The DPP continues down its Suicidal Path

The DPP continues down its Suicidal Path
Bevin Chu
May 28, 2006

In a previous article, “The Beginning of the End, Part VI: The DPP commits Political Suicide,” I said that in order to save their political party, the DPP party hierarchy must demonstrate “the vision thing.” They must jettison the corrupt, opportunistic Chen, who has run the party’s image into the ground. They must forsake Chen’s discredited Taiwan independence agenda, which has bankrupted the island’s economy. They must embrace former DPP chairman Hsu Hsing-liang’s “Da Dan Xi Jing” (Bold Advance Westward), the “West” in this case meaning the Chinese mainland. The DPP party hierarchy knows what it must do, not only to save their political party, but also to save Taiwan.

What has the DPP party hierarchy done?


The overwhelming majority of the DPP’s party hierarchy has defaulted on the solemn responsibility of challenging Chen. Lacking the courage to “Speak Truth to Power,” they have chosen their own short-term political survival over their party’s long-term political fortune. In doing so, they have all but sealed the fate of both the DPP and the Taiwan independence movement. The DPP has committed political suicide.

That was in January 2006. It is now May 2006, and guess what?

Nothing has changed.

Despite the fact that the Taiwan Development Corporation scandal has finally, belatedly, led to the arrest of Chao Chien-ming, “president” Chen Shui-bian’s son in law, on charges of insider trading, the DPP party hierarchy still refuses to face the ugly truth.

Chen Shui-bian’s son in law, Chao Chien-ming

The ugly truth is that the purportedly “democratic and progressive” DPP has become more corrupt, autocratic and reactionary after a mere six years in power than the much maligned KMT after sixty.

The DPP party hierarchy has not only refused to face the ugly truth, it has formally declared “My president, right or wrong. My party, right or wrong. My ideology, right or wrong.”

Don’t believe me? Then read on.

DPP caucus promises to support Chen
Published on TaipeiTimes
Saturday, May 27, 2006

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and its legislative caucus yesterday unanimously vowed to back President Chen Shui-bian and said they would work together to assist the president in stabilizing the political situation, in the wake of the president’s son-in-law Chao Chien-ming’s suspected involvement in an insider trading scandal.

As the DPP’s reputation and image have been severely tarnished by the scandal, about 30 DPP lawmakers met yesterday to discuss how to heal the party’s wounds and halt the emerging split between DPP factions.

After the two-hour meeting, faction leaders held a press conference at the Legislative Yuan to state that they would unite to rebuild people’s trust in the DPP and they would try their best to assist the president to get through his current difficulties.

Translation: The DPP party hierarchy will try to sweep the dirt under the rug, put on a happy face, and go on with business as usual.

Taipei Times: Another caucus whip Chen Chin-jun urged DPP members not to be so eager to draw a line between themselves and the president.

“The only solution to the current predicament is to be more united than before. We don’t think it is helpful to blame everything on the president,” Chen Chin-jun said.

Translation: “You’re all accomplices, your hands are as dirty as A-Bian’s, so don’t think you can get out of this by dropping the dime on A-Bian and singing like canaries.”

Taipei Times: The DPP yesterday also issued a public letter signed by DPP Chairman Yu Shyi-kun, Vice President Annette Lu, Premier Su Tseng-chang, and former premier Frank Hsieh, urging all party members to remain calm and united and saying that the DPP will not let them down when eradicating corruption.

Comment: For passionate advocates of Chinese reunification such as myself, the fact that every one of the DPP’s leading lights signed such a shameful statement is a positive phenomenon. It means that Taiwan independence leaders have decided that their own short term political advantage is more important to them than the survival of the DPP or the Taiwan independence movement.

The DPP party hierarchy has no chance whatsoever of salvaging the credibility of their one time political star Chen Shui-bian. Chen himself has seen to that. For the past six years, Chen has been busy emptying out the island’s coffers, transferring Republic of China taxpayers’ hard-earned wealth into the personal accounts of Taiwan’s Quisling nomenklatura, including of course, the “First Family.” That is one of many reasons Chen’s approval rating has fallen to 5.8%, according to a poll conducted by DPP’s Pan Green ally, the Taiwan Solidarity Union.

“President” Chen Shui-bian, feeling the heat

The DPP party hierarchy has little if any chance of salvaging the credibilty of the DPP as a political party, and of Taiwan independence as a political ideal. The DPP party hierarchy itself has seen to that. For the past six years, the DPP party hierarchy has been Chen’s accomplice in wholesale Pan Green looting of the Republic of China treasury. Even those who did not actually pocket any booty themselves, are nevertheless guilty of aiding and abetting those who did. Even those who are legally innocent, are morally culpable.

Chao Chien-ming with mother in law and “First Lady” Wu Shu-cheng, the Lady MacBeth of Taiwan

The only chance, if any, that the DPP party hierarchy has of salvaging the DPP as an organized political force, and Taiwan independence as a persuasive political movement, is to draw a clear line between the party and the movement on the one hand, and Chen Shui-bian on the other.

Substantively speaking of course, this is impossible. From the viewpoint of justice, they deserve to go down with Chen Shui-bian.

From the viewpoint of public relations damage control however, they might be able to salvage what remains of their miserable political careers, but only if they get down on their knees and tearfully declare that “I once was lost but now am found, was blind, but now I see.”

As we can seen, they have chosen not to. They have chosen not to for two reasons.

One, they are too greedy. Two, they are too cowardly.

Despite a handful of public prosecutors who have recently found the gumption to do what all one thousand of the ROC’s public prosecutors should have done years ago, Chen Shui-bian still has a near total lock on the machinery of the central government. Therefore he can still dangle a carrot before the DPP party hierarchy’s collective nose, and bring a stick down on the DPP party hierarchy’s collective rear.

The DPP party hierarchy and the Taiwan independence nomenklatura have decided therefore that “The only solution to the current predicament is to be more united than before.”

The DPP party hierarchy and the Taiwan independence nomenklatura will pay for their myopic decision. They will go down with Chen Shui-bian, as they deserve to, and justice will be served.


Latter Day Colonialists

Published on TaipeiTimes
Letter: Chen deserves our support
By Peter Dearman
Friday, May 26, 2006

As I sat watching President Chen Shui-bian’s son-in-law taken away by police for alleged insider trading, I couldn’t help but notice how much it looked like a Hollywood paparazzi shootout. The flashes were going off so fast it had a stroboscopic effect. I couldn’t help but think that freedom of the press is taken to the extreme here in Taiwan.

This reminded me how I find it ironic that Chen is cast by his enemies as some sort of autocratic manipulator of democracy. Why then, after six long years of being assailed in the press, hasn’t he tried to suppress it just a little? Indeed, for all his arguable failures of leadership, can it be said honestly that he’s ever done anything against the spirit of democracy? Even if you believe he committed electoral fraud through a staged assassination attempt, I would say to you, why then, has he not been caught cheating at anything else? If he has such control over his minions that he can pull off repeated conspiracies (until now), why would he allow his in-laws to get involved in such an ill-conceived investment scheme? Would he not protect his own daughter better if he were the all-controling Godfather his pan-blue opponents make him out to be?

For me, the fact that Chen recently polled an approval rating below 6 percent indicates most of the population can’t recognize a good man when they see one. His vanishing support reminds me of rats deserting a ship. As for Chao Chien-ming, I hope he is kept under safe observation. If I had caused as much trouble to Chen, I worry what I might do to myself.

Peter Dearman

Comment: I started to write a point by point rebuttal of the above letter, sent to the editors of the Taipei Times by a western expatriate Taiwan independence fellow traveler living on Taiwan.

But then I recalled the sound advice I offered readers of my column in my own article, How to Read the Taipei Times. At which point I caught myself and realized that a point by point rebuttal would be nothing but a waste of time and energy.

Anyone who has found his way to The China Desk and is reading this weblog entry is probably sufficiently well-informed about Taiwan to know that the above reader’s letter to the Taipei Times is a mind-boggling joke.

Either the reader is utterly sincere, in which case the famous quotation from Jonathan Swift comes to mind: “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”

Or else the reader is flagrantly dishonest, in which case the almost as famous quotation from comedian Richard Pryor comes to mind: “Who ya gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?”

No, I’m not going to bother with a point by point rebuttal. Not when even lifelong Pan Green leaders have openly conceded that the Chen regime, the DPP, and the Taiwan independence movement have utterly discredited themselves.

Frankly, I would prefer that Taiwan’s Quisling nomenklatura seek refuge in the rationalizations offered by western expatriate Taiwan independence fellow travelers such as the above reader of the Taipei Times.

As Napoleon Bonaparte wrly advised, “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Far be it for me to interrupt my enemy when he is making the mistake of a lifetime. By all means, keep making your mistake, with my blessing.

Instead, allow me to call everyones’ attention to an attitude all too prevalent among western expatriates on Taiwan, one betrayed by the above reader’s remark:

“For me, the fact that Chen recently polled an approval rating below 6 percent indicates most of the population can’t recognize a good man when they see one.”

Did you get that?

So much for these western expatriates’ insistence that “Beijing must respect the democratic will of the people on Taiwan! ”

Where is their respect for the democratic will of the Chinese people on Taiwan?

So much for these western expatriates’ ritual lip service to the democratic universalist article of faith: “Vox populi, vox dei.” (The voice of the people is the voice of god.)

What these western expatriates really mean when they preach “freedom and democracy,” is that the voice of white western colonial overlords from the “civilized” First World be treated as the voice of god.

Scratch a “Champion of Democracy,” and you will find an elitist. Scratch a western expatriate “Champion of Democracy” on Taiwan, and you will find a colonialist, a contemporary version of the pathetic yet pompous British colonialist so deftly satirized in Somerset Maugham’s short stories about expatriate life in the tropics.

No. Point by point rebuttals are pointless. My response to these supercilious latter day colonialists is:

“Do you really have nothing better to do? Go home. Get a life. And allow the Chinese people to live their own.”

E pluribus unum

Published on TaipeiTimes
Taiwan Quick Take: Independence groups unite
Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Four pro-independence societies said over the weekend they would integrate with several like-minded groups to form a “Taiwan Society” to promote social and political reform. Officials from the Northern, Southern, Central and Eastern Taiwan Societies said they had decided to break down the geographical barriers, and the four societies would instead serve as a platform for efforts to link up with more groups at home and overseas to form the “Taiwan Society.” The society is scheduled to be formally launched in Taipei on June 18, with former president Lee Teng-hui to address the inaugural meeting.

I can’t be the only one who has noticed the delicious irony.

Think about it. Four pro-separatist groups, the Northern, Southern, Central and Eastern Taiwan Societies decide to “break down geographical barriers,” after coming to the realization that only “in unity there is strength.”

Maybe they can adopt the motto “E pluribus unum?”

Great Seal of these United States of America

According to Wikipedia:

E pluribus unum was the first national motto of the United States of America. Translated from Latin, it means “From many, one” or “Out of many, one,” or in a direct translation, “One out of more.” It referred to the integration of the 13 independent colonies into one united country, and has taken on an additional meaning, given the pluralistic nature of American society from immigration. The motto was selected by the first Great Seal committee in 1776, at the beginning of the American Revolution. Pierre Eugene DuSimitie’re originally suggested E pluribus unum as the motto.

Now all that remains is for them to break down one more geographical barrier, the Taiwan Strait.

Former president Lee Teng-hui is scheduled to deliver an inaugural address. I have a number of quotes he might want to use, and after using them, contemplate their deeper meaning.

Behold they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.
— Genesis 11:6

Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together in unity.
— Psalms 133:1

What ever disunites man from God, also disunites man from man.
— Edmund Burke

Men’s hearts ought not to be set against one another, but set with one another, and all against evil only.
— Thomas Carlyle

We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
— Benjamin Franklin

One country, one constitution, one destiny.
— Daniel Webster

The deeper meaning of these quotes is that the real barrier is not geographical. The real barrier is psychological.

The real barrier is not the Taiwan Strait. The real barrier is the psychological barrier in the Taiwan independence nomenklatura’s hardened hearts, between those they insist on defining as “us” and those they insist on defining as “them,” between those they insist on defining as “Taiwanese, not Chinese” and those they insist on defining as “Chinese, not Taiwanese.”

We human beings face a common threat to our survival, the vagaries of nature. As I noted in my previous posting, A Real rather than Imaginary Threat,” the nations of the world ought to unite against this common threat, rather than perceiving each other as threats.

As Benjamin Franklin astutely observed, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

Franklin’s words were admittedly uttered in a different context. Nevertheless they remain remarkably apropos.

A Real rather than Imaginary Threat

A Real rather than Imaginary Threat
Bevin Chu
May 19, 2006

Neoconservative China Threat theorists responsible for America’s strategic policy are determined to cast a non-aggressive, free market capitalist China as a “New Evil Empire,” and the long-suffering Chinese people as 21st century counterparts of Genghis Khan’s Mongol hordes.

Their “China Threat” is an imaginary, rather than real threat.

Other threats meanwhile, such as space rock hitting the earth, are real rather than imaginary threats.

Space rock could hit Earth in April 2036, say experts

Knight Ridder
By Michael Cabbage

Mark your calendar for Sunday, April 13, 2036. That’s when a 1,000-foot-wide asteroid named Apophis could hit the Earth with enough force to obliterate a small state.

The odds of a collision are 1-in-6,250. But while that’s a long shot at the racetrack, the stakes are too high for astronomers to ignore.

For now, Apophis represents the most imminent threat from the worst type of natural disaster known, one reason NASA is spending millions to detect the threat from this and other asteroids.

A direct hit on an urban area could unleash more destruction than Hurricane Katrina, the 2004 Asian tsunami and the 1906 San Francisco earthquake combined. The blast would equal 880 million tons of TNT or 65,000 times the power of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Objects this size are thought to hit Earth about once every 1,000 years, and, according to recent estimates, the risk of dying from a renegade space rock is comparable to the hazards posed by tornadoes and snakebites. Those kind of statistics have moved the once-far-fetched topic of killer asteroids from Hollywood movie sets to the halls of Congress.

“Certainly we had a major credibility problem at the beginning, a giggle factor,” said David Morrison, an astrobiologist at NASA’s Ames Research Center in California. “Now, many people are aware this is something we can actually deal with, mitigate and defend against.”

Deflecting threats

In 1998, lawmakers formally directed NASA to identify by 2008 at least 90 percent of the asteroids more than a kilometer wide that orbit the sun and periodically cross Earth’s path. That search is now more than three-quarters complete.

Last year, Congress directed the space agency to come up with options for deflecting potential threats. Ideas seriously discussed include lasers on the moon, futuristic “gravity tractors,” spacecraft that ram incoming objects and Hollywood’s old standby, nuclear weapons.

To help explore possible alternatives, former Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart has formed the B612 Foundation. The organization’s goal is to be able to significantly alter the orbit of an asteroid in a controlled manner by 2015.

“You can watch all of the golf on television you want, but if you want to go out and break par, it’s going to take a lot of playing,” Schweickart said. “And you’re going to learn a lot that you thought you knew, but you didn’t.”

Throughout their 4.5 billion-year history, Earth and its neighboring planets have been like sitting ducks in a cosmic shooting gallery.

A glance at our moon shows the scars left by countless collisions with asteroids and comets. In fact, the moon is thought to have been created when part of the early Earth was ripped away in a cosmic impact with an object the size of Mars.

Earth also has scars, but most have been hidden by vegetation or eroded by geologic processes such as rain and wind. About 170 major impact sites, including northern Arizona’s 4,000-foot-wide Barringer Crater, have been identified around the globe.

Alvarezes’ research

Within the past century, an extraterrestrial chunk of rock about 200 feet wide is thought to have caused a 1908 blast near Tunguska, Siberia, that leveled 60 million trees in an area the size of Rhode Island. Researchers theorize the object exploded four to six miles above the ground with the force of 10 million to 15 million tons of TNT.

Few outside scientific circles took the threat posed by near-Earth objects seriously until 1980. Then, Luis and Walter Alvarez published a study based on geologic evidence that concluded a cataclysmic asteroid or comet impact 65 million years ago caused the mass extinction of two-thirds of all plant and animal life on Earth, including the dinosaurs.

Dubbed the Great Exterminator, the colossal object was estimated at 7 miles in diameter and created a blast hundreds of millions of times more destructive than a nuclear weapon. Objects that size are thought to hit Earth about every 100 million years.

NASA scientists studying satellite photos bolstered the Alvarezes’ theory with the discovery in 1991 of an impact crater 125 miles wide buried beneath the northwestern corner of Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula. Three years later, NASA photos of another sort drove home the potential for cosmic collisions in our part of the solar system.

Spectacular images from the Hubble Space Telescope of Comet Shoemaker-Levy’s collision with Jupiter showed 21 comet fragments, producing colossal fireballs that rose above the giant planet’s cloud deck.

“I think the most important development for getting this (public awareness) going was the Alvarezes’ research that the dinosaurs went extinct as the result of an impact,” Morrison said. “We were faced with a real example where an impact had done terrible damage.”

In 2029, the asteroid will come closer to our planet than the television and weather satellites that beam back signals from 22,300 miles above. Astronomers’ big fear is that Apophis will pass through a gravitational “keyhole” that will put it on a collision course with Earth in 2036. “For all practical purposes, it (a mission) would have to be done before the 2029 flyby to take advantage of the leverage afforded by that encounter,” said Steve Chesley, an astronomer in the Near Earth Object Program. “That means the 2036 impact needs to be addressed by 2026.”

Orbit of Near Earth Asteroid Apophis

Comment: Neoconservative China Threat theorists responsible for America’s strategic policy are determined to cast China as a “New Evil Empire,” and the Chinese people as Genghis Khan’s Mongol hordes.

Any sign that the Chinese people are making economic, but particularly scientific and technological progress, is cited as alarming evidence of Barbarians at the Gates and Apocalypse Now.

The Fiendish Plot of Dr. Fu Manchu

The China Threat theorists’ anxieties are not reflections of any real world Fiendish Plot of Dr. Fu Manchu against the “democratic west.” The China Threat theorists’ anxieties are psychological projections of the Malevolent Global Hegemonists’ disowned shadow onto a convenient external screen.

As Wikipedia explains,

Psychological projection (or projection bias) can be defined as unconsciously assuming that others have the same or similar thoughts, beliefs, values, or positions on any given subject as oneself. According to the theories of Sigmund Freud, it is a psychological defense mechanism whereby one “projects” one’s own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, feelings—basically parts of oneself—onto someone else (usually another person, but psychological projection onto animals, inanimate objects – even religious constructs – also occurs). The principle of projection is well-established in psychology. Peter Gay describes it as “the operation of expelling feelings or wishes the individual finds wholly unacceptable—too shameful, too obscene, too dangerous—by attributing them to another.”

I touched on this phenomenon in my 1999 essay, Hollywood’s Tibet, in which I pointed out how Hollywood celebrities desperate to be perceived as Politically Correct have projected America’s collective guilt over its treatment of American Indians onto China.

Psychological projection however, is hardly confined to the Beautiful People in Hollywood. It is if anything, even more commonplace among the Political Class in Washington.

China Threat Theory at its root, is the Benevolent Global Hegemonists’ projection of their own malevolent desire for global hegemony onto a strange and exotic people. You know, those mysterious heathens with yellow skin and slanted eyes, always scurrying about, speaking in strange tongues, plotting who knows what against white European civilization.

China Threat Theory, when one stops to think about it calmly and objectively, has no basis in reality. Even Australia, which is far closer to China than the US, and strategically far more vulnerable, considers the China Threat Theory sheer poppycock.

Objectively speaking, what is there to fear about China’s recent progress?

Objectively speaking, nothing whatsoever.

China’s progress is an integral part of mankind’s progress. China’s progress doesn’t benefit only the Chinese people. China’s progress, like America’s progress, like Europe’s progress, like Russia’s progress, like India’s progress, benefits mankind as a whole. That progress includes China’s astonishingly rapid advances in aerospace technology.

China launches Shenzhou 6

In the science fiction thriller Armageddon (1998, directed by Michael Bay, written by Robert Roy Pool, Jonathan Hensleigh, starring Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, Liv Tyler) an asteroid the size of Texas threatens to destroy the planet earth. Only the combined resources of US and Russian space technology succeed in saving all life on earth, including the human race, from extinction.


Armageddon was a terrible movie, but according to respected scientists the movie’s premise, that life on earth might one day be extinguished by a stray asteroid, is entirely likely. According to reputable astronomers the asteroid Apophis may well pose a threat to earth in 2036, a mere 30 years from now.

Suppose for the sake of argument that the China Threat theorists have their way. Suppose they succeed in using Taiwan independence as a pretext to launch a “preventive” war of aggression against a peacefully developing China. Suppose they “win” such a war. Suppose they succeed in their quest to “contain China” and set China’s development back 30, 40, even 50 years.

What then?

What will Neoconservative China Threat theorists do when another Great Exterminator hurtles toward earth, and they realize too late that crucial Chinese space technology, complementing US and Russian space technology, might have been able to intercept an asteroid or comet and ensure the survival of the human race, including 290 million Americans?

Anyone who snorts at such a suggestion, on the contemptuous assumption that “China doesn’t rate,” has either forgotten China’s countless contributions to world civilization, or was woefully ignorant of them in the first place.

As Professor Robert Temple, a British historian and archeologist notes:

People often speak of the modern world in which we live, and presume that it is a creation of the Western world. But this is not correct. More than half of the basic inventions and discoveries which led to the creation of this modern world are Chinese, and are not Western at all. Indeed, China has produced more fundamental inventions and discoveries than the rest of the world put together. Because so few people realize this, the view of China’s place in the modern world is wrongly conceived. Most people in both East and West believe that China is emerging into the modern world. But China is not emerging into anything, it is re-emerging into something which it helped to create in the first place. Nor is China a developing country: it is a re-developing country. For two thousand years, China was developed while most of the rest of the world was undeveloped. It was richer, it was stronger, it was bigger, it could feed itself better, it could build more things of greater magnitude, and it could explore when it wanted to.


The US government is squandering astronomical sums that American taxpayers can ill afford, to wage a nominally defensive, but in fact offensive war of aggression against China. In doing so, it is forcing the PRC government to respond by diverting sums mainland Chinese taxpayers can ill afford, into defending China’s territorial integrity from the American Empire.

The so-called China Threat is an imaginary rather than real threat. A killer asteroid, once thought of as nothing but grist for the science fiction movie mill, is a real rather than imaginary threat.

Instead of pretending that it is defending America against a non-existent China threat, the US government should facilitate private sector cooperation between American and Chinese scientists and engineers to defend America, China, and the rest of the world from a scientifically verifiable threat of annihilation from outer space.

Chen’s Approval Rating at 5.8%

Chen’s approval rating at 5.8 percent
Bevin Chu
May 17, 2006

TSU poll shows Chen’s approval rating at 5.8 percent
Wednesday, May 17, 2006

President Chen Shui-bian’s approval rating has dropped to a new low of just 5.8 percent, with 88 percent of respondents dissatisfied with the performance of Chen’s administration over the past six years, according to the results of a survey released yesterday.

The survey was conducted by the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) — the Democratic Progressive Party’s ally in the pan-green camp — on 69 civic groups from May 5 through May 12.

The respondents gave the administration’s overall performance a failing grade of 57.5 percent.

Ho Min-hao, head of the TSU’s policy committee, said the survey results reflected the government’s failure to pay attention to domestic affairs.

While 64 percent of respondents thought that the government has not worked hard enough to improve the nation’s economy over the past six years, 72 percent were dissatisfied with the deteriorating law and order situation, the survey found.

Seventy-three percent of the respondents said they thought that the average citizen’s life is not that good, and 63 percent said they were unhappy with the government’s failure to take care of disadvantaged groups.

As many as 81 percent of the respondents doubted the integrity of officials in Chen’s administration, and 90 percent think Chen should take responsibility for the corruption cases involving government officials that have occurred over the past six years.

Ninety-one percent of the respondents were supportive of the Cabinet’s decision to suspend Financial Supervisory Commission Chairman Kong Jaw-sheng from his duties over his suspected role in a government procurement scandal.

In addition, 10 percent said that they were in favor of enacting a new constitution.

Comment: For six years, Taiwan independence media spin controllers have been dismissing Pan Blue majority opposition criticism of Pan Green government as “chang shuai tai wan” (poormouthing Taiwan).

Pan Blue majority opposition commissioned polls were automatically dismissed as push polls, despite the fact they were uncannily accurate, and in fact, matched the poll results of confidential, Eyes Only polls commissioned by the DPP leadership.

But now the Deep Green Taiwan Solidarity Union has published its own poll, and the results are even less flattering to its fellow Pan Green ally, the DPP than Pan Blue camp polls.

Chen Shui-bian, the “Son of Taiwan,” received a 5.8% approval rating, not according to the Deep Blue New Party, not according to the KMT, not according to the PFP, but according to its own Pan Green ally, the TSU.

How are Taiwan independence media spin controllers going to rationalize this away?

Frankly, I hope they try. Frankly, I hope they bury their heads in the sand like ostriches. Frankly, I hope they play the McCarthyite Red Scare card.

Because if they do, they will only accelerate the rate at which the Chinese people on Taiwan forsake Taiwan independence rabble-rousers, Taiwan independence political parties, and Taiwan independence ideology.

Bear in mind that most Pan Green camp polls, particularly those published during an election campaign, are nothing more than push polls.

So how does one tell when a Pan Green poll is actually a scientific poll and not a push poll?

Simple. One compares it to Pan Blue camp polls conducted around the same time.

The results of the above mentioned TSU poll largely conform to the results of the below illustrated poll released by the Pan Blue oriented United Daily News on May 18, 2006, therefore the TSU poll is probably on the up and up.

United Daily News Poll, May 18, 2006

The title at the top of the chart reads “Changes in Satisfaction Ratings for the DPP.” The red line tracks increasing public dissatisfaction with DPP. The green line tracks decreasing public satisfaction with DPP. The dates along the bottom are Year of the Republic dates. The date on the far right “955” is the “95th Year of the Republic, May” i.e., May 2006.

Sad, isn’t it, that the Pan Green camp has so thoroughly discredited itself, that its allegations can only be believed when they are confirmed by the Pan Blue majority opposition?

Notice that according to the Taiwan Solidarity Union poll, a mere 10% of the public favors the authoring of a new “Taiwanese Constitution” to replace the Chinese Constitution already in place?

You know the Deep Green TSU is being uncharacteristically honest when it announces a poll result so obviously unfavorable to its own Taiwan independence agenda.

So why did the TSU do it?

The TSU did it because although the TSU and the DPP are Pan Green camp allies, they are also Pan Green camp rivals. The TSU hopes to profit from the potential dissolution of the DPP as an organized political party. The TSU is behaving like a shark ready to feed on a wounded member of its own kind.

The TSU wants to persuade the public that if it was the leader of the Pan Green camp instead of the DPP, these numbers would be different. The TSU wants to persuade the public that if it was the leader of the Pan Green camp instead of the DPP, Taiwan independence would be a reality instead of a rapidly receding pipe dream.

That of course is nonsense. TSU godfather Lee Teng-hui had 12 long years during which he could have declared Taiwan independence at any time

But he never did.

Rectifying a Non-Error

Rectifying a Non-Error
Bevin Chu
May 17, 2006

US postal service rectifies Web site references to nation
Taipei Times
By Nadia Tsao
Wednesday, May 17, 2006

The United States Postal Service (USPS) has agreed to revise all references to the nation [sic] on its Web site from “a province of China” to “Taiwan” as requested by the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA), the Washington-based pro-Taiwan independence group said.

The postal service also issued an apology for having referred to Taiwan as a Chinese province, it added.

FAPA sent a letter to the postal service early last month at the request of its members. The letter stated that as an enterprise established by the US Congress, the postal service should abide by the rules and regulations of the US State Department, referring to a 1996 State Department memorandum that requests all relevant US government agencies and officials to refer to Taiwan as “Taiwan.”

In a letter to FAPA dated May 9, the postal service stated that it regretted the error.

Comment: I know how one rectifies an error. But how does one rectify a non-error? I know that one should regret an error. But how does one regret a non-error?

Taiwan is a province of China. The Republic of China Constitution that is the basic law on the Chinese island of Taiwan says so clearly in black and white. So when Google and the USPS referred to Taiwan as “a province of China,” they were absolutely correct. They had nothing to regret, nothing to rectify, and nothing to apologize for.

See: Google is still Right, Taiwan is still a Province of China

Ironically Google, which is under attack from the US federal government for allegedly caving in to pressure from Beijing, showed more respect for the truth than the USPS when Google refused to “rectify” its non-error, but instead bypassed the problem by removing all references completely.

Maybe the Hawaiian independence movement can now demand that the USPS stop referring to Hawaii as the 50th state of the union, and correctly refer to it as the Kingdom of Hawaii?

See: The Overthrow of the Monarchy

Now that would truly be rectifying an error. Now that would truly be something worth apologizing for.

Come to think of it, maybe now the US federal government can start treating all 50 states as sovereign and independent nations, as specified in the Articles of Confederation?

But don’t hold your breath waiting for it to happen.