From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tom Li)
Subject: Re: A thought on Mainlanders' Attitude
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:47:30 GMT


In article <lXg=x_+@engin.umich.edu>, changhp@engin.umich.edu (Hsiou-Ping Chang) writes...
> 
>	As long as they didn't use violence or other illegal means,
>I don't see how they violate the freedom of press. On the contrary, KMT refuses
>to let go electronic media is a violation of the Constitution.

I agree, for fairness, KMT's monopoly of electronic media should be ended. 
But those TIers asked the boycott to the United Daily which also violates 
freedom of press. They not only boycotted this newspaper but also labelled 
it as "Taiwan edition of People's Daily"... (there is pending law-suit now). 
You dont boycott the newspaper just because certain news you dont like is 
printed. There are a couple of Taiwan's newspapers pro-TI do you think KMT 
should ask people boycott these newspapers? I dont think so, do you?

>> My impression nowadays many people in Taiwan including governmant officials
>> are afraid of criticizing some TIers' behavior to avoid be labelled 
>> as "Taiwanese Traitor" or other naming calling. What kind of society it
> 
>	I am not convinced by your claim unless you have concrete facts.

Two examples of TI's "white terrorism":

Last year ex-Taiwan governor Chu Chuan-Hwan supported indirect Presidental
election, a group of TIers went to his hometown and surrounded his house 
shouting "Taiwanese Traitor". 

During the recent Legislative election, Hau and several veteran KMTers were 
labelled as "Betraying Taiwan Group" because of their anti-TI position. 
Pro-unification candidates were labelled as "Wu San-Guei" (a General of Ming 
dynasty who led Ching entering Beijing).

>The problem I have is that our government claims we have sovereignty over
>China.  This is not true.  People have to realize once we unify with China,
>the huge population difference will make Taiwan a local government.
>Unless China is as democratic as US, I am afraid people of Taiwan
>won't be able to persuit their welfare as easily as they are now. 

Last August, the National Unification Council has refined the meaning of 
"China" and made the following statement:

"The unification will come only when "China" becomes a free, democratic, and 
wealth-balanced nation. At present, Republic of China has sovereignty over 
Taiwan and several small islands only and PRC has sovereignty over the 
Mainland only."

I hope the above statement can relieve your concerns. 

>Your previous mentioning of Confederal Chinas, in my opinion, is another form
>of TI.  In that case, I wouldn't concern about the name at all and should
>welcome it.  On the other hand, our current government structure is based
>on the claim that ROC represents the whole China.  It is not very practical
>(doesn't meet the "pragmatic" criterion) and somehow hinder our progress.

Whether "Confederal Chinas" implied TI is not important but what can serve 
Taiwan best is the most important. People also said KMT is B-type TI. Maybe. 

Gee, do I sound like a TIer? :) I think my position is more like Nelson Lu's. 
I have not given up the hope of unification, but also believe the unification 
should not jeopardize the welfare of Taiwan's people. I do support the right of
TI (even right of communism if that is what people want). I do see the benefit 
of unification as Nelson pointed out. I also believe there are different forms 
of unification. That is why I agree with KMT's unification (or China) policy, 
it is cautious, flexible and deliberately not to define what the unification 
would be like (acoording to Ma In-Chiu who is in charge of the Mainland's 
policy). But I dont see TI has provided these. 

>	Do you completely believe what CCP says?  

I dont completely believe what CCP says. I also dont completely believe what 
KMT, DDP, TIers or US say. But I will weigh what is the most likely and 
less likely and make judgement.

>Do you believe what Chaude Shi had said?  

Of course not. From his past postings, I think he is naive and immature. He 
thinks he knows alot but I think he is out-dated. Maybe he is too young maybe 
one day he will understand or may be not. But I have read very good postings 
from some mainland Chinese in the past. 

>I think as long as Taiwan is
>independent of China, the threats will be there.

That is true. But we dont want to give CCP excuse, right? China is changing 
too. I believe political reform will come after their economic success. At 
that time, CCP has to change if CCP wants to survive. It has happened to KMT, 
I dont believe CCP can be exception.

>What I want is the government tell its citizen the truth that the ROC 
>represents Taiwan and based on this truth to reform our government structure,
>which would meet the needs of the current Taiwan society as opposed
>to the old China socity more than 40 years from now.

I agree. The current political system has already showed its problem, IMO, it 
is not efficient. For example, I think the existence of the National Assembly 
should be discussed after the direct Presidental election in 1996 but that is 
just my personal opinion. Reforming our government structure is part of 
political reform and should not be served for independence (or unification), 
right?

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan