Pan Green's Mentality Behind the CSB Case -- And a Replay in Kaoshiung

The CSB's case - either what he did or didn't do, or the way the Taipei judiciary system fixed the case - has been haunting Taiwan in the past whole year. People with justice in mind couldn't stop asking why it could be possible, or wondering how the KMT could pull out the conspiracy so successfully to persecute the officials (and their families) of previous government in such a blatant way (see J. Michael Cole's Mobilize Now!).

From my understanding, one of the answers - a very critical one - lies in nowhere else but the green camp itself.

We Taiwanese haven't quite get to know how to be masters of own fates yet. Most still think like servants in the old time, that we go to the voting booth to "pick the Savior." Hoping that the Savior alone can right every wrong for us, we all go back home to wait for out dream to come true, without paying much attention to watch if the Savior does follow the promises he made.

Or even some do pay attention, they keep silent because they insist on "solidifying the leadership," based on the belief that not criticizing the Savior is the only means for the Savior to lead us to the promised land (I pointed this out in a post (in Chinese) when discussing the case of DPP's controversial pick of Tainan County candidate back in April, 台灣派的枷鎖:鞏固領導中心).

So, in contrary to the continuous attacks coming from the blue camp on very single policy our the Savior made, we keep very low profile, making it look like that we can take it whichever way it goes. As a result, the leader will only see and feel mounting pressure from the blue camp.

It won't be hard to picture what a person in the position of the Savior will do under that situation.

It thus drifts, step by step, farther away from our dream, until one day the situation is rotten to a point of no return.

Even at that point, we fail to recognize that the failure is the result of aggressive attacks from the blue camp, of our silence in response to those attacks, and of our ignorance thinking that the fate of a country relies solely on the shoulders of a single the Savior.

One man rises, the country is saved; one man goes down, we are all dead. So we all rush out to blame the Savior for all the fall. We claim that the so-called Saviorlied to us, that the Savior is not a savior at all. We forget that when one goes to the public announcing that he was lied to, he is announcing that something goes wrong in his intelligence.

As such, by laying all blames upon the falling guy, we wipe out the guilt of choosing a wrong leader (which in wrong), and free ourselves from the responsibility of letting the situation go worse and worse without intervening with the mind of masters.

This is probably the primary mentality of all those "anti-Bian" hatrid in the green camp -- coming from people ranging from general populate to highly educated elites, including some pronounced scholars and professors, domestic or overseas.

Very very few Taiwanese realize that, when things go wrong in a democracy, people -- the masters -- are those who are responsible. Because Taiwanese are unwilling or unaware of the need to play the role of a responsible master, that we have no courage to carry the burden, upon failure we blame everyone -- the non-green voters, the KMT, and their own falling leader -- but ourselves. That mentality is the key reason KMT is able to play the CSB card so well --- they must have known that if they pull CSB's legs to an extent, the green camp will follow up with much harsher attack against our own leader all by ourselves. In that sense, I would argue that we somehow conspire with KMT to allow the judiciary operation to go down so quickly.

Wandering around forums/blogs of both Chinese and English, I witness how much effort the English circle put on the judiciary injustice on CSB's case in the past year -- analysis, criticisms, open letters, endorsements ... one after one. In contrary, the attention of green camp on CSB's human right is almost none -- most major players or elites were dwelling in the anger of "we are cheated; we are hurt; it's all his fault." The attention from the green camp to care about the justice in CSB's case didn't show up until early May this year, when DPP politicians suddenly woke up and went to visit CSB in jail one by one during the week before DPP's 517 protest. It is at least 6 month of total negligence on the judiciary unfairness that will definitely hurt all Taiwanese in the future. Even after then, the hatred and anger keep coming from the green elites (hey, I just got one email of this sort today). It is so intense that it looks like wiping out CSB from our memories is the only thing pan green cares in the world, and as long as we do this but nothing else, we will reach our wonderland automatically.

The unbelievable ignorance toward the immediate danger right in front of us, and the shocking contrast between the Taiwanese and English circles lead me to a painful realization that the real source of major failure of green camp is most probably embedded deep in the green camp itself, not in the blue camp. Without fixing those internal problems, pan green will not gain any advantage even Ma government and the KMT fare much worse then what have done now.

But how? I am not quite sure, yet.

Taiwanese retested in Kaoshiung

But, the way Kaoshiung City handles Uighur leader Rebiya Kadeer's documentary "The 10 Conditions of Love" in the Kaoshiung Film Festival is a "CSB government in a smaller scale" that provides us a real chance to relive what happened before, as well as to rehearse what is to come in the future. (See Kaoshiung Folds under China's Pressure to Kick Rebiya's Film out of the Festival)

Every single administration head has to face public opinions, and act accordingly. There's no doubt that pro-China power will be very aggressive to give pressure to stop the screening of Kadeer's movie. If we don't play the role of asking what should have been done with at least the same caliber of pressure the pro-china voices asking Chen Chu (陳菊, Mayor of Kaoshiung City, who approves the decision to exclude the screening of the film from the Festival) to stop filming it, then Chen Chu will only face one-sided pressure from the pro-China camp. She will have no choice but follow what "the louder voices" wants. The compromising on the free speech issue will encroach further step by step, as what happened during CSB's era.

Some argue that although it's not an ideal solution by rescheduling the film to a date 3 weeks ahead of the Festival, we won a little by filming it anyway. To me that argument makes absolutely no sense.

If the case happens in a blue district, we could argue that because the administrative power is in blue's hand, we expect that Kadeer's film be prohibited, so we will "win a little" if we get it screened, even it's not screened during the Festival.

But this is in a green district !!! Screening Kadeer's film DURING the Festival is the rightful state we should have been in. Any other approach is a "loss", thus can only be a question of "losing small" or "losing big." It will never be a "win."

Mistaking a "small loss" as a "small win," simply because what the blue camp wants is a "big loss" from us. This sort of forgetting where we should be has been happening again and again in the past.

That's why I emphasize that it is a "fold" to pro-China's power. We all understand that Chen Chu is taking huge pressure from pro-China camp. But, we will go toward very different directions by choosing from the following two choices: trying to explain away the losing move as a winning one, or trying to build up the pressure from the green side to balance the pressure and help Chen Chu make a real winning move.


Kaoshiung Folds under China's Pressure to Kick Rebiya's Film out of the Festival

Kaohsiung City surrenders to China's pressure and removes Uighor leader Rebiya's film "Ten Conditions of Love" from the upcoming Kaohsiung Film Festival starting from Oct, 16th.

They claim that it is rescheduled to 9/22, 9/23 -- 3 weeks ahead of the Festival program. That is, people who attend the Festival will NOT be able to watch it.

In the mean time, Kaoshiung City still tries to convince people that, by screening it anyway, they show their respect and support to the freedom and independent spirit of art. The Director-General of Kaoshiung City's Department of Information, Li-Ming Hsu (新聞處長許立明) claims in the rescheduling announcement that the decision of rejecting Rebiya's film was made based on the principles of (1) protecting the freedom of creativity, (2) upholding the independence of Festival operation and (3)respecting the right of movie viewers (保障創作自由、策展獨立與民眾觀影權利).

I have hard time following his logic, for that if they are based on those principles, shouldn't Rebiya's film be screened in the Festival as originally scheduled ?

He also claims that Rebiya's film is just one of the 79 films they will screen, so they decide to remove the film in order to protect the creative values of the rest 78 films.

For what I know so far, there's nothing at all indicates that any of the other 78 films is in any way jeopardized by this wave of protest against Rebiya's film.

The next day after the rescheduling was announced, the Festival organizer, which is taking order from the Kaoshiung City, issued an apology, claiming that it's determined by Kaoshiung City government so it's out of their hands. Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊), who gained wide support and approval with her successful management in the World Games earlier, emphasizes that the rescheduling is "not to please China, but to cease conflicts."

Haven't we heard this kind of arguments - repeatedly - before, from the blue camp ? Which act of "pleasing China" from the blue camp wasn't coated with one sort of something else one way or anyther ? Did Chen Chu forget that the green camp has been criticizing Ma Ying-jeou and KMT for pleasing China?

So it's OK to please China only if it comes from the green camp ?

The hard lesson to learn by all Taiwanese is that the hypocrisy doesn't have boundary.

What more pathetic is, Kaoshiung City reschedules the screening time to prevent Rebiya's film from showing in the Festival in the hope to "cease the conflict." But those who protested are still protesting and requesting that Kaoshiung to surrender completely by not filming it at all (高市府:放映熱比婭 勿政治詮釋).

Being a city that has been the historical sources of democratic development in Taiwan, Kaoshiung city behaves with unbelievably naiveness by thinking that the pressure from pro-china power can be handled by partial compromise.


Ma Ying-jeou becomes the gustiest by wooing China

Regarding the issue of Ma Ying-jeou being selected as one of 5 gustiest world leaders in the Mental Floss (MF) magazine, I found the Q&A in MF's website here:

1. Who are the five leaders profiled for the “5 Gutsiest World Leaders” cover story?
Lula da Silva, Angela Merkel, Yoweri Museveni, Michelle Bachelet, Ma Ying-jeou.

It is presented as the cover story of the current issue, which requires a subscription to access. But the MF outlines the reasons these people are picked in an abstract here:

The World's Gutsiest Leaders
By Jennifer Drapkin

Whether they're healing a tortured nation, conquering AIDS, uniting Europe, galvanizing Latin America, or wooing China, these heads of state are proving that they have what it takes to change the world.

Ma Ying-jeou is among the gustiest because he is "wooing China."


The Mental Floss article about Ma can be found here. I saw it from this site: Mental_Floss 有關馬英九的報導全文

The article is full of bullshits. Just one example among many: it argues that because of CSB, the trades between China and Taiwan waned, that caused Taiwan's economics to go down, and that caused the Taiwan-USA relationship to go bad. With that kind of nonsense, MF reaches a conclusion that everything is settled after Ma, against all odds, arranged a very difficult marriage between China and Taiwan.

Is it expressed in a sarcastic manner? I don't think so. It is more like a regurgitation of bias against Taiwan we often see in western journalist circle, which only shows how poor the author's knowledge is.


Privilege - the core spirit of Chinese society

J. Michael Cole's article (as usual, worth readying) regarding the critics of China Post on the democracy inspires some discussion about the democracy (or the lack of it) in Chinese society. I am putting my thoughts here (with netters' questions), with the argument that the democracy is impossible in the privilege-based Chinese society.

Chinese society is based on privileges

The most important ingredient in Chinese culture is "privilege." People do whatever they can to get privileged, and the authority uses the privilege to buy loyalty. The entire social structure is built on the give and take of privileges.

That's why the true justice is impossible in Chinese society, because it requires that everybody is equal before the law.

That's why the democracy is denounced by Chinese, especially Chinese intellectuals, because in a democratic society the non-educated share the same political right as the educated.

If you were a member of any of most of Chinese organizations, you would find that they work as much as possible to avoid "rules," because existence of rules means everyone should follow.

Chinese don't like rules, don't like laws, and reject the democracy, because there is no room for privileges.

Understanding this, it won't be hard to see the source of the chaos in Taiwan.

Anonymous: "Any idea of whether such opinion pieces are sincerely based on the author's commitments, or paid advertising for the CCP?"

I can't say if it is paid for, but it doesn't need CCP to pay for this. That's in Chinese culture so they will say it for their own benefits, for free. We will continue to see Chinese intellectuals saying how bad a democracy is.

A democracy comes with laws

Anonymous: "@ Taiwan Echo. you make some interesting points. but if chinese hate rules, wouldn't they like 'chaotic' democracy? if democracy seems to have less structure, then it would allow you more freedom from rules...?"

First of all, "democracy is chaotic" is something deserves review. A democracy comes with laws to ensure that the democracy spirit is established. Without the fair and effective enforcement of laws, the justice cannot prevail, then the democracy will fail. The idea "democracy is chaotic" is thus a distortion. A democracy would turn chaotic only when people want the "freedom" part but disregard the "law" part. When that happens, the apparent democracy is just a formality. Paying attention to the "law" part of a democracy, it won't be hard to observe how often Chinese intellectuals (in Taiwan) undermine the law, and use that to get privileges. That's what brings chaos into the society. The question "won't Chinese love democracy because it's chaotic" is false.

The Confucianism in China is just a facade

Anonymous: "in a way, you seem to be arguing what the CCP has often argued. democracy is a western idea that is necessarily in conflict with chinese (confucian?) culture. Partly relevant is Bell's book 'China's New Confucianism. He argues that chinese will probably prefer some form of confucian rule, may be not democracy. (He also gives an interesting argument why, according to the confucian view on just war, China couldn't attack Taiwan if the latter declares independence.)"

I didn't read the book by Bell, so I can't comment. But I agree that there probably won't be wars if China does follow the Confucianism. I do appreciate the values presented in the teachings of Confucius. However, here is the situation that most westerners fail to see: in Chinese society, the teaching is one thing, the behaviors in the real world is totally different. Powerful people use the Confucianism to teach people (so the students can behave), but their own behaviors violate the teachings in many aspects. Somewhere along the line of Chinese history, Chinese developed hypocrisy as the "living principle" in conjunction with the "teaching principle" of Confucianism. People who learn the Confucianism in their early ages have to grow up behaving the opposite way otherwise they will continue to get suppressed by those who "get privileged by violating the teachings."

Just review the history of foreign encounters of Chinese. There are so many examples that Chinese gain upper hands by breaking their promises. Failing to keep promises is something Confucius criticized heavily. See how Ma Ying-jeou presents himself in a polite and soft-spoken manner. This part fits the teaching. But how many laws has he violated yet he still claims that following laws is his living standard ? How many promises have he broken, which is in complete opposite direction of Confucianism ? Until this time, the western world is still naively believing this biggest hypocrite. The western world just don't get that in Chinese society, "talking sense" is just a tool to gain upper hands.

Again, it all comes down to the privilege. No matter it's law, democracy, or Confucianism (hey, Confucianism is some sort of rules, too), in Chinese-based society, it will be bent and shaped into a tool to ensure that some class of people will hold their privileges. Newer generations will have no choice but become part of it.

Yes, I am arguing - like the CCP is - that the democracy is impossible in Chinese-based society, but obviously based on very different reasons.

vin: "But Chinese and Taiwanese prize stability above all else -- and stability has for so many Chinese centuries has been based on orthodoxy built on privilege."

Right on! That's how Chinese "use" Confucianism, as a tool to ensure privileges. IMO it's not what Confucius really meant.


Dalai Lama accepts green camp's invitation to visit Taiwan

AP reports that Dalai Lama has accepted the invitation to visit Taiwan (in Chinese here):

A joint statement by leaders from seven municipalities recently hit by deadly Typhoon Morakot said the Tibetan spiritual leader planned to be in Taiwan from Aug. 31 to Sept. 4 and would visit storm victims.

This certainly puts Ma regime in a very serious dilemma. I couldn't say it better than what's in the report (highlight mine):

Political scientist George Tsai of Taipei's Chinese Culture University (台北中國文化大學政治學家蔡信安) said the Dalai Lama announcement has put Ma in a bind.

"If the central government allows Dalai Lama to visit, relations with China will be damaged, but if not, the public will think the central government lacks humanitarian concern (for victims)," Tsai said.

It is understandable that Ma regime doesn't know how to respond:

Ma spokesman Wang Yu-chi declined to say whether Taiwan would allow the Dalai Lama to visit. Analysts said such a politically sensitive visit was unlikely, though the Dalai Lama has made three visits to the island over the past 12 years.

There must be some torturing struggle in Ma Ying-jeou's mind now. He has flipped his tongue 180 degree before and after he took the office, from praising Dalai Lama to denouncing him in the fear of angering the communist China. Ma has expressed in many occasions that he considers Taiwan as an area of China. So Ma couldn't possibly approve Dalai Lama's visit without the approval of the central government in his mind - the communist China government that is.

Considering this: China has always portrayed Dalai Lama as a separatist. Whichever country approves for Dalai Lama's visit is heavily condemned by the Chinese government. Allowing Ma to welcome Dalai lama will jeopardize this non-negotiable stand. So it's almost impossible for China to approve this.

However, Ma's credit and approval rate in Taiwan are in their historical low. If Ma denies Dalai Lama's visit again (Ma denied his visit openly last November, even that Dalai Lama never expressed his intention of visiting), it will drag him much deeper into the abyss and make his recovery much more difficult. It might even push Ma to the point of no return when Ma is currently on the brim of losing his political grip. That will result in either Ma being replaced, or his policy of annexing Taiwan being seriously challenged by his colleague. Either way is certainly not in Ma's nor China's best interest.

So China will have to approve Dalai Lama's visit to Taiwan, if they still want to take advantage of what's left of Ma's value. But, such a serious violation of their firm stand against Dalai Lama will have to come with something in return - something very very big, in proportional to what China has to give.

What will Ma Ying-jeou surrender in return for China's cooperation to allow Dalai Lama's visit in order to to save both of them himself?

Will this surrendering indeed save them, or lower people's trust on Ma even more ?

One thing is almost certain: if that kind of deal is made, expect a consensus between them, that China will criticize Ma heavily in order to keep communist China's face. But, that will inevitably raise questions that the two sides across the strait are not that buddy-buddy after all.

No matter how they fare it, Ma and the communist China are in lose-lose situation in this case. Strategically speaking, the green camp fires a perfect shot.

In the mean time, some blue politicians got angered immediately, going so far as to label Dalai Lama a disaster (高市政府:達賴允諾來台安慰災民 藍委:嫌災難不多嗎?):

KMT legislator Chiu Yi fired a broadside at the news, saying that those invited Dalai Lama are brainless. He said that the visit will seriously damage the cross-strait relation and will cause troubles. "Do they think that Taiwan's disaster is not enough?"

Well, it is indeed a disaster --- to Ma regime and his pro-China thugs. Whenever you see pro-blue politicians jump furiously like this, you know that a good move has been made.

Two Michaels just blogged about this:
Michael Turton: DPP invites Dalai Lama to visit disaster areas
J. Michael cole: Let’s bring things back to the center


Ma Ying-jeou in the most crucial hours of Morakot

He wants you to focus on how many were rescued such that you will forget how many lives were lost due to his blunders in the most crucial hours.
~~ Taiwan Echo ~~

The international community always portraits Taiwan's president Ma Ying-jeou as a capable politician who can achieve magics, without acknowledging the fact that every single construction or major policy under Ma's administration during his two terms (8 years) of the Taipei Mayorship ends up a disaster (go google, don't take my word for it).

All those facts of incompetence are hidden from the eyes of western readers by journalists whose reports literally conspire to mislead people by beautifying Ma Ying-jeou with layers of lies.

But now all those are torn apart completely by Ma's unbelievable blunders in response to the torment the Typhoon Morakot (莫拉克颱風) imposed upon innocent Taiwanese people. Finally, western journalists are forced to see with their own eyes how mistaken they were about this Harvard-educated, soft fluent-English-spoken Ma Ying-jeou.

Below are what the real Ma Ying-jeou - not the one painted by the media - did in the beginning of Morakot disaster -- the most crucial time to save lives.

(1) Attending a wedding party when Morakot strikes

Typhoon Morakot reached Hualian, Taiwan, at 11:50pm, August 7th. Taiwan has already suffered damages that day [1.1].

The next day (Aug, 8th), when the flooding got worse in southern Taiwan [1.2], Ma Ying-jeou didn't seem to make any attempt to prepare for any disaster. He started his schedule by attending a wedding party in Taipei in the evening. He spent 1.5 hr in the party, joked around and delivered a speech bragging about how great his China policy is. Only after then did he go to the Cabinet's Drought Disaster Relief Center (DDRC, 中央災害應變中心). What he did in DDRC is unknown, but none about the preparation against natural calamities was reported, let alone any evacuation order.

(2) Interfering rescue by rushing to the front line for the spot-light

When it got even worse the next day (Aug, 9th) [2.1], Ma, without taking any state-level measures, rushed to the front line where people were busy with real rescue efforts.

Receiving the president of a country, presumably the rescue personnel on-site have to stop their work to brief him (or not ?). His visit would crowd the area with his security guards. To ensure his safety, his visit would occupy personnel urgently needed for the rescue, thus reduce the manpower needed for saving lives. In fact, Ma Ying-jeou was stuck in Chiayi (嘉義)by the flooding, which turned himself into one needs to be rescued [2.2]. For that, he might be directly responsible for the death of many people who might otherwise be saved.

More incredible is, Ma Ying-jeou appeared in front of the camera with local KMT candidates wearing their campaign jackets ! What on earth did he want to achieve with that other than showing off in front of the camera ?

When 921 Earthquake happened back in 1999, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) went to the rescue site quickly, too. However, before Lee went to the site, he and his government already initiated a series of state-level rescue measures in 13 minutes after the quake. A command center was established on the rescue site in a couple of hours. Lee convened a national security meeting the same day [2.3]. He went to the disaster site only after he had set up the government rescue mechanism and got himself fully informed of what's going on.

In contrary, Ma quickly rushed to the disaster scene empty-handed. No emergency meeting convened, no state-level rescue mechanism pre-arranged, no one in the government knows what they need to do. As shown in the website screen shot [2.4] of the Executive Yuan's National Disaster Prevention and Protection Commission (行政院災害防救委員會), when lives were lost and villages were swept away in the south on Aug. 9th, Ma's government still believes that there's no serious calamity and the most updated warning of disaster on that page is for an earthquake on Aug. 3rd !

Try imagining this after the hurricane Katrina: at the time the rescuing attempt started, USA's former president G.W. Bush flight from DC to the sites, putting himself in the center of rescue, shaking hands with people and posing in front of the spot-light to be interviewed by the media -- and all are done without any attempt of national coordination. Imagine that, and ask what would you think about Bush in this imagined scenario.

By showing up in the rescue site without any relief plan, Ma Ying-jeou shows us not only how spot-light-hungry he is, but also that he has no idea what a president's duty is..

As a result, his rushing to the front line achieved nothing other than endangering lives of many. The only thing guaranteed is that the image of him shaking hands with people on the rescue site gets shown on the front pages of news, as though the country will be ok as long as he looks good in the news.

(3) Messing up the rescue plan by giving direct orders

The rising waters at where Ma visited could get people drowned right at the time he was visiting, which won't look good in the news at all. Ignoring all procedures that might be crucial for the best allocation of limited resources, Ma used his cell phone to make a direct call to Taipei and ordered Taipei government to deliver pumps to Chiayi immediately [3.1],[3.2].

Did he know who knows better where the pumps should be delivered, who knows the environment better, what type of pumps should be used in that environment, what other devices and personnel are needed for that mission, where else might be in much more urgent need of pumps, and how long does it take for the pumps from Taipei to be delivered?

Furthermore, as the president, does he know that he is the head of all military forces so he can instruct the army to help the rescue mission -- the army of all specialties (including the marine and special operation forces) that already stationed in Kaohsiung (高雄), Chishan (旗山), Linyuan (林園), Yanchao (燕巢), Gangshan (岡山), Tainan (台南) -- all in very close vicinity of Chiayi? Did he have any scintilla of idea what is available in southern part of Taiwan at all?

All those close military units were left alone when he tried to order pumps far from Taipei with a direct phone call. Does he has to perform in front of the camera as though he was the one doing something, and no one else is doing anything ? It did make it easier for him to play the blaming games to cover his incompetence, didn't it ?

With his poor knowledge about available resources and his poor judgment by giving direct orders without knowledge of the overall situation, Ma messed up the rescue and might have jeopardized lives of more citizens.

(4) Leading the country toward the game of finger-pointing

When Ma and his government didn't do any preventive preparations, didn't warn the victims about how serious it could be, didn't issue any evacuation order to the disaster area, didn't keep track of what damages already being done and what misery people are already suffering, and Ma himself went to a wedding party when people were about to lose their own or family's lives (some lost entire family of 15 or more), Ma Ying-jeou has the audacity to show up in front of the camera to pin the fault on the suffering victims!

What kind of cruelty is hidden behind the facade of the apparant eloquent gestures and a mouthful of fluent English ?

He also blames The Central Weather Bureau (中央氣象局) for not being able to make precise prediction, without the knowledge that the weather prediction is extremely difficult, especially the rain level.

He also blames local governments for no disaster prevention constructions, without acknowledging that the disaster relief budgets were often cut by the Legislative Yuan in which his KMT members always has the majority.

He even blames the weather, saying that the rescue is delayed by the disaster that damaged the roads, forgetting that human can still walk without roads. In fact, there were at least several members of special operations force took a leave from their station, went back to the disaster area to rescue their families. They had to take a leave because no one in Ma Ying-jeou's administration ordered them to do anything when lives of their families were in danger. They were able to rescue people by themselves, but Ma Ying-jeou wants you to believe that it's the weather that makes military rescue impossible.

Even after days of heavy criticism from international media, in an interview by CNN, Ma YJ finally said he will take full responsibility. But he followed immediately with what he means by taking responsibility -- punishing others [4.1]. His definition of taking the responsibility is to blame all wrongs on others but himself, as though that people should have got everything done and ready for him to sit there enjoying the life of an emperor worry-free. Those who didn't make sure that happens should take all the blames.

(5) He doesn't know what to do in a disaster relief meeting

When the 921 earthquake stroke in 1999, former president Lee Tenghui convened the first high-level national security meeting (國安高層會議) to lay out his rescue plan on the first day, and had the second meeting 2 days later.

Why did it take Ma 7 days to convene such a meeting? We will never know, but what he did in the first meeting might shed some light.

Taiwan has accumulated experiences of disaster rescue channel and established pretty good disaster response mechanism during the past decades. But when a disaster of this scale happens, often a system like that is not enough. Foreign aid will flow in, which might involve diplomatic issues beyond a domestic rescue channel can handle. It also involves the deployment of military personnel and resources, which requires an assessment of the balance between rescuing victims and defending the country. The re-distribution of reserved resources is way beyond the authority of a routine rescue system.

This is when a national security meeting should step in. By convening such a meeting, the president should lay the foundation to coordinate all those different resources and channel them to the rescue system. He should monitor and give instructions on how the routine rescue system, the foreign aids, the military reserves, the local and central governments should coordinate. And he should play that role of watching all channels of forces until all problems are solved.

Unfortunately, none of the above was conducted by Ma Ying-jeou in his 7-day-late meeting [5.1]. Nothing on the coordination on the national level that only the president can do is discussed or planned (for example, how to handle foreign aids is completely missing in the meeting). Instead, Ma's speech is full of impractical wishful thinking like "I hope...", "... very important", "we should ...", "we must ...". Other than that, he issues instructions that the head of rescue system can issue, which includes the only significant instruction he gave in the meeting -- mobilizing the students of police academics.

Among all mumbo jumbo, he did remember to start the speech by bragging how many people his government rescued by emphasizing that it's the record high. In fact, he keeps mentioning this in every chance he got, as though he has done a cherity service to the victims so poeple should not have complained. This kind of bragging is surely not you want to hear in a meeting like that.

Now we see why the meeting was delayed --- he has no idea at all what he should do with such a meeting !!! Such a disaster-handling meeting requires him to behave like a commander who makes new problem-solving decisions but not just regurgitating what he memorized. This is something far beyond his ability, and his fear of taking on it shows that he knows it by heart.

Ma Ying-jeou's fear of taking up the responsibility doesn't stop there. After the meeting, he refused to take the command. He handed over all responsibilities to the rescue team. The government claims that what is left will now all count on the routine rescue system, so Ma will retreat behind the first line of rescue and reconstruction, leaving himself completely out of future responsibilities [5.2].

So what is left for Ma Ying-jeou to be responsible for? Full time blame hunter to hunt down those who did nothing because Ma never gave any order?

Ma Ying-jeou has been either a government official or people's elected all his adult life, yet his extremely poor knowledge on the duty of a government's job and his complete lack of sense of responsibility would guarantee that there's a long long way of future suffering for Taiwanese to endure.

The above is a retrospect to part of Ma Ying-jeou's blunders in the most crucial hours of Morakot disaster. His unprecedented incompetence followed by the act of 100% responsibility shirking stun those who thought Ma Ying-jeou was a savior of Taiwan. Even KMT high-level feels something is seriously wrong --- after all, they just handed this incompetent pretty-face camera boy the absolute power by electing him the KMT's chairman.

There are a lot more unbelievable blunders happened and are happening (just google !), so I'll stop here for now. For Ma Ying-jeou, he might be burning his scarce brain cells calculating how to shirk all responsibilities by finger-pointing and by bragging what record he had achieved to make people think that it's a previlige to have him as the president.

For most Taiwanese, however, judging from the fact that Ma failed to get a single collapsed building rebuilt in 7 years (see my post in 2006, Hopeless quake victims under Ma Ying-Jeou's lead), the suffering has just begun.



報載馬英九昨天下令台北縣長周錫瑋到南部救災 (馬總統指示 周錫瑋率車隊南縣救災 )。這個動作讓人震驚。



















8月9日周錫瑋因為台北縣 4個鄉鎮市長在颱風來前「擅離職守」而震怒並打算懲處;
8月9日報載周錫瑋因為颱風要坐鎮北縣而取消 6日的香港之行,改由副秘書長廖榮清代打;



陳致中等人,在之前與檢方達成「認罪協商」的決議 ── 認罪並當證人指控其他被告以換取較輕刑罰。檢調在利用他們的認罪來指控其他人(主要是陳水扁)之後,拒絕給予較輕的刑罰:

『台北地院審理扁案,昨傳喚要求認罪協商的陳致中夫婦、吳景茂夫婦及蔡銘杰、郭銓慶六被告,六人均認罪,但特偵組以被告涉洗錢,犯罪情節重大,另有國泰世華七億四千萬元等洗錢案仍在偵查中,拒絕六名被告認罪協商。』陳致中等六被告 認罪協商全遭拒


在美國,所謂的 make a deal ,是指被告與檢方達成協議而認罪,協議內容一定包括兩個部分:(1)被告認罪,有時包括自願擔任污點證人指證其他被告;(2)檢方保證較輕的刑期。



因此,這樣的例子,應該叫做「認罪求饒」── 認罪了之後,被告已經完全沒有籌碼,所以唯一能做的,就是叩頭求饒,跪求檢調法外開恩。






~~ Echo ~~

馬英九政權上個禮拜透過 ECFA 漫畫說帖中的侮辱性人物描述公然以政府公權力挑撥族群對立,分化台灣人(ECFA 漫畫說帖:一個撕裂社會、製造族群對立的文宣但是這次,就讓我爽爽快快地幹個徹底吧!)。對此,一個朋友提到:

這倒引發了我一個構想, 民進黨何不藉此高雄世運的成功來反宣傳一哥與發嫂? 馬統政府故意把"高級外省人"的"高級又有品的形象"加諸在苗栗客籍的一嫂身上, 我們何不把這"高級"的一嫂宣傳成一個失敗主義與內心自卑的一嫂? "高級"的假象只是穿在外面偽裝來的, 事實上, 就是一個失敗主義者, 騎牆派, 投機主義者, 沒有國家觀念的機會主義者? 反之, 發福的發哥卻是一個務實, 築夢, 追夢, 愛鄉, 愛土, 不畏強權有正義感的本土台灣人?














從最近的民調資料以及相關資訊可以揣摩:台灣人民當初選馬英九,並不是他們贊成統一,而是馬英九包裝與欺瞞的技巧奏效,讓他們相信馬英九可以帶給他們一個繁榮的和諧的 ── 而且有別於中國 ── 的社會。

當馬英九的所有承諾都被他的行動證實是謊言的時候,民眾不會 (如許多台派知識份子認定的) 茫然所知;即使口中不願意承認,他們會看到自己被欺騙,而開始尋找能夠帶給他們希望、讓他們放心信任的新目標。







~ Plurker 不來恩 @ here ~

馬政權的經濟部長尹啟銘對他主導的充滿岐視的 ECFA 漫畫說帖 (見「ECFA 漫畫說帖:一個撕裂社會、製造族群對立的文宣」)這樣說:


















ECFA 漫畫說帖:一個撕裂社會、製造族群對立的文宣

為了強行推銷連馬政府官員自己都不知道內容是什麼的 ECFA,經濟部經過專家學者的設計,推出了 ECFA 說帖的四格漫畫,主要是兩位主角一哥與發嫂的對話。經濟部還特別為了這兩位代言漫畫人物的身份做了簡介:

反對 ECFA 的一哥:贊成 ECFA 的發嫂:
職業:傳統製造業業務 貿易公司主管
學歷:五專畢 大學畢,現於 EMBA 進修中
操台灣國語,對人生得過且過,是只會說大話的人。對 ECFA 完全不瞭解,擔心兩岸簽訂 ECFA 後,可能會因公司面臨營運困難而被裁員。已婚職業婦女,個性積極,精通國台英日語,總以客觀角度看待事物,具求知精神及理財觀念。對 ECFA 議題相當瞭解。


首先,反不反對 ECFA, 跟籍貫有什麼關係?





(1)ECFA 的對立,發生於「本省人」之間;

在這種強烈暗示性文宣中,台灣人被分化高級、低級成兩派,除了將反對 ECFA 的那一派貼標籤成「低級」外,也加深了台灣人內部族群之間的對立,埋下了「分化台灣人」的種子。

用說帖來解釋政策,就針對 ECFA 的內容與影響來說就可以,根本不需要有任何跟政策無關的人格特質、籍貫學歷的描述。但是馬政權卻一定要利用這個機會,以「高級低級、北部南部」等強烈地域色彩與對比的人格特性賦予在一哥與發嫂的身上,利用此機會羞辱那些反對 ECFA 的人,並趁機分化台灣人、撕裂台灣社會。



「郭冠英事件」畢竟是個人言行,但這個卡通卻是政府使用公權力公然對台灣人羞辱。照理講,這個漫畫羞辱台灣人的事情,應該比郭冠英事件要嚴重百倍千倍才是。台灣知識份子的靜默,似乎顯示對政治事件嚴重程度的敏感度不夠精確 ─ 好像那些當面使用侮辱性辱罵言語的個人,就應該發動所有台灣人的動能將之消滅;但使用隱性言語的暗示性醜化文宣,就好像不痛不癢無所謂。




ECFA說帖 民黨批歧視台南人


How to insult a people(如何羞辱一個族群)
ECFA Cartoons - bigotry as a tool of persuasion
(ECFA 卡通 ─ 以偏見為工具的說帖)

MOEA Exploits Ethnic Stereotypes to sell ECFA
( 經濟部利用族群成見來推銷 ECFA)

KMT 'High class mainlanders' deliver another insult to Taiwanese

More on the ECFA Cartoons: Guest Post
(客座文章:關於 ECFA 卡通的更多討論)

DPP gives ministry three days to pull 'racist' comic
(DPP 給經濟部三天時間撤回族群岐視的卡通)


不要把人民當敵人 ─ 我看「藍綠對決」












「藍綠對決」的問題就在這裡 ── 如果泛綠把泛藍當成對決的敵人,那要如何讓他們變成泛綠的戰友?如何使他們變成「抵制專制政權」的幫手?






(Note: English version of this article with similar content: here )

台北地方法院昨天下令第三次延長已經被非法羈押了 227 天的前總統陳水扁的羈押,時間由 7 月 26 日開始到 9 月25日共兩個月。(北院認定 干擾審判 扁三度延押)






在今年一月底,大法官已經對「對看守所羈押人犯會客進行錄音」認定為違憲 (大法官:對羈押禁見被告律見時錄音違憲):


今年 4 月 16日,立法院初審通過羈押法部分條文修正草案 (台立院初審 被告會見律師不得錄音錄影):


4月28日立法院三讀通過 (台羈押法三讀 看守所不得錄影錄音):



很明顯地,蔡守訓法官跟台北地方法院完全將司法踩在角底下 ── 不但違法的錄音行為沒有中斷,而且竟然還膽敢將這些違法的錄音拿來做為迫害陳前總統的根據。




南方論壇一位網友 vedo 在討論欄(目無法紀的蔡守訓與台北地院)中認為延押裁決並不違法:

1. 自今年5月1日起,羈押中的被告與律師見面時,監所將不得再予錄音、監聽,僅可以派員觀看,看不能聽聞,即「監看不與聞」;但大法官會議並未禁止對被告與親友見面時錄音。

2. 針對"對受羈押被告與辯護人接見時監聽、錄音所獲得之資訊,得以作為偵查或審判上認定被告本案犯罪事實之證據..." 在此範圍內係已解釋為妨害被告防禦權之行使,且牴觸憲法保障訴訟權之規定。但法院之延押庭所作出的是延押"裁定書",既非和檢察官之偵查有關,也不是法官對犯罪事實之認定而於審判上所作出的"審判書"。



vedo 網友指出大法官釋字第654號並無限制羈押單位針對被羈押人與其親友會面之對話進行錄音。




If the content of the speeches, conducts, and sent and received mails of a defendant can provide information for criminal investigation and trial, they shall be reported to public prosecutor or district court.



至於 vedo 提到的第二點,個人認為「錄音違憲」的判決與立法院修改羈押法之精神,在於制止檢方利用公權力阻止、妨礙被羈押人為自己辯護的權力與機會。釋憲與修法兩者都沒有規定這樣的精神只限於「審判」,而「羈押」本身的原因之一當然是為了檢方「利於偵查」,要不然何必羈押。


基於上述理由,個人認為 vedo 的解釋有缺陷,蔡守訓法官與台北地方法院的行為確為違法。

Lawless Taipei District Court extends Chen's detention based on illegal taping


Taipei District Court issues an order to extend the former president Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) detention the 3rd time, beginning from 7/26 to 9/25, adding 2 more months on top of the already lengthy detention of 227 days. (北院認定 干擾審判 扁三度延押)

I want to highlight one of the brazen law encroachments made by the collegiate bench and the presiding Judge Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓).

The main reason for this detention extension is that they argue Chen instructs his staff to communicate with people outside to help him:


The collegiate bench uses the transcript of the recorded conversations (between Chen and his staff when Chen's staff visited him in the detention center) to argue that, although Chen is detained, he continuously meets and instructs his staff Liu Dao (spelling?) to use outsiders to help him.

The collegiate bench cited the conversations as evidence that Chen is asking outsiders to help him, which is considered - by Tsai and the collegiate bench in Taipei District Court - 'interfering with the justice' and thus the main reason for the extended detention.

Now, take a deep deep deep breath ---

The recording of detainees' meeting with their guests is declared illegal (i.e., it is against the Constitution) by the Grand Justices in January this year, and an order is issued to stop the recording after May 1st !

It is obvious that Judge Tsai and his collegiate bench completely ignore the order -- not only the recording continues, but also the content of illegal taping is used against Chen now !!!

Tsai and Taipei District Court have once again put their agenda above the Constitution and prove that the prosecution of Chen is political oriented and no boundary -- even the Constitution -- will be followed.

Update, seriously:

I took down this post for a couple of hours, because one netter vedo has counter arguments against my points (here, in Chinese though), and I want to make sure I get it right. To be short, vedo argues that although the decision of the Grand Justices ( 大法官釋字第654號 ) says that recording the detainee's meeting with defense lawyers is illegal, the decision doesn't forbid the recording between detainees and any one other than the defense lawyer. Thus recording of conversation between Chen and his staff is legal.

He missed the point that in the decision, the Grand Justices says that the Art.28 of the (original) Detention Act is illegal. The Detention Act was later revised on April, 28th to delete that article. The content of deleted Art. 28:

If the content of the speeches, conducts, and sent and received mails of a defendant can provide information for criminal investigation and trial, they shall be reported to public prosecutor or district court.

That is, what is deemed illegal doesn't limit to the conversations between the detainee and the defense lawyer.

That is, not only the conversations a detainee has during a meeting with any guests are protected, but also, anything the detainee says and writes in the detention center (not in a meeting) is under protection of the law and shouldn't be used against him/her.


Brief summary of political persecution against Chen Shui-bian

The linked article below (in Chinese) briefly summarizes the judiciary injustice against CSB.


The judiciary injustice against CSB has been repeatedly raised in English blogs and by international scholars since the end of last year.

But in Taiwan, even pan green paid little or no attention at all to it, not to mention blue supporters. Even when the DPP chairwoman Tsai decides to make launch to fight for CSB's human right lately, her appeal mentions only the extended detention with a term of "judiciary injustice".

Without laying out the "sign of persecution in almost every single step" in CSB's case, the focus on the extended detention could easily be mistaken or distorted into an attempt to interfere the law practice.

It is therefore critical for articles like the linked one being circulated more often and more widely.


The trigger of Uyghur-Han Clash in Xinjiang-- Chinese Killing Uyghurs in Guangdong

A deadly ethnic clash occurred on July 5th in Xinjiang, China, between Uyghurs and Han Chinese when the Chinese government launched an armed suppression against originally peaceful protest, resulting in 156 deaths (according to the China government).

The tension between Uyghurs and Hans have been high for decades. The trigger of the current protest is another ethnic clash occurred earlier far away in Guangdong, where a rumor is posted about six Xinjiang guys raped a girl ('No Rapes' in Riot Town),

Authorities in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong have said they found no evidence that ethnic minority Uyghur laborers had raped two Chinese girls, a rumor they blamed for last week's ethnic fighting at a toy factory in Shaoguan city.

According to official media reports, police also detained a former worker at the city's Xuri toy factory for posting the rumor on the Internet in the first place.

"Six Xinjiang boys raped two innocent girls at the Xuri Toy Factory," ran the text of the posting, the official Xinhua news agency reported, quoting a Shaoguan municipal spokesman.

Outraged by what the post says, the Chinese in Guangdong started a deadly ethnic cleansing against Uyghurs in a toy factory in Shaoguan city, Guangdong. The following horrifying video is apparently shot by Chinese witnesses inside the factory. It was posted on Sohu.com, taken down, and republished several times. Take a look on how hundred of enraged Chinese beat several unarmed Uyghurs to death:

The horrifying scene shows that several people running for life through an narrow passage, chased by people holding sticks of unidentifiable materials. They eventually took their last breaths after being beaten repeatedly by the angry crowd.

Starting from 1'30", you can hear those who shot the video commented in Chinese:

"How come is he/she not dead yet? Fuck!"

"Weird if he/she isn't dead."

"Is that one a female?"

Following the question, the camera points to a scene where 8~9 people holding sticks and hammering down on a non-responsive person. A lifeless body left on the ground when the crowd dispersed.

"This one kneels down ..."

"Another one over there"

"Great! Great!"

Then in shouting,

"Fuck him/her dead !"

"肏他媽的屄, 敢摔倒 !"
"Fuck his/her mohter's cunt, he/she dares to fall down !"

The narrow passage where the killings occurred is between two tall buildings that look like apartments. It appears that residents of both buildings stood in their balconies watching the killings, making uproars, shooting the video as though they were watching a gladiator killing show in ancient Rome, when unarmed people in the passage run for their lives. A vivid demonstration of what the term "terrorism" defines.

Remember that the Rome was not built in one day. Neither is the tension between Uyghurs and Han Chinese. It started in 1949 with China's invasion to occupy the East Turkestan, followed by decades of systematic suppression of Uyghur culture and history by the China government. The language, building, books of Uyghur origin are systematically destroyed. Millions of Han Chinese were forced by the government to migrate into Xinjiang, resulting in effective dilution of Uyghur population in the area, the exact same way the Chinese government applied to dilute Tibetans in Tibet!

The Chinese government took a completely new and refined approach in terms of the media control to define the incident as nothing but a riot initiated by Uyghurs. They (1) announced the news and revealed the photo and footages before the news has a chance to spread; (2) block all internet connections in/out of the area; (3) had press conference and allowed journalists to visit in confined and well guarded places. It seems that the only thing not new is to blame it on the victim group.

J. Michael Cole, a columnist, editorialist and editor at Taipei Times, in his excellent blog post writes - among other things - about the CCP propaganda machine (Xinjiang finally explodes, Taipei remains silent) .

More links to share about Uyghurs and East Turkestan:
  1. First of all, brief Q&As about Uyghurs and Xinjiang:

    Q&A: Troubles in Xinjiang
    Q&A: China's restive Uighurs

  2. For how China is annihilating the entire culture of Uyghur, watch the short video clips:

    Uighurs' struggle to retain cultural identity -...
    China's 'Go West' policy fuels ethnic tensions ...

    and listen to the desperate call by Alim Seytoff, spokesperson for the World Uyghur Congress, Vice-President of Uyghur-American Association and director of the Uyghur Human Rights Project, in a radio interview (Tune in: Online radio show on Uighur unrest in China);

  3. Uyghur leader in exile, Rebiya Kadeer, who is seen by some as the Dalai Lama of Uyghur, also the one the China government blames this incident to, speaks out:

  4. Check out Al Jazeera, a prominent Muslim news media. Some of their coverages on Uyghur:

  5. Another video clip:

  6. Uighurs Provoke Beijing by Michael Turton;
  7. Reports from the West from The China Beat;

The bloody suppression by the China government invites condemnations from the international community, which certainly doesn't include Ma Ying-jeou's regime that considers Taiwan is just a part of China.

The ethnic clash also triggers retaliation of Han Chinese. As this report from the Liberty Time (漢、維再爆衝突 新疆緊繃) indicates, Han Chinese in China go on the street seeking Uyghurs to beat.

From what is known, I believe larger scale and more widely spread retaliations from both sides are likely to happen, or probably already happened but covered under the tightly information control of China government.

A lot more information is available on the net. I would like to end this article with this:

What is happening now in Xinjiang happened before in Taiwan in the 228 massacre back in 1947 when many Taiwanese were killed by the occupying Chinese Nationalist (KMT), and is happening now in Tibet by the occupying Chinese Communist Party. The similarities are:

1) Chinese forces invade and take over the land;
2) Chinese forces make use of the resources, squeeze the locals to the brim of famine and death;
4) Local cultures were systematically annihilated;
5) Locals will either be dead anyway, or live like animals, so the revolution is their only way out;
6) Massacre by the Chinese follows, at the same time blaming the victims;
7) Massive government-forced migration of Han Chinese into the locals to dilute the population of local ethic population. This is the only feature that hasn't happened in Taiwan. Yet.

This process has happened before, is happening now, and will continue to happen in the future. Observing how the current Ma Ying-jeou Regime annexes Taiwan to China, it's very likely that Taiwan will experience it the 2nd time in a short span of less than a hundred years. With that, Taiwan will make another mark in human history -- following the mark of peaceful democracy progress Taiwan had earned -- as the first country to rush herself into the slavery via the path of democracy.



行政院通過了台南縣市合併升格的提案(補考通過 台南升格過關)。









Flip-flopper Ma Ying-jeou Changes Tongue on his Cross-Strait Promise

Twisting the meaning of a promise is the way a flip-flopper keeps promises.
~~ Taiwan Echo ~~

Common Wealth Magazine (天下雜誌) had an interview (in Chinese) with Mr. Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on June, 11th, the first interview of Ma after Ma flip-flops on his pre-election promise of not campaigning for the KMT Chairman.

During the interview, Mr. Ma broke another promise on his intention regarding the cross-strait relationship, one that is much more crucial to Taiwan's future.

It is the 不統不獨不武 that Mr. Ma promised to the people of Taiwan before the election. The promise is translated to English by Ma's regime as:

No unification, No independence and No use of force

(See the regime's website for English translation of phrases.)

The words clearly mean "don't push for" or "don't want." It is more so in Chinese language, since the character "統" usually means an "action" (as a verb, like "unify") instead of "state of fact" (as a noun, like "unification"). The character "不" also bares the meaning of determination, means "I don't" or "I won't", but not a simple "no" as shown in English.

So a more precise translation of 不統不獨不武 should have been:

I won't push for unification, I won't push for independent, I won't use force

That's the promise he made at a time he needed trust of Taiwanese to give him the power.

Now, during the above-mentioned interview, Mr. Ma made a drastic twist (see also: 馬英九對統一議題表態引發爭議) on his own words (highlight by me):


My 不統不獨不武 was supported by 80% of the people. The 不統 doesn't mean to exclude the option of "unification." It means that in my term of 8-year presidency we don't discuss the unification, because it's impossible to have an answer (on the unification) in these 8 years, so the discussion on this subject is insignificant.

After convincing most of Taiwanese that he won't push for the unification, he now twists the word into "no discussion." The alarming signal of his twist:

1) Ma's regime can push for the unification between Taiwan and China. As long as no discussion is made, his promise will be kept;

2) It's ok for Ma's regime to push for the unification without discussion with any one;

3) To make sure that his twisted promise is kept, any "discussion" of Ma's attempt of pushing the unification might be suppressed by Ma's regime.

This is a huge, huge turn of direction in terms of Ma Regime's cross-strait announcement. After twisting the meaning of his promise, Mr. Ma can now push the annexation of Taiwan to China and still tell people that his promise is kept.

Lastly, as side note, Mr. Ma has again displayed how he puts himself above the Constitution. In every one of his interviews that I know of, this person keeps mentioning that his term of presidency is 8 years, while Taiwanese only gave him 4-year of presidency, and most importantly, the time span of a president is defined as 4 years in the Constitution.

The interview covers many other subjects that I don't have time to share here.

Update: an English version of Mr. Ma's interview is found here.

Update2: a-gu's view and readers' comments on Mr. Ma's interview : Fallout from Ma interview: probably zero.


令人困惑的 ECFA 公投主題

兩個禮拜前報紙以這樣的標題「拒絕ECFA公投連署517開跑」報導民進黨將在517開始推動 ECFA 公投。該標題將「拒絕ECFA」與「公投連署」整個連在一起,讀起來就像是民進黨在推動「拒絕ECFA公投」的連署。

我在一個網群提到這點。有朋友指出這是媒體下標題時沒有加標點,不是民進黨的問題,應該是「拒絕ECFA,公投連署517開跑」。同時網友妙子寄給我一份 PDF 檔的公投連署書,顯示公投的題目是:『你是否同意政府與中國簽訂兩岸經濟合作架構協議(ECFA)』。

今天看到民進黨開始大力推動的「ECFA就是要公投」連署的幾個網站(ECFA 就是要公投, 官方公投連署的網頁, 連署書 pdf 檔),公投題目竟然變成:


這個主題本身問題重重。首先,這是一個「決定 ECFA 要不要公投」的公投提案。也就是說,先公投要不要公投,然後如果通過,再來公投一次決定要不要 ECFA。(參考 Jason Cox (a-gu) 這篇文章的英文討論)

一個 ECFA 要搞兩次公投,民進黨到底在想什麼?

其次,請注意,這是針對「台灣與中國簽訂之ECFA」,而主題裡面沒有任何「事先」或「先經過」的字眼。也就是說,這是一個針對「台灣與中國已經簽署的 ECFA」來進行的要不要公投的公投。(參考:看不懂 ECFA 公投廣告

要針對 ECFA 公投,為什麼不要求「事先公投」呢?這種放馬後砲的公投,參與率會高嗎?

我不明白民進黨為什麼擠出這樣的公投主題。馬政權強要台灣人接受連國民黨自己都不清不楚的 ECFA,人民早已經搞得暈頭暈腦,現在民進黨要反 ECFA,卻訂出這樣模糊不清、令人困惑而且光看就覺得會失敗的主題,這公投要讓人民如何投起?看來這兩個黨還真是寶一對。

在 Taiwan Matters,一個集體的英文部落格,網友 Άλισον 在其最新文章中提供了一個比較周全的公投主題。我將之稍微修改(將「國民黨」改成「馬政權」),以做為我對 ECFA 公投主題的建議:


Yes or No: Do you agree that the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) Ma Ying-jeou government intends to sign with China should be presented first to the citizens of Taiwan for discussion and approval or else be invalidated?


1. 事先審核,不是事後認證;
2. 沒有「先公投一次決定要不要公投」的含意。
3. 人民有討論的權利(本來就應該有!),而不只是單純的「全盤接受」或「全盤否決」;





而且該陳述又引出另一個問題。請注意文章題目『以ECFA公投爭取完整的直接民權』。所以。。。民進黨辦 ECFA 的公投,目標並不是在 ECFA,而是拿 ECFA 當工具,來爭取直接民權?




搞了半天,原來民進黨推動 ECFA 公投只是拿來做為一個工具!這樣的一個公投理由,是不是等於放棄那些只關注 ECFA,不去注意「公投本身」的民眾?

直接集中火力在 ECFA 上,並跟民眾陳述「ECFA 有害台灣」就是要公投的原因,有那麼難嗎?


本文主要是以邏輯的角度探討這次公投主題設計的缺失。網友 Powercat 的一篇文章 評民進黨 ECFA 公投案以公投策略的角度來探討民進黨這次 ECFA 公投主題:

筆者以為,如果今天命題為「你是否同意台灣與中國簽定經濟合作架構協議(ECFA)?」 或者為「你是否同意馬政府可在未經立法院審查的情況下,與中國簽定之經濟合作架構協議(ECFA)?」則不管泛藍投反對或拒領公投票,都會讓結果變成反對,也就是說,最終民意的表現為「我不同意台灣與中國簽定經濟合作架構協議(ECFA)。」「我不同意馬政府可在未經立法院審查及公民投票的情況下,與中國簽定之經濟合作架構協議(ECFA)。」這樣不是更有機會達成公投的目的?

Powercat 的看法與筆者一樣,這次公投「已經可以預見該活動最終必定會以失敗收場」。


Next Time When Mr. Ma Ying-jeou Promises Something ...

To a flip-flopping politician, a promise is a road to power.
It ends where the power starts. ~~ Taiwan Echo ~~

Taiwan President (who presents himself as a Mr. in front of China) Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九先生) announced yesterday his intention to campaign for the chairman of the ruling party KMT. (昔主張總統不得兼主席// 馬:兼黨主席 義無反顧 )

Mr. Ma Ying-jeou was elected Taiwan President in March, 2008. Before then, in October of 2007 when he needed people's votes to grab the power, he promised to the public that he will never take the position of KMT chairman no matter what happens (馬上吳下 馬今宣布選黨魁):


KMT's presidential candidate, Ma Ying-jeou, states clearly today, that although KMT doesn't have the rule to regulate if a person can take both the government president seat and KMT chairman concurrently, he will never campaign for the party chairman under any circumstance if he is elected the president. He says that the duty of a president require full focus on the state administration.

He elaborated his promise further (馬英九:專心國政 若當總統絕不兼黨主席):

When a journalist asked Ma if he will take KMT chairman concurrently after he is elected president. Ma says, "Of course not! Why on earth would I chair KMT concurrently?" Ma mentioned that KMT chairman has to be voted by party members but not be taken by the president. Ma also emphasized that the idea of "separation of party and government" is to stress that the party and government focuses on separate responsibilities, so certainly a president should focus on the state administration.

Ma says, although KMT doesn't have a rule to regulate, for example, if a KMT chairman is elected the president, he is allowed to serve the full term of chairman or resign. But no matter under what situations, he will never chair KMT concurrently.

The promise was made at a time when he needed the public to entrust him with people's power, now all gone in the wind after he got the power in hand.

Is this sort of promise-breaking new to this person ?

Check out how he flip-flops before and after he grabs the power on the issues like "condemning Tiananmen mascara", "praise Dalai Lama" ... etc.

Chinese has a idiom:

When one can't keep his promises, we can't expect him be capable of doing anything.

Considering himself who upholds the traditional, legitimate Chinese culture, Mr. Ma Ying-jeou's behavior simply proves otherwise.

Next time, when you hear this person promise you something, you should know what to expect.


In an interview of Mr. Ma on 6/11/09:

With his candidacy Ma broke his earlier promise not to serve concurrently as president and KMT chairman.