|
Shooting highlights double standards
Double standards have long been a part of Taiwanese politics. This is
particularly apparent when it comes to criticism directed at the nation’s
politicians. More often than not, the intensity — or lack thereof — of criticism
depends on which side of the political spectrum a politician hails from.
The shooting incident involving one of former vice president Lien Chan’s (連戰)
sons, Sean Lien (連勝文), vividly demonstrated just how ludicrous the double
standards are for political figures from different camps.
The election-eve shooting at the rally of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
councilor candidate Chen Hung-yuan (陳鴻源) in Yonghe (永和), Taipei County, on
Friday left one innocent bystander dead and Sean Lien injured. A bullet
reportedly entered the left side of Sean Lien’s face and exited near his right
temple.
The incident is reminiscent of the shooting on the eve of the 2004 presidential
election, in which bullets grazed the stomach of then-president Chen Shui-bian
(陳水扁) and hit then-vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) in the knee.
Immediately after the shooting of the two Democratic Progressive Party
candidates running for re-election, KMT politicians and pan-blue political
commentators blasted it as a political ploy aimed at winning sympathy votes.
Asking how Chen survived and questioning why he was still able to walk after
being hit, many suspected Chen of staging the shooting. The pan-blue camp
painted any shooting-related comment by the DPP as an attempt to manipulate the
public, with the KMT urging voters to use their ballots to punish the DPP. With
the slogan “no truth, no president,” the KMT called on Chen to let the public
see his wound, release his medical treatment records and allow opposition
members to view his injuries to substantiate the claims that he was shot.
Now that the tables have been turned and the victim is a KMT member, the
pan-blue response is totally different. Brushing aside claims that Friday’s
shooting was staged, the pan-blue camp attributed it to “extreme good luck” that
Sean Lien survived the gunshot and was able to flash a “V” sign for victory on
his way to surgery. It also dismissed criticism that Lien Chan’s comments at
Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin’s (郝龍斌) rally shortly after the shooting were
politically motivated and described the comments as selfless and commendable.
Moreover, when the pan-green camp called for Sean Lien to make public pictures
of his injuries and X-rays, the pan-blue camp accused the opposition of lacking
any shred of humanity and demanded respect for Sean Lien’s privacy.
The glaring absurdity of the double standards applies to both camps — the
pan-blue camp called on voters to punish the DPP when the victim was a pan-green
politician (Chen), and again called on voters to punish the DPP when the victim
was a pan-blue politician (Sean Lien.) This bizarre pan-blue logic seems to
suggest that whatever happens, it’s the DPP’s fault and that the DPP needs to be
punished.
Some may argue that the shootings were different — Chen was a president seeking
re-election and Sean Lien was not even running for election. However, Sean
Lien’s injury garnered such intense media attention because of his influential
family background; hence it is reasonable to compare the two.
Best wishes to Sean Lien for a speedy recovery. However, in view of the brazen
double standards applied to Chen and Sean Lien, the credibility of the people
now chiding the DPP seems suspect, especially when recalling how these same
people dogged Chen after the shooting six years ago.
|
