How much is your liberty worth?

This time last week we wondered whether, given that a victory in the next presidential election by the blue-camp ticket of KMT Chairman Lien Chan and PFP Chairman James Soong meant the end of this nation as an independent sovereign entity, Taiwan might have to step outside the conventions of democratic practice in order to save its democratic institutions and civil liberties.

We were aware at the time that we were open to derision -- it does rather resemble the comment of the luckless US army officer during the Vietnam War who said "we had to destroy this village to save it."

We also knew quite well that a number of people would be shocked and offended that a newspaper that has hitherto tried to be of a liberal persuasion should suggest any compromise of those very liberal values which it has lambasted others for not sharing.

"You have every right to denounce the blue camp and the so-called defeatism and pro-China politics. It is your job to convince people in Taiwan using your logic and rationale. Suggesting anything outside the democratic system to achieve it is irresponsible and inflammatory," wrote an irate reader from San Francisco. "Taiwan has gone through 50 years of struggle to achieve a glimmer of democracy, if immature. It is for Taiwanese people to treasure and nurture it into something shining and bright."

Our reply to this reader and other critics of the same ilk is that they seem to have ignored our initial argument. We are all for nurturing the nation's democracy. But it is quite plain that a blue camp victory means its destruction.

The problem with democratic institutions is that they only work if all political parties or factions are committed to their maintenance. The PFP-KMT is plainly not. It is committed to a deal with China which will give it perpetual control of Taiwan -- like the Tung Chee-hwa clique in Hong Kong only with more real power -- at the price of Taiwan's sovereignty. The Taiwanese are not to be given a say in whether they want this or not -- no referendum will be allowed. And liberties will be curtailed -- the first one being the right of any political group to advocate secession from China. The 50 years of struggle that our reader talks of so proudly will then have been totally in vain.

The mistake that is commonly made in this country is to think that democracy is its own guarantee of civil liberties and democratic values. Last week we alluded to Weimar Germany as the counter-example par excellence to refute this roseate view. For readers whose European history is thin, our intention was to point out that the supreme anti-democrat Adolf Hitler was elected through democratic and constitutional means and his acceptance by the German people owed a huge amount to his coming to power by constitutional means. As soon as he entered office he remarked to his henchmen that the only way he would leave it was in a coffin. We suspect that much the same ambition goes through Soong's head.

The obvious way to combat this would be to promote massive public demonstrations demanding the right of referendum on any decision changing the nation's current status. This would be constitutional, though many governments see referendums as a threat to representative democracy.

But can people be mobilized for this? Probably they would prefer to complain about the economy and stay at home. And that is the problem that Taiwan faces. That the blue camp can win an election on economic issues while their malign intention concerning the nation's relations with China will only become apparent when it is too late. And then Taiwanese will find out, as Joni Mitchell long ago told us, that "you don't know what you've got till it's gone."