislative elections over the past 20 years, no matter how hysterical or tense the political atmosphere became, the candidates always paid some attention to the issues. When Shih Ming-teh was DPP Chairman, the withdrawal of troops from Kinmen and Matsu was a serious election issue. When Hsu Hsin-liang was DPP Chairman, he played the welfare for senior citizens card, forcing KMT Chairman Lee Teng-hui to follow suit. Now it has has become a policy the nation must implement on an annual basis. When Lin Yi-hsiung was DPP Chairman, he promoted his referendum to halt construction on Nuclear Plant No. 4. The subsequent halting and resuming of construction on Nuclear Plant No. 4 constituted an international fiasco. But it was unquestionably a serious issue.
Leave Nuclear Plant No. 4 aside for the moment. Environmental issues have been seriously marginalized this year. The Yunlin No. 8 Cracking Plant, the Meinung Reservoir, the Su Hua Highway, and the Snow Mountain Tunnel were important issues in previous legislative and presidential elections. Candidates for the legislature dared not treat these issues lightly. Even presidential candidates treated these issues as matters of national importance. Today however, the candidates never speak of these issues. Mention of them in print, in election pamphlets is even more rare.
The DPP and KMT have been promoting utterly pointless and irrelevant plebiscites on UN membership. The Kaohsiung Teachers Association meanwhile, has proposed a modest but meaningful plebiscite on Small Class Teaching and Learning. But time is short. Their petition has the necessary number of signatures. It truly is a " bottom-up" plebiscite. But it must take a back sea to the "Join the UN" and "Rejoin the UN" plebiscites being held in conjunction with the presidential election. Will it be given the attention it deserves? Take a wild guess. Wouldn't you think legislators from Kaohsiung would show some concern for a plebiscite Kaohsiung citizens petitioned for on their own initiative? Yet legislators willing to voice concern for parents and teachers can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Hardly anyone gives a damn.
If legislative candidates don't talk about public welfare, what do they talk about? They talk about their rivals' dirty laundry and health problems. If it isn't extramarital affairs, then it's who's supporting a mistress. Or who is addicted to drugs or popping ecstasy. Who had a stroke or whose mind is going. Whether their vicious rumors are true or false, nobody cares. To expect voters to feel concern, let alone enthusiasm for legislative elections dominated by smear campaigns and rumor mongering is no easy matter.
No kidding. The legislative elections really are important. The new legislature will have only 113 members. These legislators will decide how to spend one trillion dollars every year. No matter who is elected president in 2008, this Legislative Yuan will approve Control Yuan members and Grand Justices nominated by the president. It will pass major legislation submitted by the Executive Yuan. The future direction of the Republic of China will be determined largely by the Legislative Yuan. If the legislative elections lose focus, how can we establish a functioning parliament? Voters are ignorant. Political stars are insensible. Can ruling and opposition legislative candidates shoulder a little responsibility? Can they make a little effort? Can they seize the opportunity during these last few days to get back to the issues?
中時電子報
中國時報 2008.01.03
一場議題完全消失的選舉
中時社論
立委選舉重不重要？當然重要！因為選後的國會將主導未來四年的重大政策、法案、預算；今年的立委選舉尤其重要，為什麼？因為今年國會選制改變，立委人數足足減少一半，每位立委的政策影響力等同一夕倍增，而過去八年惡劣的國會政黨生態能否改變，在此一舉。
這麼重要的選舉，你知道嗎？大多數人的答案可能很簡單，只有三個字：不知道，或者複雜一點七個字：知道但我不關心。為什麼不知道？為什麼不關心？因為懶得知道、懶得關心，立法院在各項民調中，幾乎成為政治之惡的代名詞；很遺憾的，多數選民的不關心，讓國會生態與素質長年無法提昇，甚至每下愈況；更遺憾的，因為立委本身不知己身權責的重要，讓國會陷入汙名化的惡性循環難以解脫。
即將到來的立委選舉，這麼重要，選情卻這麼冷清，立委候選人被現任總統、以及競逐大位的朝野總統參選人邊緣化，遑論立委選舉的議題，必然被邊緣化。因為立委候選人們主動或被動地依賴所謂天王造勢，尤其依賴陳水扁總統的辛辣輔選，結果，選舉舞台上，只見扁一人從北罵到南，從美國罵到兩蔣，理應是立委選舉主角的立委們，到底說了什麼話？或想說什麼話？自然無人聞問。
在數百候選人中，還肯孤軍奮戰談談議題的，大概只剩下小黨候選人，他們在冷風中訴求環保，罵得夠重了，「不重視環保，談什麼愛台灣！」還是沒人理他們。沒辦法，這場選舉，從返聯、入聯公投爭議無休，一階段、二階段爭議難了，大中至正拆是不拆，蔣介石銅像關是不關，吵得日以繼夜，聚光燈下的焦點是總統、教育部主祕、新聞局長、各級選委會主委，甚至連聯電名譽董事長曹興誠推動「兩岸和平促進法」，都能成為陳水扁輔選場子上痛批的對手，一躍而成為主角之一，獨缺立委候選人們。
想來真的很悲哀，細數過去廿年的立委選舉，不論選戰多激情，選情多緊繃，在這個舞台上，總還是有許多值得討論的話題，施明德擔任民進黨主席時，金馬撤軍是一個朝野嚴肅面對的選舉議題；許信良擔任民進黨主席時，還打出一個老人年金，讓國民黨主席李登輝非跟不可，跟到現在，已經成為國家年度非辦不可的政策；林義雄擔任黨主席時代，推動的是核四公投，儘管核四蓋了又停、停了又蓋，掀起漫天政治烽火。
不談核四，就拿今年被嚴重邊緣化的環保議題好了，雲林八輕、美濃水庫、蘇花高、雪山隧道，都曾經是歷次立委選舉、甚至總統大選的重要議題，不要說立委候選人不敢輕忽，總統候選人也當成國家大事，成為可以左右選情的變數。如今，這些議題候選人嘴上不說，連印文宣品都屬鳳毛麟角。
高雄市教師會非常有心，在藍綠推動無關民生宏旨的「重大公投」後，自主推動市民連署小班制教學公投，不過，時間有限，這個已經跨過公民連署門檻，而且真的是「由下而上」的公投議題，最快只能跟在總統大選的入聯與返聯公投後面，其可能受到的重視與關切可想而知。高雄市民自主連署推動的公投案，不論如何，高雄市立委總該關心一下吧，但是，願為這些家長老師發聲的立委候選人依舊屈指可數，激盪不出太多火花。
立委候選人們不談民生政策，談什麼呢？他們談的是對手的八卦緋聞和身體健康，不是「討客兄」，就是「開查某」，甚至還有「吸毒，嗑搖頭丸」，中風或腦袋秀逗，這些惡言到底是真是假，沒人管。選民被此說彼爛的傳單或耳語攻勢包圍下，想要對立委選舉有絲毫關心或熱情，委實很難。
真的不能開玩笑，國會改選真的很重要，未來的國會只有一百一十三位立委，這些立委要決定國家每年上兆總預算，二○○八總統不論是誰，這個立法院要通過總統提名的監委與大法官、要通過行政院提送的重大政策，台灣未來怎麼走，有一大半操諸立法院手中，失焦的立委選舉，不可能創造出健康的國會。選民無知、輔選天王無覺，就是朝野立委候選人不能不清楚自己肩負的責任，用一點心，把握最後幾天的機會，讓自己的選舉回歸政策、回歸正常吧。
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 3, 2008
Are the legislative elections important? Of course they are! Because the legislature formed as a result of this election will be making major policy and budget decisions for the next four years. Due to changes in the election system, this year's legislative elections are particularly important. The number of legislators has been halved. Overnight, the influence each legislator has over policy will be doubled. Whether the deadlock that has prevailed in the legislature over the past eight years can be broken will be determined by this election.
Such an important election. Yet when most people are asked how they will vote, say: "I don't know." Either that, or they answer: "I know but I don't care." Why don't they know? Why don't they care? Because they can't be bothered to know. Because they can't be bothered to care. According to most polls, the Legislative Yuan has become synonymous with political evil. Unfortunately, the majority of voters don't care. Their indifference means the quality of the legislature will never improve. It may even go from bad to worse. Unfortunately, legislators themselves do not understand their own power and responsibilities. This means the voters' expectation that the legislature is dysfunctional will remain a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The upcoming legislative elections are so important. Yet the voters are so colossally indifferent. The candidates have been marginalized by the outgoing president and the ruling and opposition party's presidential candidates. No mention is made of the legislative elections. Naturally it has been marginalized. Candidates for the legislature actively or passively rely on the so-called "princes" to endorse their candidacy and increase their exposure. In particular they rely on Chen Shui-bian to stump for them. As a result, all we see in the election arena, from north to south, is Chen Shui-bian denouncing the United States and the two Chiangs. The candidates for the legislature are supposed to be the stars of the show. What have they said? What do they want to say? Nobody cares. Nobody asks.
Among the hundreds of candidates, only smaller party candidates are willing to talk about the issues. Standing in the winter cold, they talk about protecting the environment. Their criticisms are harsh. "If you don't care about environmental protection, don't bother telling us how much you love Taiwan!" But no one listens to them. This election has been about pointless irrelevancies such as "Joining the UN" or "Rejoining the UN." About the single stage vs. two stage balloting procedures. About whether to demolish the plaque over the ceremonial gateway to the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial. About whether to "imprison" the bronze statue of Chiang Kai-shek by surrounding it with iron bars. Night and day controversies rage. The spotlight remains on the president, on the secretary general of the Ministry of Education, on the chief of the Government Information Office, on the hierarchy of the Central Election Committee. Even UMC Honorary Chairman Tsao Hsing-chen's "Cross-Straits Peace Act" has become the object of Chen Shui-bian's attacks, turning Tsao into one of the major players. All that is missing is the candidates for the legislature.
When you think it about, it's really rather sad. If you look at the legislative elections over the past 20 years, no matter how hysterical or tense the political atmosphere became, the candidates always paid some attention to the issues. When Shih Ming-teh was DPP Chairman, the withdrawal of troops from Kinmen and Matsu was a serious election issue. When Hsu Hsin-liang was DPP Chairman, he played the welfare for senior citizens card, forcing KMT Chairman Lee Teng-hui to follow suit. Now it has has become a policy the nation must implement on an annual basis. When Lin Yi-hsiung was DPP Chairman, he promoted his referendum to halt construction on Nuclear Plant No. 4. The subsequent halting and resuming of construction on Nuclear Plant No. 4 constituted an international fiasco. But it was unquestionably a serious issue.
Leave Nuclear Plant No. 4 aside for the moment. Environmental issues have been seriously marginalized this year. The Yunlin No. 8 Cracking Plant, the Meinung Reservoir, the Su Hua Highway, and the Snow Mountain Tunnel were important issues in previous legislative and presidential elections. Candidates for the legislature dared not treat these issues lightly. Even presidential candidates treated these issues as matters of national importance. Today however, the candidates never speak of these issues. Mention of them in print, in election pamphlets is even more rare.
The DPP and KMT have been promoting utterly pointless and irrelevant plebiscites on UN membership. The Kaohsiung Teachers Association meanwhile, has proposed a modest but meaningful plebiscite on Small Class Teaching and Learning. But time is short. Their petition has the necessary number of signatures. It truly is a " bottom-up" plebiscite. But it must take a back sea to the "Join the UN" and "Rejoin the UN" plebiscites being held in conjunction with the presidential election. Will it be given the attention it deserves? Take a wild guess. Wouldn't you think legislators from Kaohsiung would show some concern for a plebiscite Kaohsiung citizens petitioned for on their own initiative? Yet legislators willing to voice concern for parents and teachers can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Hardly anyone gives a damn.
If legislative candidates don't talk about public welfare, what do they talk about? They talk about their rivals' dirty laundry and health problems. If it isn't extramarital affairs, then it's who's supporting a mistress. Or who is addicted to drugs or popping ecstasy. Who had a stroke or whose mind is going. Whether their vicious rumors are true or false, nobody cares. To expect voters to feel concern, let alone enthusiasm for legislative elections dominated by smear campaigns and rumor mongering is no easy matter.
No kidding. The legislative elections really are important. The new legislature will have only 113 members. These legislators will decide how to spend one trillion dollars every year. No matter who is elected president in 2008, this Legislative Yuan will approve Control Yuan members and Grand Justices nominated by the president. It will pass major legislation submitted by the Executive Yuan. The future direction of the Republic of China will be determined largely by the Legislative Yuan. If the legislative elections lose focus, how can we establish a functioning parliament? Voters are ignorant. Political stars are insensible. Can ruling and opposition legislative candidates shoulder a little responsibility? Can they make a little effort? Can they seize the opportunity during these last few days to get back to the issues?
中時電子報
中國時報 2008.01.03
一場議題完全消失的選舉
中時社論
立委選舉重不重要？當然重要！因為選後的國會將主導未來四年的重大政策、法案、預算；今年的立委選舉尤其重要，為什麼？因為今年國會選制改變，立委人數足足減少一半，每位立委的政策影響力等同一夕倍增，而過去八年惡劣的國會政黨生態能否改變，在此一舉。
這麼重要的選舉，你知道嗎？大多數人的答案可能很簡單，只有三個字：不知道，或者複雜一點七個字：知道但我不關心。為什麼不知道？為什麼不關心？因為懶得知道、懶得關心，立法院在各項民調中，幾乎成為政治之惡的代名詞；很遺憾的，多數選民的不關心，讓國會生態與素質長年無法提昇，甚至每下愈況；更遺憾的，因為立委本身不知己身權責的重要，讓國會陷入汙名化的惡性循環難以解脫。
即將到來的立委選舉，這麼重要，選情卻這麼冷清，立委候選人被現任總統、以及競逐大位的朝野總統參選人邊緣化，遑論立委選舉的議題，必然被邊緣化。因為立委候選人們主動或被動地依賴所謂天王造勢，尤其依賴陳水扁總統的辛辣輔選，結果，選舉舞台上，只見扁一人從北罵到南，從美國罵到兩蔣，理應是立委選舉主角的立委們，到底說了什麼話？或想說什麼話？自然無人聞問。
在數百候選人中，還肯孤軍奮戰談談議題的，大概只剩下小黨候選人，他們在冷風中訴求環保，罵得夠重了，「不重視環保，談什麼愛台灣！」還是沒人理他們。沒辦法，這場選舉，從返聯、入聯公投爭議無休，一階段、二階段爭議難了，大中至正拆是不拆，蔣介石銅像關是不關，吵得日以繼夜，聚光燈下的焦點是總統、教育部主祕、新聞局長、各級選委會主委，甚至連聯電名譽董事長曹興誠推動「兩岸和平促進法」，都能成為陳水扁輔選場子上痛批的對手，一躍而成為主角之一，獨缺立委候選人們。
想來真的很悲哀，細數過去廿年的立委選舉，不論選戰多激情，選情多緊繃，在這個舞台上，總還是有許多值得討論的話題，施明德擔任民進黨主席時，金馬撤軍是一個朝野嚴肅面對的選舉議題；許信良擔任民進黨主席時，還打出一個老人年金，讓國民黨主席李登輝非跟不可，跟到現在，已經成為國家年度非辦不可的政策；林義雄擔任黨主席時代，推動的是核四公投，儘管核四蓋了又停、停了又蓋，掀起漫天政治烽火。
不談核四，就拿今年被嚴重邊緣化的環保議題好了，雲林八輕、美濃水庫、蘇花高、雪山隧道，都曾經是歷次立委選舉、甚至總統大選的重要議題，不要說立委候選人不敢輕忽，總統候選人也當成國家大事，成為可以左右選情的變數。如今，這些議題候選人嘴上不說，連印文宣品都屬鳳毛麟角。
高雄市教師會非常有心，在藍綠推動無關民生宏旨的「重大公投」後，自主推動市民連署小班制教學公投，不過，時間有限，這個已經跨過公民連署門檻，而且真的是「由下而上」的公投議題，最快只能跟在總統大選的入聯與返聯公投後面，其可能受到的重視與關切可想而知。高雄市民自主連署推動的公投案，不論如何，高雄市立委總該關心一下吧，但是，願為這些家長老師發聲的立委候選人依舊屈指可數，激盪不出太多火花。
立委候選人們不談民生政策，談什麼呢？他們談的是對手的八卦緋聞和身體健康，不是「討客兄」，就是「開查某」，甚至還有「吸毒，嗑搖頭丸」，中風或腦袋秀逗，這些惡言到底是真是假，沒人管。選民被此說彼爛的傳單或耳語攻勢包圍下，想要對立委選舉有絲毫關心或熱情，委實很難。
真的不能開玩笑，國會改選真的很重要，未來的國會只有一百一十三位立委，這些立委要決定國家每年上兆總預算，二○○八總統不論是誰，這個立法院要通過總統提名的監委與大法官、要通過行政院提送的重大政策，台灣未來怎麼走，有一大半操諸立法院手中，失焦的立委選舉，不可能創造出健康的國會。選民無知、輔選天王無覺，就是朝野立委候選人不能不清楚自己肩負的責任，用一點心，把握最後幾天的機會，讓自己的選舉回歸政策、回歸正常吧。
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Democracy arrives in Waves
Democracy arrives in Waves
Chen Shui-bian rose to Power on the Second Wave and is falling from Grace on the Third Wave
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 2, 2008
The Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall has reopened. Its new decor can't even compare with the decor of a night market souvenir shop. Nothing suggests the solemn dignity of a memorial to democracy. Nothing suggests a memorial to a great nation's artistic and cultural achievements. The hall is a chaotic mess, and reflects nothing but the obsessions of a barbaric political regime filled with hatred and consumed by a desire for revenge.
The instigators of the changes originally wanted to demolish Chiang Kai-shek's bronze statue. Failing that they wanted to "imprison him in effigy" by installing iron bars around his statue, but the DPP was afraid to alienate moderate voters. They wanted to exploit the victims of the 228 Incident by surrounding Chiang's statue with their photographs. But family members publicly opposed this political gesture. They wanted to exploit the victims of the White Terror by surrounding Chiang's statue with their photographs. But they were reluctant to inadvertently elevate real, live Communist agents into "martyrs of democracy." This is how they wound up the current result, which resembles nothing so much as a five and ten cent store or a magazine stand. The result is a disorderly hodge-podge utterly incapable of evoking the solemn mood of a hall "commemorating democracy." All it can do is reveal the ruling regime's barbarism and superficiality. All it can do is make the ruling regime appear ridiculous. The physical chaos reflects the ruling regime's intellectual confusion as it attempts to apply its own spin control to the Republic of China's democracy.
Since the ruling regime wants to "commemorate Taiwan's democracy," we may as well recapitulate the evolution of democracy on Taiwan over the past 60 years. Due to space constraints, we can only examine the broad outlines and cannot go into detail.
If we review the progress of the democratic opposition movement over the past 60 years, the process can be divided into three waves. In chronological order, they are: The First Wave. No denial of Chinese identity. The Second Wave. The rise of "Taiwanese nativism." The Third Wave. Opposition to Chen Shui-bian/DPP kleptocracy.
The first wave of the democratic tide protested the KMT's authoritarianism and martial law. It did not involve the denial of one's Chinese identity. Between the 228 Incident in 1947 and the ROC's expulsion from the UN in the 70s, except for a handful of exiles, society had almost no "Taiwanese consciousness." The Chinese Civil War was raging at the time. Some people on Taiwan endorsed law and order and harsh punishments against agents provocateurs and supported the KMT government. Other people, such as Hsieh Hsueh-kung, hoped that the Chinese Communists would win the civil war and govern Taiwan. In short, people were either Nationalist or Communist. All were Chinese. Almost no one advocated "Taiwan independence." In 1949, after the central government relocated to Taiwan, the political opposition movement split in two. One branch, including Lei Chen and Yin Hai-kuang, perceived the struggle over democracy as an "internal conflict." Another branch perceived the struggle between the CCP and the KMT as an "us vs. them struggle," and saw Communist agents everywhere. These two opposition movements had two things in common. One. Both advocated or at least did not deny that they were Chinese. It was rare to encounter anyone who advocated "Taiwan independence." Two. Participants were mainly mainlanders. The so-called "White Terror" was a wave of repression against these advocates of democracy. Many of these "Communist agents" were of course "pro-unification." Others, such as Lei Chen, who argued 50 years ago that "reclaiming the mainland was hopeless," weren't necessarily "pro-unification." Of course some were victims of injustice. During the late 60s people returned from overseas and began to identify with the island. The Defend Diaoyutai Movement, the revival of liberalism in the late 70s, and the "China Tide" movement remained within the framework of a Chinese identity. Although "Taiwan independence" was beginning to develop both overseas and on the island, it remained a non-mainstream movement. Today a "Chinese identity" and "Taiwan's democracy movement" are presumed to be in opposition. So-called "mainlanders" are vilified as "anti-democratic," in a ludicrous manner totally at odds with the facts. In fact, Taiwan underwent a long period during which the "democracy movement" could not be equated with either denial of one's Chinese identity or with being "pro-unification." This was the situation during the "White Terror" and prior to the lifting of martial law.
The second wave of democratic opposition was "Nativist" oriented. It began in the 70s as part of a domino effect resulting from the ROC's expulsion from the UN in 1971, and a "broken window effect" resulting from the Chungli Incident in 1977. Long-suppressed "Nativism" and "Taiwan independence" soon become the dominant force within the political opposition. Actually, under martial law in the 70s, "Nativist" opposition took the form of demands to "Return to the Constitution" and to lift martial law. Only after the DPP promulgated its "Taiwan Independence Party Constitution" did the opposition democratic movement demand "Taiwan independence" and "Nativism." Even then, "Nativism" and "Taiwan independence" did not call for enmity between Taiwan and mainland China, but suggested that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait could become "fraternal nations." Nor did it vilify "mainlanders." It defined them as "residents of Taiwan." In 2000, Lee Teng-hui lost power as a result of his "black gold" politics and repeated attempts to subvert the constitution. The "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" moderated the DPP's demands from "Taiwan independence," to "an independent Taiwan," and from a "Nativist path" to "clean government" and a "New Centrist Path." The DPP's lip service to moderation, combined with a political schism within the KMT, enabled the DPP to seize power. This amounted to a major victory for "Nativist" oriented elements within the democratic opposition movement.
The Third Wave of the democratic tide began with Chen Shui-bian's "Two Bullets" political dirty tricks, which enabled him to refuse to vacate the Presidential Palace. It reached its climax when the million strong Red Shirt Army filled the city streets like a lava flow, protesting rampant "Green Government" corruption. A vote of non-confidence in Chen Shui-bian and the DPP has become the theme of this year's legislative and presidential elections. In other words, the theme of the third wave of the democratic tide is "anti-corruption," "anti-Chen Shui-bian," and "anti-DPP." The Republic of China's democracy movement has arrived in waves. The Wild Lily student protests against KMT authoritarianism were a democratic opposition movement. The Red Shirt Army protests against DPP kleptocracy were a democratic opposition movement. Chen Shui-bian and the DPP have reneged on their promise to establish "fraternal relations" with mainland China. They have gone back to referring to "mainlanders" as "Chinese pigs." They are referring to democratic dissidents such as Shih Ming-teh and Tsao Hsing-chen as "Chi-Com fellow travelers." They know their demands for the "rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution" are cynical "self-deception." Yet they persist in promulgating their "Resolution for a Normal Nation," obstinate to the bitter end. The foul stench of corruption permeates the air, facilitating violations of the constitution and the law. The DPP and Chen Shui-bian rode to power on the crest of a wave of "Taiwanese values." Now it is being questioned for trampling over those same values. The theme of the third wave of Taiwan's opposition movement is the rebuilding of those "Taiwanese values." Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party have lost the respect and trust of the community, and now face severe challenges.
Three waves of democracy. Each wave had its own theme. Each wave addressed issues raised by the previous wave. Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party continue to gnaw on the corpses washed ashore by the first wave on February 28, 1947, and the second wave of "Taiwanese nativism." They ignore the massive surge of the third wave that is protesting Chen Shui-bian and the DPP's moral bankruptcy and is demanding the restoration of moral values Chen Shui-bian and the DPP have forsaken. The "Memorial" mentions only the 228 Incident. It makes no mention of "Charlie" and "Pearl," who dared to speak truth to power. The "Memorial" mentions only the Wild Lily student protests against the KMT. It ignores the one million strong Red Shirt Army protests against Chen Shui-bian's brazen corruption. If the "Memorial" ignores this third wave, how can we talk about "Taiwan's democracy?" If the memorial refuses to display the awe-inspiring spectacle of the hundreds of thousands of "A-bian step down!" banners held high by one million Red Shirt Army protestors, how can we talk about "Taiwan's democracy?"
Three waves of democracy, one after another. As Chen Shui-bian gnaws on the corpses washed up by the first wave, while riding the crest of the second wave, he may well find himself inundated by the third wave. When posterity "commemorates Taiwan's democracy," no one will be left untouched by the surging waters of the third wave.
民主大潮‧生生不息：陳水扁在第二波興起第三波倒下
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.02 02:55 am
中正紀念堂大廳重新開放，裝置得不如夜市的民俗禮品雜貨店；這裡看不出任何「紀念民主」的莊嚴意味，更看不到一個「國家級」的「紀念館」應具的藝術及人文的表述水準；滿室的亂七八糟，雞零狗碎，只是反映了當權者一肚子的政治垃圾，及難登大雅的野蠻與淺薄。
主事者原想拆去蔣介石的銅像，或將之「禁錮」，但怕民進黨失去「中間選民」的選票；又想用二二八死難者圍住銅像，但家屬公開表示反對這種政治操作；再想改用「白色恐怖」死難者圍住銅像，但又不宜公然將其中真正的「匪諜」奉為「民主烈士」……。於是就布置成現在這副雜貨店、海報攤的怪樣；不能激發觀眾「紀念民主」的莊嚴心緒，只是令人看穿了操作者的野蠻與淺薄而啼笑皆非。現場布置的錯亂，反映了當權者對「台灣民主」認知與操弄的錯亂。
不過，既然要「紀念」台灣的「民主」，亦不妨在此對六十年來台灣民主運動的進程作一回顧。惟因篇幅所限，只能述其梗概，難求周備。
回顧台灣過去六十年的民主反對運動進程，可以大略分成三波大潮。依時序先後：第一波，未否定中國關聯；第二波，本土取向興起；第三波，以反貪倒扁為主軸。
第一波的民主大潮，以對抗國民黨政權的戒嚴威權體制為主題，未否定中國關聯；自二二八起，約迄至七○年代退出聯合國止。二二八事件中，除少數流亡人士倡議「託管」，民間幾無「台獨意識」；當時國共內戰正熾，台灣民意一支主張嚴懲禍首、澄清吏治，但仍支持國民黨政府統治；另一支則希望中共在內戰獲勝，來主持台灣局面，謝雪紅等即是。換句話說，當時的民意非「國」即「共」，皆為「中國取向」，幾乎未涉「台獨」。一九四九年中央政府來台後，反對運動亦分兩支，一支將民主視為「內部矛盾」，如雷震、殷海光等；另一支則視「國共鬥爭」為「敵我矛盾」，數以萬計的「匪諜案」皆是。這兩支政治反對運動的共同特質是：一、主張或未否定「中國關聯」，亦即極少主張「台獨」；二、重要參與者以外省人為主力。所謂「白色恐怖」，即是對這一波民主大潮的鎮壓。這些人中，不少的「匪諜」固然是「統派」；但也有許多未必是「統派」，如雷震在五十年前即主張「反攻無望論」；當然，其中更有冤錯假案。後來，至六○年代末期的回歸認同、保衛釣魚台運動與自由主義回潮，及七○年代末期的《夏潮》，亦皆仍在「未否定中國關聯」的範疇之中；當時，「台獨」在海外及島內雖皆已有發展，但在島內反對運動的比例上尚非主流。也就是說，今日常以「中國關聯」與「台灣民主反對運動」為敵對的概念，或將「外省人」視為「反民主」，極其謬誤，完全不符史實；其實，台灣曾在很長的一段歲月中，「民主運動」的主力並未否定「中國關聯」，但亦不能將之與「統派」劃上等號。解嚴前所謂的「白色恐怖時代」，大抵是如此光景。
第二波民主反對運動的大潮則是「本土取向」，大略始自一九七一年「退出聯合國」的「骨牌效應」，及一九七七年「中壢事件」的「破窗效應」；壓抑已久的「本土」及「台獨」迅速成為反對運動的主流。其實，七○年代中期「本土取向」的反對運動興起時，在戒嚴氛圍中，仍以「回歸憲政」為訴求；直至解嚴後民進黨頒布《台獨黨綱》，始公開以「台獨」、「本土」為訴求。但即使當時主張「本土」及「台獨」，並未主張與中國反目，而是希望兩岸成為「兄弟之邦」；亦未完全否定「外省人」，而視其為「台灣全體『住民』」的一支。至二○○○年，李登輝因「黑金毀憲」的「本土路線」而喪失政權，陳水扁則因《台灣前途決議文》（由「台獨」變成「獨台」）、「清流共治」及「新中間路線」的「本土路線」，而在國民黨的分裂中，實現了政黨輪替，贏得了政權，這是「本土取向」反對運動的大勝利。
第三波的民主大潮，則自陳水扁以「兩顆子彈」當選連任即告爆發，至綠朝貪腐引發的百萬紅衫軍「岩漿」穿街過市、蔚為高潮，迄今則「對陳水扁投下不信任票」已然成為明年兩大選舉的主題；也就是說，這第三波民主大潮是以「反貪倒扁」為主軸。若從台灣民主運動生生不息的角度來看，野百合是對抗國民黨威權統治的民主反對運動，紅衫軍則是對抗民進黨貪腐失政的民主反對運動。民進黨及陳水扁如今未能實現與中國成為「兄弟之邦」的許諾，又將「外省人」指為「中國豬」，且將所有民主異議者如施明德及曹興誠指為「中共同路人」；更明知「正名制憲」是「自欺欺人」，卻仍頒布《正常國家決議文》，蠻幹到底；又非但貪腐已至臭不可聞，益且違憲亂法，傷天害理。因而，民進黨及陳水扁固然藉「台灣價值」而興起，如今卻因違背並踐踏「台灣價值」而受質疑；於是，台灣的政治反對運動如今興起了第三波的大潮，以重建「台灣價值」，拯救「台灣價值」為主題；陳水扁及民進黨失去了社會的尊敬與信任，面臨極為嚴峻的挑戰。
三波民主大潮，每一波有每一波的主題，每一波有每一波的任務。但是，陳水扁及民進黨，至今仍然沉湎於啃食第一波的二二八屍骨，及誇示第二波的本土啟蒙；竟完全無視於民主大潮已然進入洶湧澎湃的第三波，是以抗議陳水扁及民進黨的失政敗德為主題，是以重建被陳水扁及民進黨所摧殘的「台灣價值」為任務。因此，「紀念館」裡只有二二八，卻無「查理與阿珠」；只「紀念」抗議國民黨政權的野百合，卻未「紀念」山洪爆發一般反貪倒扁的紅衫軍。然而，若不「紀念」這第三波的民主大潮，豈能說是「台灣民主」的真版本？若不展示高舉「阿扁下台」標語的百萬紅衫軍之轟動場景，豈能說是「台灣民主」的全版本？
三波民主大潮，後浪推前浪。陳水扁因啃食第一波的屍骨，及駕御第二波的憧憬而興起，如今卻可能在這第三波反貪倒扁的民主大潮中滅頂。後人「紀念」台灣的「民主」，沒有人會遺漏這洶湧澎湃的第三波大潮。
Chen Shui-bian rose to Power on the Second Wave and is falling from Grace on the Third Wave
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 2, 2008
The Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall has reopened. Its new decor can't even compare with the decor of a night market souvenir shop. Nothing suggests the solemn dignity of a memorial to democracy. Nothing suggests a memorial to a great nation's artistic and cultural achievements. The hall is a chaotic mess, and reflects nothing but the obsessions of a barbaric political regime filled with hatred and consumed by a desire for revenge.
The instigators of the changes originally wanted to demolish Chiang Kai-shek's bronze statue. Failing that they wanted to "imprison him in effigy" by installing iron bars around his statue, but the DPP was afraid to alienate moderate voters. They wanted to exploit the victims of the 228 Incident by surrounding Chiang's statue with their photographs. But family members publicly opposed this political gesture. They wanted to exploit the victims of the White Terror by surrounding Chiang's statue with their photographs. But they were reluctant to inadvertently elevate real, live Communist agents into "martyrs of democracy." This is how they wound up the current result, which resembles nothing so much as a five and ten cent store or a magazine stand. The result is a disorderly hodge-podge utterly incapable of evoking the solemn mood of a hall "commemorating democracy." All it can do is reveal the ruling regime's barbarism and superficiality. All it can do is make the ruling regime appear ridiculous. The physical chaos reflects the ruling regime's intellectual confusion as it attempts to apply its own spin control to the Republic of China's democracy.
Since the ruling regime wants to "commemorate Taiwan's democracy," we may as well recapitulate the evolution of democracy on Taiwan over the past 60 years. Due to space constraints, we can only examine the broad outlines and cannot go into detail.
If we review the progress of the democratic opposition movement over the past 60 years, the process can be divided into three waves. In chronological order, they are: The First Wave. No denial of Chinese identity. The Second Wave. The rise of "Taiwanese nativism." The Third Wave. Opposition to Chen Shui-bian/DPP kleptocracy.
The first wave of the democratic tide protested the KMT's authoritarianism and martial law. It did not involve the denial of one's Chinese identity. Between the 228 Incident in 1947 and the ROC's expulsion from the UN in the 70s, except for a handful of exiles, society had almost no "Taiwanese consciousness." The Chinese Civil War was raging at the time. Some people on Taiwan endorsed law and order and harsh punishments against agents provocateurs and supported the KMT government. Other people, such as Hsieh Hsueh-kung, hoped that the Chinese Communists would win the civil war and govern Taiwan. In short, people were either Nationalist or Communist. All were Chinese. Almost no one advocated "Taiwan independence." In 1949, after the central government relocated to Taiwan, the political opposition movement split in two. One branch, including Lei Chen and Yin Hai-kuang, perceived the struggle over democracy as an "internal conflict." Another branch perceived the struggle between the CCP and the KMT as an "us vs. them struggle," and saw Communist agents everywhere. These two opposition movements had two things in common. One. Both advocated or at least did not deny that they were Chinese. It was rare to encounter anyone who advocated "Taiwan independence." Two. Participants were mainly mainlanders. The so-called "White Terror" was a wave of repression against these advocates of democracy. Many of these "Communist agents" were of course "pro-unification." Others, such as Lei Chen, who argued 50 years ago that "reclaiming the mainland was hopeless," weren't necessarily "pro-unification." Of course some were victims of injustice. During the late 60s people returned from overseas and began to identify with the island. The Defend Diaoyutai Movement, the revival of liberalism in the late 70s, and the "China Tide" movement remained within the framework of a Chinese identity. Although "Taiwan independence" was beginning to develop both overseas and on the island, it remained a non-mainstream movement. Today a "Chinese identity" and "Taiwan's democracy movement" are presumed to be in opposition. So-called "mainlanders" are vilified as "anti-democratic," in a ludicrous manner totally at odds with the facts. In fact, Taiwan underwent a long period during which the "democracy movement" could not be equated with either denial of one's Chinese identity or with being "pro-unification." This was the situation during the "White Terror" and prior to the lifting of martial law.
The second wave of democratic opposition was "Nativist" oriented. It began in the 70s as part of a domino effect resulting from the ROC's expulsion from the UN in 1971, and a "broken window effect" resulting from the Chungli Incident in 1977. Long-suppressed "Nativism" and "Taiwan independence" soon become the dominant force within the political opposition. Actually, under martial law in the 70s, "Nativist" opposition took the form of demands to "Return to the Constitution" and to lift martial law. Only after the DPP promulgated its "Taiwan Independence Party Constitution" did the opposition democratic movement demand "Taiwan independence" and "Nativism." Even then, "Nativism" and "Taiwan independence" did not call for enmity between Taiwan and mainland China, but suggested that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait could become "fraternal nations." Nor did it vilify "mainlanders." It defined them as "residents of Taiwan." In 2000, Lee Teng-hui lost power as a result of his "black gold" politics and repeated attempts to subvert the constitution. The "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" moderated the DPP's demands from "Taiwan independence," to "an independent Taiwan," and from a "Nativist path" to "clean government" and a "New Centrist Path." The DPP's lip service to moderation, combined with a political schism within the KMT, enabled the DPP to seize power. This amounted to a major victory for "Nativist" oriented elements within the democratic opposition movement.
The Third Wave of the democratic tide began with Chen Shui-bian's "Two Bullets" political dirty tricks, which enabled him to refuse to vacate the Presidential Palace. It reached its climax when the million strong Red Shirt Army filled the city streets like a lava flow, protesting rampant "Green Government" corruption. A vote of non-confidence in Chen Shui-bian and the DPP has become the theme of this year's legislative and presidential elections. In other words, the theme of the third wave of the democratic tide is "anti-corruption," "anti-Chen Shui-bian," and "anti-DPP." The Republic of China's democracy movement has arrived in waves. The Wild Lily student protests against KMT authoritarianism were a democratic opposition movement. The Red Shirt Army protests against DPP kleptocracy were a democratic opposition movement. Chen Shui-bian and the DPP have reneged on their promise to establish "fraternal relations" with mainland China. They have gone back to referring to "mainlanders" as "Chinese pigs." They are referring to democratic dissidents such as Shih Ming-teh and Tsao Hsing-chen as "Chi-Com fellow travelers." They know their demands for the "rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution" are cynical "self-deception." Yet they persist in promulgating their "Resolution for a Normal Nation," obstinate to the bitter end. The foul stench of corruption permeates the air, facilitating violations of the constitution and the law. The DPP and Chen Shui-bian rode to power on the crest of a wave of "Taiwanese values." Now it is being questioned for trampling over those same values. The theme of the third wave of Taiwan's opposition movement is the rebuilding of those "Taiwanese values." Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party have lost the respect and trust of the community, and now face severe challenges.
Three waves of democracy. Each wave had its own theme. Each wave addressed issues raised by the previous wave. Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party continue to gnaw on the corpses washed ashore by the first wave on February 28, 1947, and the second wave of "Taiwanese nativism." They ignore the massive surge of the third wave that is protesting Chen Shui-bian and the DPP's moral bankruptcy and is demanding the restoration of moral values Chen Shui-bian and the DPP have forsaken. The "Memorial" mentions only the 228 Incident. It makes no mention of "Charlie" and "Pearl," who dared to speak truth to power. The "Memorial" mentions only the Wild Lily student protests against the KMT. It ignores the one million strong Red Shirt Army protests against Chen Shui-bian's brazen corruption. If the "Memorial" ignores this third wave, how can we talk about "Taiwan's democracy?" If the memorial refuses to display the awe-inspiring spectacle of the hundreds of thousands of "A-bian step down!" banners held high by one million Red Shirt Army protestors, how can we talk about "Taiwan's democracy?"
Three waves of democracy, one after another. As Chen Shui-bian gnaws on the corpses washed up by the first wave, while riding the crest of the second wave, he may well find himself inundated by the third wave. When posterity "commemorates Taiwan's democracy," no one will be left untouched by the surging waters of the third wave.
民主大潮‧生生不息：陳水扁在第二波興起第三波倒下
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.02 02:55 am
中正紀念堂大廳重新開放，裝置得不如夜市的民俗禮品雜貨店；這裡看不出任何「紀念民主」的莊嚴意味，更看不到一個「國家級」的「紀念館」應具的藝術及人文的表述水準；滿室的亂七八糟，雞零狗碎，只是反映了當權者一肚子的政治垃圾，及難登大雅的野蠻與淺薄。
主事者原想拆去蔣介石的銅像，或將之「禁錮」，但怕民進黨失去「中間選民」的選票；又想用二二八死難者圍住銅像，但家屬公開表示反對這種政治操作；再想改用「白色恐怖」死難者圍住銅像，但又不宜公然將其中真正的「匪諜」奉為「民主烈士」……。於是就布置成現在這副雜貨店、海報攤的怪樣；不能激發觀眾「紀念民主」的莊嚴心緒，只是令人看穿了操作者的野蠻與淺薄而啼笑皆非。現場布置的錯亂，反映了當權者對「台灣民主」認知與操弄的錯亂。
不過，既然要「紀念」台灣的「民主」，亦不妨在此對六十年來台灣民主運動的進程作一回顧。惟因篇幅所限，只能述其梗概，難求周備。
回顧台灣過去六十年的民主反對運動進程，可以大略分成三波大潮。依時序先後：第一波，未否定中國關聯；第二波，本土取向興起；第三波，以反貪倒扁為主軸。
第一波的民主大潮，以對抗國民黨政權的戒嚴威權體制為主題，未否定中國關聯；自二二八起，約迄至七○年代退出聯合國止。二二八事件中，除少數流亡人士倡議「託管」，民間幾無「台獨意識」；當時國共內戰正熾，台灣民意一支主張嚴懲禍首、澄清吏治，但仍支持國民黨政府統治；另一支則希望中共在內戰獲勝，來主持台灣局面，謝雪紅等即是。換句話說，當時的民意非「國」即「共」，皆為「中國取向」，幾乎未涉「台獨」。一九四九年中央政府來台後，反對運動亦分兩支，一支將民主視為「內部矛盾」，如雷震、殷海光等；另一支則視「國共鬥爭」為「敵我矛盾」，數以萬計的「匪諜案」皆是。這兩支政治反對運動的共同特質是：一、主張或未否定「中國關聯」，亦即極少主張「台獨」；二、重要參與者以外省人為主力。所謂「白色恐怖」，即是對這一波民主大潮的鎮壓。這些人中，不少的「匪諜」固然是「統派」；但也有許多未必是「統派」，如雷震在五十年前即主張「反攻無望論」；當然，其中更有冤錯假案。後來，至六○年代末期的回歸認同、保衛釣魚台運動與自由主義回潮，及七○年代末期的《夏潮》，亦皆仍在「未否定中國關聯」的範疇之中；當時，「台獨」在海外及島內雖皆已有發展，但在島內反對運動的比例上尚非主流。也就是說，今日常以「中國關聯」與「台灣民主反對運動」為敵對的概念，或將「外省人」視為「反民主」，極其謬誤，完全不符史實；其實，台灣曾在很長的一段歲月中，「民主運動」的主力並未否定「中國關聯」，但亦不能將之與「統派」劃上等號。解嚴前所謂的「白色恐怖時代」，大抵是如此光景。
第二波民主反對運動的大潮則是「本土取向」，大略始自一九七一年「退出聯合國」的「骨牌效應」，及一九七七年「中壢事件」的「破窗效應」；壓抑已久的「本土」及「台獨」迅速成為反對運動的主流。其實，七○年代中期「本土取向」的反對運動興起時，在戒嚴氛圍中，仍以「回歸憲政」為訴求；直至解嚴後民進黨頒布《台獨黨綱》，始公開以「台獨」、「本土」為訴求。但即使當時主張「本土」及「台獨」，並未主張與中國反目，而是希望兩岸成為「兄弟之邦」；亦未完全否定「外省人」，而視其為「台灣全體『住民』」的一支。至二○○○年，李登輝因「黑金毀憲」的「本土路線」而喪失政權，陳水扁則因《台灣前途決議文》（由「台獨」變成「獨台」）、「清流共治」及「新中間路線」的「本土路線」，而在國民黨的分裂中，實現了政黨輪替，贏得了政權，這是「本土取向」反對運動的大勝利。
第三波的民主大潮，則自陳水扁以「兩顆子彈」當選連任即告爆發，至綠朝貪腐引發的百萬紅衫軍「岩漿」穿街過市、蔚為高潮，迄今則「對陳水扁投下不信任票」已然成為明年兩大選舉的主題；也就是說，這第三波民主大潮是以「反貪倒扁」為主軸。若從台灣民主運動生生不息的角度來看，野百合是對抗國民黨威權統治的民主反對運動，紅衫軍則是對抗民進黨貪腐失政的民主反對運動。民進黨及陳水扁如今未能實現與中國成為「兄弟之邦」的許諾，又將「外省人」指為「中國豬」，且將所有民主異議者如施明德及曹興誠指為「中共同路人」；更明知「正名制憲」是「自欺欺人」，卻仍頒布《正常國家決議文》，蠻幹到底；又非但貪腐已至臭不可聞，益且違憲亂法，傷天害理。因而，民進黨及陳水扁固然藉「台灣價值」而興起，如今卻因違背並踐踏「台灣價值」而受質疑；於是，台灣的政治反對運動如今興起了第三波的大潮，以重建「台灣價值」，拯救「台灣價值」為主題；陳水扁及民進黨失去了社會的尊敬與信任，面臨極為嚴峻的挑戰。
三波民主大潮，每一波有每一波的主題，每一波有每一波的任務。但是，陳水扁及民進黨，至今仍然沉湎於啃食第一波的二二八屍骨，及誇示第二波的本土啟蒙；竟完全無視於民主大潮已然進入洶湧澎湃的第三波，是以抗議陳水扁及民進黨的失政敗德為主題，是以重建被陳水扁及民進黨所摧殘的「台灣價值」為任務。因此，「紀念館」裡只有二二八，卻無「查理與阿珠」；只「紀念」抗議國民黨政權的野百合，卻未「紀念」山洪爆發一般反貪倒扁的紅衫軍。然而，若不「紀念」這第三波的民主大潮，豈能說是「台灣民主」的真版本？若不展示高舉「阿扁下台」標語的百萬紅衫軍之轟動場景，豈能說是「台灣民主」的全版本？
三波民主大潮，後浪推前浪。陳水扁因啃食第一波的屍骨，及駕御第二波的憧憬而興起，如今卻可能在這第三波反貪倒扁的民主大潮中滅頂。後人「紀念」台灣的「民主」，沒有人會遺漏這洶湧澎湃的第三波大潮。
Chairman Ma's Interview with "Taiwan Review"
Chairman Ma's Interview with "Taiwan Review"
1. What is your reason for running?
Answer:
The reason I decided to participate in the 2008 presidential election, is that I feel a sense of mission regarding our nation. I feel a concern for the land and for the people. I feel a responsibility to step forward and speak out, to join the people in an effort to extricate the nation from its current dilemma. Over the past several years, under the Democratic Progressive Party's inept and corrupt rule, the economy has stagnated, the standard of living has plummeted, and social tensions have escalated. These are the bitter fruits of the ruling DPP's ineptitude. Meanwhile, other East Asian nations are undergoing rapid development. The rest of the world is making giant strides. No wonder Taiwan's development has people worried. Given these circumstances, the Chinese Nationalist Party has a responsibility to keep the nation on the right track, so that Taiwan can continue to advance, so that the Republic of China can continue to stand tall on the world stage, so that it can remain a first-rank nation with a strong competitive edge in an increasingly globalized world. This is why I decided to become a candidate for the 2008 presidential election.
Over the past half a century, Taiwan has been fearless in the way it dealt with its difficult international plight. It has been the economic, scientific, and technological leader among emerging industrial nations. It has been the political and cultural leader among ethnic Chinese societies. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party however, has been spinning its wheels for seven years. Seven years of stagnation, contrasting sharply with the rapid progress of neighbouring countries and regions, leave one simultaneously baffled and embarrassed.
The DPP has a high turnover rate among its financial and economic leaders. Its economic and trade policies change from week to week. It has at its disposal trillions of dollars in national assets. But because of its incompetence, it has nothing to show in terms of national policy. It knows only how to incite social opposition, how to shift public and media attention from its failures, and how to pass the buck to opposition parties. The people of Taiwan can no longer endure the DPP's outrageous economic, financial, educational, and cross-straits policies. We have decided that Taiwan must move forward. The ruling DPP lacks the ability to govern. It rules by ideology. We have decided to take a stand. All those who share our passionate love for the Republic of China, all those who love the people of Taiwan, must stand together and get our nation back on track, allowing the people to once again find happiness.
What do you think your strengths are compared to other candidates?
Answer:
After long-term contact with the people, I gradually came to understand people's perceptions and expectations of me. These perceptions and expectations may answer this question. After years in politics, many people consider me uncorrupt, optimistic, affrimative, public-spirited. This is what I have always striven to be. I have always hoped that by being this way, I could lead by example, that I could be a positive force in political circles, so that I could improve our nation's political character. I have been in politics for over 20 years. I have always been what I am. Nothing more, nothing less. I hope that all political leaders, all KMT members and comrades and I can work together to build an uncorrupt and just political party, This is why I actively promoted intra-party democracy and reform during my term as chairman of the Kuomintang. After I am elected, I will be committed to clean government and social justice, to enabling everyone to enjoy peace and prosperity. These views and policies reflect who I am and what I believe. They have won the trust and support of a broad mass of people, especially the middle-class, young people, and women. This is my biggest advantage in this election. Because pan-blue and pan-green voters are largely set, how to win the swing vote is extremely important.
Another electoral advantage is that the people of Taiwan consider the KMT adept at economic development, and able to improve their lives and enabling them to enjoy a higher standard of living. To this end, I have asked former Premier Vincent Siew, with his financial expertise and abundant administrative experience, to be my running mate, to increase voter confidence in the KMT's ability to revitalize Taiwan's economy. The DPP's policies over the past seven years have left the people of Taiwan utterly disillusioned. Their tired slogans and pie in the sky proposals no longer convince voters. The KMT has drafted a new blueprint for Taiwan's economic revitalization. We have proposed twelve projects that demonstrate our love for Taiwan. Once we take office, we will organize a team of financial experts. They will vigorously promote Taiwan's economic development, and replicate Taiwan's economic miracle. allowing the people to be happier and enjoy a better life. We have a dream. We can make it happen. With our past experience, the people can safely believe that the KMT, that Ma Ying-jeou and Vincent Siew, will do better if elected. This is our electoral advantage!
馬主席接受「英文台灣評論」專訪擬答參考稿
內政組
1. 參選的動機為何?
擬答：
我 之所以決定參加2008年總統大選，是基於對我們國家的一份使命感，也是基於對我們台灣這塊土地、對台灣人民的一份關懷，深深感到自已有責任站出來，和所 有民眾一起努力，扭轉當前國家的亂局。因為我們國家在民進黨執政這幾年當中，政府施政效能不彰，官員貪腐情形嚴重，經濟發展停滯不前，民眾生活水準下降， 社會對立問題嚴重。這些問題，都是民進黨政府執政無能造成的苦果。在此同時，東亞各國都在快速的發展，全世界都在大步向前走，所以台灣的發展狀況實在讓人 感到非常憂心。在這種情勢下，我們中國國民黨有責任將國家發展重新導向正軌，要讓台灣能夠繼續大步向前走，讓中華民國能夠繼續在世界上昂揚挺立，成為具有 強勁競爭力，能夠在全球化趨勢中不斷進步的一流國家。這是我決定要投入總統大選的主要原因。
台灣過去半個世紀以來，無懼於國際環境的艱困，一直在經濟、科技上領先新興工業國家，在政治、文化上領先所有華人社會；但是在民進黨執政後已經原地踏步了七年多。而這七年多的停滯，相對於鄰近國家與地區的突飛猛進，實在讓人覺得迷惑與難堪。
民 進黨政府財經首長更迭頻繁，經貿政策反覆搖罷，無法延續和落實，他們支配數以兆計的國家資源，但施政續效卻乏善可陳，而且面對空白的政績時，他們只會激化 社會對立，轉移社會大眾和媒體輿論的焦點，或者將責任推給在野黨。然而，台灣民眾已經不能再忍受民進黨在經濟、財政、教育、兩岸等各方面荒腔走板的施政 了，大家有共識，那就是台灣一定要向前走。民進黨的執政團隊能力有限，以意識形態治國的政策和心態出了問題，所以，我們決定站出來，和所有熱愛中華民國、 熱愛台灣的民眾一起團結努力，要讓我們國家回歸正軌，讓人民重新找回幸福生活。
二、與其他候選人相較，您覺得您的優勢為何？
擬答：
在 我長期和民眾接觸之後，我逐漸了解到民眾對我的觀感和期許。而從廣大民眾對我的看法和期許，或者可以作為回答這個問題的基礎。在我從政這麼多年以來，很多 人認為我的形象是清廉的、陽光的、健康的、公益的，這也是我一直以來希望能夠維持的一貫風格，希望我自己潔身自持，以身作則，可以成為政治圈當中的一股清 流，成為帶動台灣向上提昇，讓我們國家的政治風氣有所改善。所以，我從政二十餘年，一路走來，始終如一，我也希望所有政治人物，所有國民黨黨員和從政同 志，和我一起努力，建設一個健康、公義的政黨，這也是我在擔任國民黨主席的時候，積極推動黨內民主和黨內改革的原因。將來我當選後，也一定會致力打造廉能 政府，建立公義社會，讓所有的國民生活得更安定、更安全、更安心。這樣的施政理念和政策主張，完全符合我個人長期的形象，也贏得了廣大民眾，特別是在為數 眾多的中產階級、青年和婦女這些中間選民的的信任和支持，這正是我這一次參選的最大優勢。因為泛藍、泛綠陣營各有相當穩定的支持選民，如何爭取中間選民的 認同就非常重要。
我們的另外一個參選優勢，是台灣民眾都認為國民黨擅長經濟建設，真正能夠為全體國民帶來實質生活的改善，讓民眾的生活比 以前更幸福、未來可以享有更好的生活品質。這次選舉，我特別力邀具有財經背景和豐富行政經驗的前行政院長蕭萬長先生擔任我的副手，讓選民對於將來國民黨要 全力振興和發展台灣經濟更有信心。相反地，民進黨七年多來的施政，已讓台灣民眾徹底失望，喊出再多的口號和美麗的政策訴求，都再也不能吸引選民。而我們國 民黨已經規劃完成未來台灣經濟建設新藍圖，也提出了愛台灣十二項建設，將來執政後，一定會組成強有力的財經執政團隊，發揮經濟長才，全力推動台灣經濟建 設，讓台灣重現經濟奇蹟，讓國民過更幸福、更美好的生活。我們有理想願景、有能力實現、有過去成功的經驗，所以可以讓民眾相信，我們國民黨、馬蕭團隊如果 當選絕對可以作得更好，這就是我們的優勢﹗
1. What is your reason for running?
Answer:
The reason I decided to participate in the 2008 presidential election, is that I feel a sense of mission regarding our nation. I feel a concern for the land and for the people. I feel a responsibility to step forward and speak out, to join the people in an effort to extricate the nation from its current dilemma. Over the past several years, under the Democratic Progressive Party's inept and corrupt rule, the economy has stagnated, the standard of living has plummeted, and social tensions have escalated. These are the bitter fruits of the ruling DPP's ineptitude. Meanwhile, other East Asian nations are undergoing rapid development. The rest of the world is making giant strides. No wonder Taiwan's development has people worried. Given these circumstances, the Chinese Nationalist Party has a responsibility to keep the nation on the right track, so that Taiwan can continue to advance, so that the Republic of China can continue to stand tall on the world stage, so that it can remain a first-rank nation with a strong competitive edge in an increasingly globalized world. This is why I decided to become a candidate for the 2008 presidential election.
Over the past half a century, Taiwan has been fearless in the way it dealt with its difficult international plight. It has been the economic, scientific, and technological leader among emerging industrial nations. It has been the political and cultural leader among ethnic Chinese societies. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party however, has been spinning its wheels for seven years. Seven years of stagnation, contrasting sharply with the rapid progress of neighbouring countries and regions, leave one simultaneously baffled and embarrassed.
The DPP has a high turnover rate among its financial and economic leaders. Its economic and trade policies change from week to week. It has at its disposal trillions of dollars in national assets. But because of its incompetence, it has nothing to show in terms of national policy. It knows only how to incite social opposition, how to shift public and media attention from its failures, and how to pass the buck to opposition parties. The people of Taiwan can no longer endure the DPP's outrageous economic, financial, educational, and cross-straits policies. We have decided that Taiwan must move forward. The ruling DPP lacks the ability to govern. It rules by ideology. We have decided to take a stand. All those who share our passionate love for the Republic of China, all those who love the people of Taiwan, must stand together and get our nation back on track, allowing the people to once again find happiness.
What do you think your strengths are compared to other candidates?
Answer:
After long-term contact with the people, I gradually came to understand people's perceptions and expectations of me. These perceptions and expectations may answer this question. After years in politics, many people consider me uncorrupt, optimistic, affrimative, public-spirited. This is what I have always striven to be. I have always hoped that by being this way, I could lead by example, that I could be a positive force in political circles, so that I could improve our nation's political character. I have been in politics for over 20 years. I have always been what I am. Nothing more, nothing less. I hope that all political leaders, all KMT members and comrades and I can work together to build an uncorrupt and just political party, This is why I actively promoted intra-party democracy and reform during my term as chairman of the Kuomintang. After I am elected, I will be committed to clean government and social justice, to enabling everyone to enjoy peace and prosperity. These views and policies reflect who I am and what I believe. They have won the trust and support of a broad mass of people, especially the middle-class, young people, and women. This is my biggest advantage in this election. Because pan-blue and pan-green voters are largely set, how to win the swing vote is extremely important.
Another electoral advantage is that the people of Taiwan consider the KMT adept at economic development, and able to improve their lives and enabling them to enjoy a higher standard of living. To this end, I have asked former Premier Vincent Siew, with his financial expertise and abundant administrative experience, to be my running mate, to increase voter confidence in the KMT's ability to revitalize Taiwan's economy. The DPP's policies over the past seven years have left the people of Taiwan utterly disillusioned. Their tired slogans and pie in the sky proposals no longer convince voters. The KMT has drafted a new blueprint for Taiwan's economic revitalization. We have proposed twelve projects that demonstrate our love for Taiwan. Once we take office, we will organize a team of financial experts. They will vigorously promote Taiwan's economic development, and replicate Taiwan's economic miracle. allowing the people to be happier and enjoy a better life. We have a dream. We can make it happen. With our past experience, the people can safely believe that the KMT, that Ma Ying-jeou and Vincent Siew, will do better if elected. This is our electoral advantage!
馬主席接受「英文台灣評論」專訪擬答參考稿
內政組
1. 參選的動機為何?
擬答：
我 之所以決定參加2008年總統大選，是基於對我們國家的一份使命感，也是基於對我們台灣這塊土地、對台灣人民的一份關懷，深深感到自已有責任站出來，和所 有民眾一起努力，扭轉當前國家的亂局。因為我們國家在民進黨執政這幾年當中，政府施政效能不彰，官員貪腐情形嚴重，經濟發展停滯不前，民眾生活水準下降， 社會對立問題嚴重。這些問題，都是民進黨政府執政無能造成的苦果。在此同時，東亞各國都在快速的發展，全世界都在大步向前走，所以台灣的發展狀況實在讓人 感到非常憂心。在這種情勢下，我們中國國民黨有責任將國家發展重新導向正軌，要讓台灣能夠繼續大步向前走，讓中華民國能夠繼續在世界上昂揚挺立，成為具有 強勁競爭力，能夠在全球化趨勢中不斷進步的一流國家。這是我決定要投入總統大選的主要原因。
台灣過去半個世紀以來，無懼於國際環境的艱困，一直在經濟、科技上領先新興工業國家，在政治、文化上領先所有華人社會；但是在民進黨執政後已經原地踏步了七年多。而這七年多的停滯，相對於鄰近國家與地區的突飛猛進，實在讓人覺得迷惑與難堪。
民 進黨政府財經首長更迭頻繁，經貿政策反覆搖罷，無法延續和落實，他們支配數以兆計的國家資源，但施政續效卻乏善可陳，而且面對空白的政績時，他們只會激化 社會對立，轉移社會大眾和媒體輿論的焦點，或者將責任推給在野黨。然而，台灣民眾已經不能再忍受民進黨在經濟、財政、教育、兩岸等各方面荒腔走板的施政 了，大家有共識，那就是台灣一定要向前走。民進黨的執政團隊能力有限，以意識形態治國的政策和心態出了問題，所以，我們決定站出來，和所有熱愛中華民國、 熱愛台灣的民眾一起團結努力，要讓我們國家回歸正軌，讓人民重新找回幸福生活。
二、與其他候選人相較，您覺得您的優勢為何？
擬答：
在 我長期和民眾接觸之後，我逐漸了解到民眾對我的觀感和期許。而從廣大民眾對我的看法和期許，或者可以作為回答這個問題的基礎。在我從政這麼多年以來，很多 人認為我的形象是清廉的、陽光的、健康的、公益的，這也是我一直以來希望能夠維持的一貫風格，希望我自己潔身自持，以身作則，可以成為政治圈當中的一股清 流，成為帶動台灣向上提昇，讓我們國家的政治風氣有所改善。所以，我從政二十餘年，一路走來，始終如一，我也希望所有政治人物，所有國民黨黨員和從政同 志，和我一起努力，建設一個健康、公義的政黨，這也是我在擔任國民黨主席的時候，積極推動黨內民主和黨內改革的原因。將來我當選後，也一定會致力打造廉能 政府，建立公義社會，讓所有的國民生活得更安定、更安全、更安心。這樣的施政理念和政策主張，完全符合我個人長期的形象，也贏得了廣大民眾，特別是在為數 眾多的中產階級、青年和婦女這些中間選民的的信任和支持，這正是我這一次參選的最大優勢。因為泛藍、泛綠陣營各有相當穩定的支持選民，如何爭取中間選民的 認同就非常重要。
我們的另外一個參選優勢，是台灣民眾都認為國民黨擅長經濟建設，真正能夠為全體國民帶來實質生活的改善，讓民眾的生活比 以前更幸福、未來可以享有更好的生活品質。這次選舉，我特別力邀具有財經背景和豐富行政經驗的前行政院長蕭萬長先生擔任我的副手，讓選民對於將來國民黨要 全力振興和發展台灣經濟更有信心。相反地，民進黨七年多來的施政，已讓台灣民眾徹底失望，喊出再多的口號和美麗的政策訴求，都再也不能吸引選民。而我們國 民黨已經規劃完成未來台灣經濟建設新藍圖，也提出了愛台灣十二項建設，將來執政後，一定會組成強有力的財經執政團隊，發揮經濟長才，全力推動台灣經濟建 設，讓台灣重現經濟奇蹟，讓國民過更幸福、更美好的生活。我們有理想願景、有能力實現、有過去成功的經驗，所以可以讓民眾相信，我們國民黨、馬蕭團隊如果 當選絕對可以作得更好，這就是我們的優勢﹗
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
The Darkness before the Dawn, Welcoming a Year of Hope
The Darkness before the Dawn, Welcoming a Year of Hope
Ma Ying-jeou's 2008 New Year's Day Address
translated by Bevin Chu
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On this chilly winter morning, let us bid farewell to 2007, and welcome the first faint rays of 2008.
Our hearts are filled with hope. We hope that the bitter winter solstice promises a warm spring. That the darkness heralds a new dawn. That 2008 brings renewed hope.
As we review the past year, we cannot help feeling alarmed. With great difficulty, we have laid down the foundations of democracy. Yet here we are, in our current plight. Independent agencies are anything but independent. The government bears scant resemblance to a government. The Central Election Committee has become the puppet of the Government Information Office. [Alternative:The Central Election Committee has become the Democratic Progressive Party's Reelection Committee] "Free and fair elections" have become a cruel joke. The rhetoric of hate has driven out rational debate. The tragedies of history have become political cash machines. Public prosecutors have become partisan hatchetmen. Officials have been indicted on discretionary fund charges on the basis of party affiliation. Elections have become tools to retain power, and not means to fulfill the voters' aspirations. The president has even hinted that he might impose such anti-democratic measures as "postponing" the election, nullifying the results of the election, or even imposing martial law.
In any genuinely democratic nation, such irresponsible rhetoric would have touched off a political firestorm. But on Taiwan, politicians treat such talk as word games. They seem unaware they have already undermined Taiwan's image as a democracy and made our allies uneasy. Our allies have sent officials to Taiwan to express their concerns, fearful that the presidential election won't be held as anticipated, that political authority will not be transferred peacefully, that Taiwan will destroy Asia's hard-won development.
This is the darkside. That said, we remain filled with hope. Polls reveal that over half the people believe it is time for political change. Only if a new government takes over will our political fortune improve. Seven out of ten people feel that economic development far outweigh political concerns. The people are telling us that what they want is the pursuit of happiness. What they want is an end to joblessness. Teachers and parents are telling us that the ruling DPP must be replaced, that it must be taught a lesson. If the ruling regime's barbaric conduct and politics of hate cannot be brought to an end, they won't know what to tell their children.
Our New Year's resolution is crystal clear. Listen to the people.
First. For the sake of our children, for the sake of future generations, we must force the corrupt ruling party to step down. We must give it an opportunity to engage in self-examination, and allow our society to reclaim its core values.
Secondly. For our fellow citizens economic well-being, we must bring an end to political rhetoric and return to economic issues. If the people cannot live in peace, that is the government's responsibility, an indicator of the government's ineptitude.
Thirdly. We must win back the right to govern. Only then can we fulfill our promises to the public. In future elections, we must ensure free and fair elections. We must not allow any party to remain in power by means of political deceit. No matter what the results of the election might be, we must demand that the government guarantee the peaceful transfer of political power, avoid political unrest, and ensure democratic stability.
2008 is a watershed year. The peoples' fortunes, the survival of democracy, the struggle between light and dark, between integrity and corruption, rests in our hands. The fate of the next generation, awaits our decision.
We know our task is daunting. That is why we must persevere! Let us advance together, through the darkness before the dawn, toward a future filled with hope!
Ma Ying-jeou's 2008 New Year's Day Address
translated by Bevin Chu
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On this chilly winter morning, let us bid farewell to 2007, and welcome the first faint rays of 2008.
Our hearts are filled with hope. We hope that the bitter winter solstice promises a warm spring. That the darkness heralds a new dawn. That 2008 brings renewed hope.
As we review the past year, we cannot help feeling alarmed. With great difficulty, we have laid down the foundations of democracy. Yet here we are, in our current plight. Independent agencies are anything but independent. The government bears scant resemblance to a government. The Central Election Committee has become the puppet of the Government Information Office. [Alternative:The Central Election Committee has become the Democratic Progressive Party's Reelection Committee] "Free and fair elections" have become a cruel joke. The rhetoric of hate has driven out rational debate. The tragedies of history have become political cash machines. Public prosecutors have become partisan hatchetmen. Officials have been indicted on discretionary fund charges on the basis of party affiliation. Elections have become tools to retain power, and not means to fulfill the voters' aspirations. The president has even hinted that he might impose such anti-democratic measures as "postponing" the election, nullifying the results of the election, or even imposing martial law.
In any genuinely democratic nation, such irresponsible rhetoric would have touched off a political firestorm. But on Taiwan, politicians treat such talk as word games. They seem unaware they have already undermined Taiwan's image as a democracy and made our allies uneasy. Our allies have sent officials to Taiwan to express their concerns, fearful that the presidential election won't be held as anticipated, that political authority will not be transferred peacefully, that Taiwan will destroy Asia's hard-won development.
This is the darkside. That said, we remain filled with hope. Polls reveal that over half the people believe it is time for political change. Only if a new government takes over will our political fortune improve. Seven out of ten people feel that economic development far outweigh political concerns. The people are telling us that what they want is the pursuit of happiness. What they want is an end to joblessness. Teachers and parents are telling us that the ruling DPP must be replaced, that it must be taught a lesson. If the ruling regime's barbaric conduct and politics of hate cannot be brought to an end, they won't know what to tell their children.
Our New Year's resolution is crystal clear. Listen to the people.
First. For the sake of our children, for the sake of future generations, we must force the corrupt ruling party to step down. We must give it an opportunity to engage in self-examination, and allow our society to reclaim its core values.
Secondly. For our fellow citizens economic well-being, we must bring an end to political rhetoric and return to economic issues. If the people cannot live in peace, that is the government's responsibility, an indicator of the government's ineptitude.
Thirdly. We must win back the right to govern. Only then can we fulfill our promises to the public. In future elections, we must ensure free and fair elections. We must not allow any party to remain in power by means of political deceit. No matter what the results of the election might be, we must demand that the government guarantee the peaceful transfer of political power, avoid political unrest, and ensure democratic stability.
2008 is a watershed year. The peoples' fortunes, the survival of democracy, the struggle between light and dark, between integrity and corruption, rests in our hands. The fate of the next generation, awaits our decision.
We know our task is daunting. That is why we must persevere! Let us advance together, through the darkness before the dawn, toward a future filled with hope!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)