|
|
|
China¡¦s
syndrome on Nov 28, 2004 China releases prominent dissident LIMITED FREEDOM: Longtime dissident Liu
Jingsheng, a key activist in the democracy movement, was freed even as Beijing
reined in others who have questioned the regime Liu stopped short of saying whether he would continue to take part in
pro-democracy activities but said he was still concerned about the many problems
facing his people. "I am an ordinary citizen, I don't have a lot of ambition but I still
care very much about the situation of Chinese people," Liu told reporters
after his release. He took part in the 1978 Democracy Wall movement, published the underground
magazine Exploration and helped set up the China Freedom and Democracy
Party after the crushing of the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement. "I am still the same person. I haven't changed the way I think,"
he said. Liu, 50, said his political rights would be curtailed for four years after
his release and there were limits on his freedom of speech and publication. "It is not convenient to talk about lots of things now," he said.
Liu, who was released more than two years before his sentence ended, had
been suffering from high blood pressure, heart and stomach problems. "I am well," he said. "I am in good spirits and my health is
okay." Liu, who was detained in May 1992 and sentenced two years later on charges
of "organizing and leading a counter-revolutionary organization" and
"inciting counter-revolutionary subversion," was due for release in
May 2007. But his release does not mean China is relaxing its grip on other
activists. At least two people were detained in police custody -- one said she was
beaten -- and some 20 more prevented from leaving home by Beijing police as they
tried to attend the trial of high-profile activist Ye Guozhu. Ye was detained in August after applying to organize a 10,000-strong
demonstration in Beijing and was later formally arrested on charges of
disturbing social order. Many of his supporters are activists and petitioners who have appealed to
the central government to deal with their grievances with little result. Wheelchair-bound Ni Yulan, who said she received spinal injuries in a
police beating in 2002, said she was kicked by police at Xinjiekou police
station after she was picked up from her home while preparing to go to the court
early yesterday. Internet dissident Liu Di was detained for four hours. AIDS activist Hu Jia
was put under police surveillance and barred from leaving home even though he
needed to go to a hospital. Police refused to comment on the detentions. New York-based Human Rights in China, which this week announced the news of
Liu's early release, urged the government to show similar tolerance to other
activists behind bars. Despite China's stellar economic growth and the unprecedented personal and
economic freedoms enjoyed by its citizens, the country still has little
tolerance for voices of dissent. Editorial: Let's de-politicize de-Sinicization The
recent debate over a proposed ten percent reduction of classical Chinese
material in senior high school is actually a very good thing. It creates an
opportunity to discuss a key issue: should a curriculum focus more on serving a
pragmatic purpose, such as shaping students' ability to write and express their
views in a coherent, easy-to-understand, logical manner? Or should a curriculum
be designed to spark students' interest in classical literature? The answer is
the former, so under the circumstances the proposed curriculum change is a step
in the right direction. The value of any language study is first and foremost in helping people
communicate and get their point across. It is only after people have a good
command of the basics that they can do so in an elegant and artistic manner. A
widespread problem today is the lack of basic language and writing skills to
accomplish even the most elementary objectives. Those who teach in senior high
schools and at universities recognize this as a serious problem. One reason for the deficiency has been the way Chinese literature is taught
in schools. Students memorize by rote ancient poems and essays written in
classical literary Chinese, and then have to write compositions imitating an
ancient literary style. As a result, few students in Taiwan can write a
well-structured essay, with a consistent central idea running through it, with
supporting facts and arguments and a conclusion. No amount of flowery phrases
cited from ancient classical essays can help cover up these fundamental flaws in
composition. This would be unthinkable in Western countries. In the US, although reading
Chaucer's Canterbury Tales is part of the high school English curriculum,
students aren't required to memorize particular paragraphs, let alone imitate
ancient language used in their own writing. There are good reasons for this. In
real life, no one in their right mind writes like that anymore; doing so would
simply kill interest and appreciation for the masterpiece. Granted, mastering traditional Chinese writing is a very good thing. For
those with a keen appreciation there is always the option of specializing in
Chinese literature at university. But high school level training should be
communication-oriented. In most professions, writing serves the practical
purpose of conveying ideas and thoughts -- something more efficiently done by
using modern-day language. For example, the legal profession in the US was once
notorious for using language filled with complex legal jargon --
"legalese." After decades of reform, lawyers are now trained to write
in plain English. Unfortunately, almost nothing can escape politics in Taiwan, and the
proposed change to high school curriculum is no exception. Opponents call it an
attempt by education minister Tu Cheng-sheng to "de-Sinicize"; that
is, to do away with Chinese cultural roots. Ironically, on the other side of the
Taiwan Strait, high school Chinese classes teach even less about ancient
classical literature. This is not to mention the fact that the use of simplified
Chinese characters there serves an almost identical pragmatic goal. Finally,
those who accuse Tu of "de-Sinicization" are forgetting about China's
Cultural Revolution. Now that was a truly thorough attempt at
"de-Sinicization." Chen,
Lee stump for new constitution
Reactor plan frozen amid N Korean nuke
standoff
Parties should give up the ghost There are fewer than 20 days until the legislative election. The election
is a key battle that will decide whether the pan-blue camp can maintain its
legislative majority and continue to hold more seats in the legislature.
Alternatively, the pan-green camp may enjoy a legislative majority for the first
time, and hold in its grasp both the legislative and executive powers. As the election campaign reaches an all-time high in terms of intensity,
one cannot help but feel perplexed. The campaign's spirit of rowdiness seems to
come mostly from deliberate manipulations of debate topics and the use of
campaign gimmicks. Although it's an important and critical campaign, voters have
not actually been informed of any positive campaign platforms. The only things being fed to them are fistfights between political camps
and debate topics being tossed out nonchalantly, one after another. These are
issues that have virtually taken over front page newspaper headlines every day.
This type of campaigning is comparable to stocks whose prices are driven over
the top by speculation. The worrisome thing is this: the present campaign race has failed not only
to outline a vision for its policy proposals, but it has become only an
extension of the presidential election through which the parties seek to settle
their scores once and for all. The only difference between this upcoming
election and the March 20 presidential election is that this election is being
fought by party representatives. While on the surface it is an election race between a group of pan-green
and pan-blue candidates, the real leading characters are still President Chen
Shui-bian, Vice President Annette Lu, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman
Lien Chan, and People's First Party hairman James Soong. If presidential and legislative races are considered indicators of
democratization and nativization, then Taiwan has completely left behind the
shadow of its authoritarian past. In particular, the 2000 presidential election
brought changes to the ruling party, helping facilitate judiciary independence,
education reform, and in particular education of history. It also stressed a
loyalty of the military exclusively to the government, rather than to any
particular political parties. As a result, the dignity and human rights of the people of Taiwan were
safeguarded, in the process shattering the plots of the conservative forces to
revive the old system of government monopolized by the KMT. This historical
evolution ensured the implementation of political democracy in Taiwan. However, democratic reforms entail much more than the establishment of a
political system: they also give substance to the system established. One hopes
that the legislative election this year can indeed elevate the quality and
substance of Taiwan's democracy and give the country a new sense of direction
and vitality. One cannot but feel disappointment in view of the performance of
both ruling and opposition camps thus far, and offer some words of advice. Up to now, the hottest topics in the campaign have been none other than the
"soft coup" and "mixing the national and KMT emblems," both
raised by Chen. As a result, no talk shows in Taiwan can steer clear of these
topics for even a day. At the same time, fearing to pale in comparison, the
printed media is giving extensive coverage to these topics of discussion. According to staff members of the Presidential Office, all the campaign
debate topics of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) were personally
decided by President Chen. The DPP Legislative Caucus Chairman Lee Chun-yi
frankly said that "A-bian said ..." has become the new campaign theme.
Evidently, few can surpass Chen's expertise in putting together campaign points
of debate. It is not that topics such as "soft coup" and national and party
emblems cannot be debated or that they are bad topics. However, these topics on
the one hand exacerbate grudges left behind from the past presidential election,
and on the other hand highlight the KMT's past in confusing the party with the
government. To this day, the pan-blues are still refusing to concede defeat in the
presidential election and there seems to be no end to its rallies and protests.
In fact, it went as far as to doubt the impartiality of the judiciary after the
verdict was handed down on its lawsuit to overturn the result of the
presidential election. Such disregard for principles of democracy and the public
welfare is of course less than praise-worthy and should be condemned. The confusion between national and KMT party emblems is something that
should be addressed and corrected as well, so as to turn Taiwan into a
"normal" country. They should not be allowed to linger on, becoming
unbreakable political curses. However, the pan-greens' call for voters to give them a legislative
majority is not convincing enough if these are the sole reason. This is turning
the elections into a process through which old scores and grudges are to be
settled. On the other hand, the campaign strategies of the pan-blues are even worse.
They give absolutely no reason for praise. They are not only equally short of
vision and policy proposals, but also pale in comparison with the pan-greens in
terms of the ability to handle topics. Especially annoying is the fact that Lien and Soong still refuse to concede
defeat in the March election. They still do not dare to face reality. As a
result, the opposition parties -- who are supposed to monitor and counter the
ruling party -- have in fact become the roots of destruction of social stability
and political chaos. In this election campaign, they have reiterated their contempt for Chen,
accusing him of foul play and fraud in the presidential election, and calling
him names like dictator, totalitarian, among others. They have gone all out in
attacking the head of their own country in interviews with foreign media. Lien
and Soong have been unable to issue any new blueprint that brings hope. The presidential election is over. The upcoming election is not round two
of the presidential election. The voters are not obliged to continue a
never-ending game with these two old men -- Lien and Soong. Democratic countries need powerful opposition party, so as to keep the
ruling party in line and avoid political corruption. The refusal of the
pan-blues to accept defeat in the presidential election has made it incapable of
serving as a functioning opposition party. Using controversy from the last presidential election as the theme of the
legislative election campaign has turned this contest into round two of the
presidential race. Under the circumstances, it has become extremely hard for
voters to convince themselves they should support a pan-blue legislative
majority. The rough outline of Taiwan's political democracy is there. However,
substance-wise, there is much room for improvement. In this ongoing legislative
election campaign, the pan-blue and pan-green camps are pretty close in terms of
strength. But the result of the election could bring major changes to the
political dynamics of the country. Voters hope that this can be a visionary election campaign. Therefore, the
two sides should reveal more to voters their vision of Taiwan's future
direction, and contribute a more enriched and refined substance to Taiwan's
political democracy. We do not need past grudges and ghosts of the past to keep us from moving
forward. Taiwan must move on. The voters must vote based on the ability and
character of the candidates. Both the candidates and the political parties should highlight a
comprehensive platform and outline the concrete steps they would take to
accomplish these goals. This way, voters can make informed choices. There is a need for more moderation and rational thinking, and both parties
must abandon the war of words which wastefully consumes energy. As the election campaign enters its final phase, it is hoped that the
opposition and ruling party can modify their campaign themes and move beyond
manipulation of debate topics. Don't let them turn the legislative election into
an extension of the presidential election. Make positive and constructive
proposals about the future, so as to help Taiwan establish a quality political
democracy and a peaceful way of life.
|
|
|
