`Independence' as fascism

The letter from the Taiwanese Canadian Social Service Center (Letters, June 4, page 8) on the fostering of a strong Taiwanese consciousness was very disturbing, for the examples the writers used were all from extremely fascist societies: Germany, Poland and Ukraine.

Further the article acknowledged a "cultural debt" to China and Japan, which are both extremely fascist societies with authoritarian cultures. The idea that Taiwanese identity owes a cultural debt in a positive sense to China or Japan is questionable. Indeed the negative aspects of those cultures remain quite strong in Taiwan.

For example, the president had no difficulty ordering official disobedience in the face of the unconstitutional March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee Statute, because it was politically expedient to do so.

There is no reason why the government should not also choose to regard the unconstitutional provisions of the Household Registration Act's mandatory national fingerprinting requirements as ineffective from the get-go.

The government wrongly, unconstitutionally and arrogantly believes that anything they feel is in the public interest may lawfully override the rights and provisions of the Constitution. Another example of fascism in Taiwan is the household registration system, enforced by authoritarian Asian societies to this day. The police and the state do not have the right to regard average citizens carrying out their daily lives as criminals.

The fascist aspects of the Chinese and Japanese negative cultural vestiges on Taiwan must be uprooted and overturned. The battle for Taiwanese independence is the battle for the respect of the human rights of all persons of Asian and Pacific Island heritage.

But until the people of Taiwan themselves stand up and reject the fascist and Chinese cultural origins of much of their Taiwanese independence movement, including those such as Lin Cho-shui who proudly proclaim a "cultural debt" to China, as if such respect will earn them brownie points with the Chinese leadership, they will likely not merit those providential blessings so aptly recorded in the US Declaration of Independence, in which the people rejected the authoritarian and demeaning culture of the British motherland, and chose to freely recognize the innate beauty of a tolerant society where each individual may be respected for who they are in their own right.

Profound respect for such individuality is not only conducive to stronger social cohesion, it is essential to achieving just and equitable social welfare and charity, something almost entirely lacking from Taiwan's dog-eat-dog, get rich at all costs Chinese cultural mentality.

First there was The Ugly American, then there was Bo Yang's Ugly Chinaman. Now it is time for Taiwanese independence advocates to face up to the truth of the "Ugly Taiwanese," and demand an end to the fascist aspects of the Chinese and Japanese cultural heritage on Formosa.

Further, those fascists who engaged in crimes against humanity on Formosa for decades from the 228 Incident through the White Terror must be brought to justice for their crimes against humanity.

The claims of Taiwanese independence advocates in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) who desire to make peace with the fascist Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members, and refuse to employ the judicial resources of the state to bring the fascists to justice, in the name of "cultural, ethnic and national origin reconciliation" are absurd and immoral to the core.

One does not reconcile with fascist murderers: one brings them to justice. When Taiwan is just and dedicated to justice, then and only then will it merit the recognition of its true identity as a free and independent, sovereign people, living freely and independently in their own state. The hypocrisy of anything less is obvious, and will stain forever the claims of those who seek a just recognition of their equal humanity as a nation among the states of the world.

Paul Maas Risenhoover

Special Adviser for International Law, Permanent Mission of Tuvalu to the UN

TSU has a chance

By Chen Ming-chung

If the DPP can rise from dangwai to become ruling party in a little over a decade, the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) can become the second largest party in about the same amount of time. ["TSU's future in doubt after electoral reforms," June 8, page 3.] The question is, how?

In the near term, the TSU should concentrate on securing third place among the parties. This is not hard to do, because of the People First Party's (PFP) incoherence in direction and purpose, its total retrograde in Taiwan's cause and democracy. The KMT bubble will burst once its illegal assets are spent or taken away.

The TSU can address issues such as constitutional reform. The DPP will not touch upon issues of national name, sovereignty, territory or symbols. Yet, the "Republic of China" will lead nowhere. Eventually, Taiwan's international space and commercial interests will be squeezed by China without these changes. Taiwan will be backed into a corner, and will have to fight like a trapped beast. This is where the TSU can distinguish itself. There may be no "consensus" now, but the truth will become more and more clear. Taiwan has no alternative but to face up to it.

The DPP cannot have it both ways, promoting Taiwan's independence come election time, only to drift toward the "middle of the road" after an election. "Green" voters may not have an alternative now. It is up to the TSU to provide that alternative as Taiwan's faithful opposition party.

I am looking forward to the day when the TSU becomes "the" faithful Taiwanese opposition party, and beyond.

Chen Ming-chung

Chicago, Illinois

Recognize Taiwan's interests

By Benjamin Adams

I was surprised to read on the front page about the spat over exlusive economic zones between Taiwan and Japan ("Fishermen hold protest near Japan," June 10, page 1). While it is unsurprising that self-interested commercial groups are waving flags and organizing protests, it is myopic for the Council of Agriculture (COA) to blindly wade in and threaten "action."

The council, presumably a government department [Editor's note: The COA is an agency of the Executive Yuan, and its head holds ministerial rank.] stated: "We will take concrete action to show Japan that the sovereignty of our exclusive economic zones cannot be violated."

Putting aside for a moment the argument about Taiwan's soveriegnty, isn't Japan the only Asian power who actually sympathizes with Taiwan's plight? Especially in light of the recent joint Japan-US statement concerning the Taiwan Strait, both the Council of Agriculture and the Suao Fishermens's Association appear to be shooting Taiwan -- and eventually themselves, in the case of the fishermen -- in the foot. Spouting vitriol and making rash unsupportable claims may invoke some sympathy at home, but it does nothing for Taiwan's strategic interests.

It is time for such small-minded groups to consider the larger issues at stake. The Diaoyu islands cannot be held by Taiwan in the face of Chinese agression or Japanese encroachment. Instead, this is an opportunity to strengthen Taiwan's position in preparation for the inevitable showdown with China. In short, negotiations with Japan over the Diaoyu islands would strengthen ties, improve access to the fisheries in the area, and may lead to greater security ties in the future.

Benjamin Adams

Taipei