Thursday, February 24, 2022

Insults - Must try harder

(中文在下方)

The rumpus between Era News anchor Catherine Chang and former presenter for a now banned Chinese company and now TMD spokesperson Christina Yang seems to be entertaining the entire country right now. 

Who needs to watch professional wrestling when these two are going at it hammer and tongs, although I have to say they don’t even get close to the mark when it comes to proper insults. 

Broken flower vase? Your face is not pretty enough to be a flower vase, you are just an empty bottle? Why are you hanging around me to get attention, is it because someone is not even a bottle?

This really is little league stuff when it comes to decent insulting and these two clearly have a lot to learn. Although I have to say Catherine Chang’s come-back to the KMT’s Bai Qiao-yin who clumsily waded into the row was pretty good, when she said she had no recollection of Bai when she interned at Chang’s TV station so she obviously wasn’t a very successful intern.

There are three issues here as far as I can see…

1) If you are a party spokesperson you have to be all sorts of an idiot to publically take on a high profile journalist. It is asking for trouble and you are bound to lose. 
2) Mayor Malfunction has hired yet another dud.
3) Public figures in Taiwan really need to work harder on their verbal abuse.

The most recent masterful example of political insult I can think of came from Dominic Cummings the former head of the Brexit Vote Leave campaign who branded the then Brexit Secretary David Davis as being as “thick as mince” and “as lazy as a toad”.

In the 1860s British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli said of rival William Gladstone. “If Gladstone fell into the Thames, that would be a misfortune, and if anybody pulled him out, that, I suppose, would be a calamity.”

British statesman David Lloyd George said of Winston Churchill. “He would make a drum out of the skin of his own mother in order to sound his own praises.” While Churchill described Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee as “A sheep in sheep’s clothing.”

At the time, I particularly enjoyed Labour health secretary Frank Dobson on the outspoken Tory MP Edwina Currie that “When Edwina Currie goes to the dentist, he needs the anesthetic.”

More up to date is broadcaster Ian Hislop on Prime Minister Boris Johnson. “People always ask me the same question, they say, ‘Is Boris a very very clever man pretending to be an idiot?’ And I always say, ‘No.‘”

Another that springs to mind is from a former girlfriend of British Conservative Party ‘heavyweight’ politician Nicholas Soames who said of having sex with him as “Like having a large wardrobe fall on top of you with the key still in the lock.”

Which takes us full circle given the row between Catherine Chang and Christina Yang all started with the thinly veiled fat insult aimed at ex-Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Ju, now President of the Control Yuan and Chair of the National Human Rights Commission, that she was a ‘heavyweight’. 

Of course, the Brits, and Australians come to that, see most insults as a term of endearment…

Tinkerty Tonk...

《 學習英國毒舌》

年代電視主播張雅琴與一家現已因詐騙關門的中國公司的前主持人,也就是現任TMD發言人楊寶楨之間的鬥嘴,似乎正在娛樂整個台灣。

當這兩個人用錘子和鉗子進行比賽時,誰還需要看職業摔跤?不過我不得不說,在適當的侮辱方面,他們甚至沒有達到接近毒舌的標準。

破碎的花瓶?當花瓶你的臉不夠漂亮,你只是一個空瓶子?你為什麼要蹭聲量,是不是因為有人連瓶子都不是?

要談到體面的侮辱,這些真的是小聯盟等級,這兩個人顯然有很多東西要學。但張雅琴給笨手笨腳的KMT發言人白喬茵的回覆真的很不錯,她說該發言人在她的電視台實習時,她一點印象也沒有,可見不是什麼優秀的工讀生。

這個事件我看到三個重點。

第一,如果你是政黨發言人,你一定是個全方位的白痴,才會想到要和一位知名記者公然對決。這是自找麻煩,你一定會輸。

第二,運作故障的市長又雇了一個無用之人。

第三,台灣的公眾人物需要更加努力學習如何口頭羞辱他人。

我能想到最近一個政治毒舌相當傑出例子,是來自英國脫歐公投大將Dominic Cummings,他形容當時的脫歐秘書David Davis「笨得跟絞肉一樣 」(thick as mince) 「像蟾蜍一樣懶惰」(as lazy as a toad)

(註:英文的 thick 有笨的意思,和絞肉一樣粘可見有多笨)

在1860年代,Benjamin Disraeli 談到了William Gladstone:「如果Gladstone掉進泰晤士河,那將是一場不幸,如果有人把他拉出來,我想,那將是一場災難。」

David Lloyd George談到Winston Churchill:「他會用自己母親的皮做一個鼓來讚美自己。」,而丘吉爾則將工黨首相Clement Attlee描述為「披著羊皮的羊」。

(註:羊是非常溫馴的,還要穿著羊皮就是完全的懦弱無能)

那段時期我還特別喜歡工黨衛生部長Frank Dobson 對總是直言不諱的保守黨議員Edwina Currie的評語:「當她去看牙醫時,牙醫需要麻醉劑。」

近期對政治人物的的羞辱來自廣播人Ian Hislop對首相Boris Johnson的評論。「人們總是問我同樣的問題,他們說,會不會強生其實是一個非常聰明的人,但他只是假裝是個白痴?我總是說,不是。」

另一個毒舌來自英國保守黨“重量級”政治家Nicholas Soames的前女友,她說與他發生性關係「就像一個大衣櫃落在你身上,而鑰匙還在插在門鎖裡。」

這讓我們繞了一圈回到這件事的原點,因為張雅琴和楊寶楨之間的爭吵,是從楊寶楨對前高雄市長、現任監察院院長、國家人權委員會主席陳菊的暗示性侮辱開始的,毫無疑問陳菊是一個重量級的政治人物。

不過要知道,許多來自英國人和澳洲人的毒舌,其實都是一種喜愛寵愛的表現,而不是羞辱。

Tinkerty Tonk...掰掰!


Monday, February 21, 2022

The Great Chicken Conspiracy

It will be remembered as the great Chicken Conspiracy of 2022 when Mr Wannabe and his  KMT chums release a deluge of evidence proving the complete and prolonged absence of eggs in shops the length and breadth of the land is all the  government's fault. 

I mean, it must be true if one or two of their members have managed to take pictures of a few shelves empty of eggs, and recently call a press conference in the pouring rain to decry the lack of eggs and say how it’s all the governments fault.

Wow, a big story I thought and my journalistic instincts instantly kicked in. I knew I needed to quickly find out why on earth the government had let the people down so badly and screwed up the egg supply chain in such spectacular fashion that no eggs were available anywhere.

Frankly, I was shocked they could allow such a thing to happen.

It didn’t take long for my investigative nose-for-news to dig out the truth by driving along in the car and looking out of the window. “Isn’t that an egg shop which sells nothing but eggs and are there not huge trays of all sorts of eggs in trays outside?” I asked myself. You see how good an investigative journalist I am!

But I didn’t stop there. I also visited a local supermarket and, to my amazement, there were shelves full of eggs for sale. The sales lady was eyeing me suspiciously as I took pictures, probably thinking I had some kind of egg fixation. 

Could it be that there were actually plenty of eggs and Mr Wannabe and his KMT cohorts were talking chicken-shit? Surely not? I had to dig deeper for the facts…so I looked at Google for five minutes. 

It appears egg supply is cyclical in nature and waxes and wanes depending on things like the price of feed, demand over holiday periods and other seasonal factors. 

This was the case with the new year holiday period here coupled with Covid, which meant at this particular time there was a slightly more acute downturn in supply and a few shops here and there ran out for a few hours on a few days. 

On top of which, in some places, these daft and irresponsible KMT rants made some impressionable people rush out to hoard eggs in case the ‘shortage’ was genuine. 

So, ironically, any shortage anyone suffered was mainly due to KMT scaremongering which made a cyclical supply squeeze worse. 

Well done boys, you’ve done it yet again and proved you have no idea how to be an effective opposition party, that you have no fresh ideas of your own, and are struggling to find fault with the government that you are reduced to basically making stuff up. 

Tinkerty Tonk…   

Friday, February 18, 2022

Welcome to Taiwan - Hotel Covid Capers

(中文在下方) At the quarantine hotel we were greeted on the steps by another fully suited-up astronaut who checked us in, a somewhat of a laborious process given the pile of Covid documentation we all have to deal with at the moment. 

With the preliminaries out of the way we were allowed access to the lobby which was devoid of people aside from one or two other fully suited spacemen pottering about looking bored. They barely looked up as we made our way to the lift lobby down a roped-off queue line designed to stop you escaping from the route to your cell… sorry, room.

The experience was definitely becoming a little more surreal. The feel of the whole affair certainly changed at this point, from the space-port theatricals at the airport to the more prison-like procedure of checking into the hotel.

That feeling continued to the 6th floor as we navigated through empty corridors to room 610 to find a note on the door announcing ‘Smith/Liu 5/2-13/2’. 

Now that really is something they do in prisons, I thought. In the corridor outside the door was a plastic stool and a large plastic tray, one for our jailers to deposit food and one for us to deposit our garbage. 

That was it, and our last human contact for a week.

The fair size room was clean, although a little old fashioned, and two big double beds made for a bit of extra comfort. 

Another plus was a street view so we could at least see people moving around and not feel like the zombie apocalypse had arrived and the city was devoid of other humans. 

We had booked hotel food for one and used Food Panda for the rest. The hotel food was actually pretty good after we asked them to switch to vegetarian after a dubious and slightly grey looking pork cutlet arrived on the first Sunday.

We had to get used to not answering the door immediately when the bell rang as the staff dropped off food. It was weird not seeing anyone when you opened the door, just a plastic bag of food sitting forlornly atop a cheap plastic stool. If they had had a hatch like a prison door, I’m sure they would have shoved our food in through and slammed the hatch shut.

Hotel food                                                           Panda food


It didn’t take long for the room to start looking ‘lived-in’ ie. a little squalid and more like a teenagers bedroom during exam time. Soon there were food boxes, coffee cups, open suitcases and clothes scattered about in that odd limbo you find yourself in sometimes when it’s not worth putting everything neatly away in cupboards because you are not there long enough, and being heartily sick of the untidiness.

The final day came and the PCR test people arrived at the hotel and we were allowed to go down to the lobby for that. The apparatus was straight out of Zombie Apocalypse but it was all very efficient and we were soon back in our cell to await the results. 

I had never seen one of these medical isolation screens before but the team which goes round doing the tests have it all stowed in a van and set up to do the tests. 

It is all very well organised and the medial staff are all very friendly and helpful.

The following day the plague taxi arrived to take us to the Bali flat where we have been ever since to the accompaniment of almost constantly beeping and ringing phones as the cops and the local council administration kept tabs on our movements…more of that in the next instalment. 

At least we have a better view while we spend another seven days in isolation. 

Tinkerty Tonk...

離開機場後我們抵達隔離旅館,在進門的台階上有另一位全副武裝的太空人迎接我們,幫我們辦理入住手續,但因為我們的手機裡有不少疫苗注射證明,PCR檢測結果以及入境文件,過程有點繁瑣,最後太空人決定我們可以上樓後慢慢再把文件寄給他們。

於是我們可以進入旅館大廳了,因為時候已經不早,大廳裡除了一兩個看起來有點無聊,一樣全副武裝連頭也不抬的太空人之外,空無一人。我們沿著紅色繩索圍起來的路徑前往電梯,這個路徑是為了防止你在前往牢房的途中脫逃。。。抱歉,我是說房間。

回到台灣進入隔離檢疫的經驗,現在肯定是更加超現實了,整個事件的感覺在此時發生了一點變化:從降落在機場的月球太空站,轉變成入住監獄般的旅館。

這種感覺一直持續到 6 樓,當我們穿過空蕩蕩的走廊到 610 房間時,在門上發現了一張告示,上面寫著“Smith/劉 5/2-12/2”。現在這真的像是監獄的電影場景了,我想。門外有一張塑膠凳子,地上有一個大塑膠托盤,凳子讓是獄卒放食物的,塑膠托盤則是讓我們放綁緊的垃圾袋,而且必須雙層。

就這樣,在做下一次PCR篩檢前,我們不會再有任何與人類的接觸。

這個房間雖然有點老式但是很寬敞也很乾淨,有兩張大雙人床讓人倍感舒適。另一個優點是有個大窗戶面對車水馬龍的街道,雖然依規定不能打開但至少我們可以看到街上的人們四處走動,而不是覺得殭屍片中的大災難已經到來,城市裡沒有半個人。

我們向旅館訂了單人三餐,另一份則有勞 Foodpanda。在第一個週日發現便當裡有一塊可疑且略帶灰色的豬排後,我們要求改送素食,之後旅館三餐都非常美味可口。

當旅館員工把食物放在塑膠凳子上門鈴響起時,我們不得不習慣於不立刻去開門。送餐人員離去後打開門看見空無一人的長廊真的很奇怪,只有一個塑膠袋裝著便當,孤零零地坐在便宜的塑膠凳子上。

如果房間門有一個像牢房門上一樣的小門,我敢肯定他們會把食物從那裡塞進來,然後砰地一聲關上。

讓房間開始看起來像是有人住不需要花多少時間,有點不太整潔,但更像是考試期間的青少年臥室。很快地你就發現吃完或是沒吃完的食物盒、咖啡杯、打開的行李箱和衣服散落在各處。

這是一種有點怪異的情況,就是你覺得不值得花時間把所有的東西整齊地放進櫃子裡,因為你停留的時間不夠長,但是你又厭倦了周遭的雜亂。

這一天終於到了,PCR 檢測人員抵達旅館大廳,我們被允許離開房間下樓。那些設備我看起來根本是直接來自殭屍啟示錄,但這一切都非常有效率,我們很快就回到了我們的牢房等待結果。

我以前從未見過這些醫療隔離屏風,屏風上有兩個長長的手套,這些醫護人員應該是輪流到各地去做採檢,一切都井井有條,他們也非常友善而且樂於回答任何問題。

隔天瘟疫計程車來了,把我們帶到回八里淡水河畔的家中,從我們進門的那一刻開始,就有不間斷的電話簡訊鈴聲加震動,因為派出所警察和區公所的關懷人員密切關心著我們的行動……我會在下一集連載中多告訴你們一些內幕。

不過至少接下來七天的居家隔離,面對淡水河風景比在旅館時好多了。

Tinkerty Tonk...掰掰。




Wednesday, February 16, 2022

Doctor Binface, meet Count Binface

    
Make your vote Count Binface
(中文在下方)
I’ve written before that Mayor Ko and his team regularly produce something more akin to performance art than serious politics, and I’m fast coming to the conclusion he has some British blood in him in terms of his political stance.
Click here for the Performance Art piece.

A quick glance at the list of his nominations for TMD representatives for the local elections at the end of this year reveals a menagerie of ill-suited candidates which, if elected, will bring nothing to the political table. His motivation for putting these mis-fits up for election is clearly to have them as spoiler candidates to do damage to other political parties in terms of voting patterns. 

That is a legally fair, although I would argue morally bankrupt, tactic but I do wish he could at least do it with a sense of humour if he is going to indulge in joke politics, which could have consequences to the serious parties who actually care how the country is run. 

It also pretty much proves he is not serious about furthering the aims or policies of the TMD and is just out to spoil the elections for those more politically aware and politically serious. It also proves he has given up on any Presidential ambition, which, I guess, is a good thing. 

For example, one of his nominees boasts that his main achievement was being in his high school basketball team and was a prefect at school events. Another worked at McDonalds, nothing at all wrong with that, and now works as a secretary but she and many of the others have neither experience or even ever shown any interest in public affairs.

Count Binface                                             Mayor Ko
Putting up joke candidates is a longstanding and highly enjoyable part of elections in Britain. It costs only GBP 500 (TWD 19,000) to stand as a Member of Parliament, while in Taiwan it can cost up to TWD 200,000 (GBP 7,600) depending on the constituency. Also in Britain you only lose your deposit if you gain less than five percent of the vote, while here it is ten percent.

Britain keeps the deposit low because everyone enjoys the joke candidates and it is very in-keeping with the British sense of humour. The joke candidates get a lot of newspaper attention during the campaigns and lighten the mood so at least the election becomes a little more bearable for the ordinary voter. 

Currently most famous is Count Binface whose last political pitch was for Mayor of London and he did surprisingly well, polling better than some of the serious candidates. His website boasts… “Thank you to the 24,775 beautiful London humans who made me their first choice for Mayor. I finished 9th out of the 20 candidates, in a new record for an alien standing for public office on planet Earth.” 

The Count claims to be an intergalactic space warrior.

He also stood against Boris Johnson in the 2019 election for the Uxbridge seat in parliament alongside Lord Buckethead, the official Monster Raving Loony Party candidate, and William Tobin, whose aim was to receive no votes because as an expatriate who has lived abroad for 15 years, he was not able to vote in UK elections, but could stand as a candidate. Elmo from the Give Me Back Elmo Party also stood against Johnson.

 

I cannot vote in the UK as I’ve not lived there for 25 years, but perhaps I should shell-out GBP 500 and stand myself in the next election. 

Others include the Landless Peasant Party, the Vote For Yourself a Rainbow Dream Ticket Party, which recorded one vote at the 2005 general election in Cardiff North. Yes, you are allowed to vote for yourself in UK elections. 

Sometimes they even win. H’Angus the Monkey, real name Stuart Drummond, became the first and only directly elected mayor of Hartlepool in 2002 and served for three terms until the post was abolished in 2013.

The Birthday Party, whose main policy is to hope for a miracle, and the Al-Zebabist Nation of OOOG, Children of the Atom, and World Peace Through Song both stood in the 2015 general election.

Mr Fishfinger who stood against Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron in the Westmorland and Lonsdale constituency had a manifesto pledging “Free fishing rods for all", and, "No tax on fish and chip shops". He also said he was "fully codmitted to making Brexit work for the codstituents".

Mr Fishfinger with Tim Farron Theresa May and Lord Buckethead
Elmo - The  Give Me Back Elmo Party Johnson with Elmo and Count Binface
Journalist and novelist Auberon Waugh contested North Devon for the Dog Lovers’ Party with the slogan “A better deal for your dog” and Tom Barber stood for the No Fruit Out of Context Party in Battersea in 2001 on the platform of fighting against the scourge of pineapple on pizza. 

The Freedom to Party Party makes regular appearances on the hustings, as does the Fancy Dress Party and The Can’t Stop the Party Party, although sadly the Teddy Bear Alliance no longer exists as a political entity.

There are a few joke parties elsewhere in the world like the Sun Ripened Warm Tomato Party in Australia and many beer related parties in parts of Europe like the Friends of Beer Party in the Czech Republic, Poland’s Polish Beer-Lovers' Party and Russia’s Beer Lovers Party. 

But if there was a Olympic event for stupid political parties, the Brits are sure fire gold medal winners.  

If only the Taipei Mayor would get properly into the swing of things and field some really spectacularly ridiculous and useless candidates...then at least we could all have a good laugh.

Tinkerty Tonk… 


《 垃圾桶臉醫生,容我為您介紹垃圾桶臉伯爵 》

我之前寫過,柯市長和他的團隊經常製作一些更像是表演藝術而不是嚴肅政治的東西,如今我似乎已經有了結論:就他在台灣政治舞台上所在的位置看來,他身上似乎有些英國血統。

很快瀏覽一下他為TMD在今年年底地方選舉提出的參選名單,就會發現一群在動物園般不合適的候選人,如果他們當選,將不會給台灣政治帶來任何好處。他將這些不合適的人推上選舉的動機,顯然是讓他們擔任破壞者的角色,用投票的機制對其他政黨造成損害。

雖然這在法律上是公平競爭,但也是一種道德破產的策略,因此我真心希望他至少可以帶著幽默感來做這件事。如果他沉迷於遊戲政治,那將會影響真正關心國家如何運作的嚴肅政黨 。

這也幾乎證明了柯市長對更進一步提昇 TMD 的目標或政策並不認真,他只是為了在選舉中打擊那些更有政治意識和嚴肅性的對手。這不是一國之首該有的心態,因此我認為他已經放棄了任何當總統野心,這是一件好事。

例如他的一位被提名人陳述他的主要經歷是曾擔任高中籃球隊和國中糾察隊;另一位目前是秘書,曾經在麥當勞工作。這沒有錯,但她和不少被提名人一樣既沒有經驗,也沒有對公共事務表現出任何興趣。

笑話參選人 (joke candidates) 是英國選舉中歷史悠久且非常令人愉快的一部分。想要競選英國國會議員僅需繳交 500 英鎊(19,000 新台幣)的保證金,在台灣根據地方中央的不同,議員最高保證金是 200,000 新台幣(7,600 英鎊)。在英國如果得不到 5% 的選票無法拿回保證金,在台灣是 10%。

英國選舉維持低保證金是因為每個人都喜歡笑話參選人,這非常符合英國人的幽默感。笑話參選人在競選期間總是有許多媒體版面並且緩和了緊張的情緒,至少因為他們,選舉對於普通選民來說變得可以忍受。

目前最著名的笑話參選人是垃圾桶臉伯爵(Count Binface),他上一次出現是競選倫敦市長,他的表現出人意料地好,民調甚至比一些嚴肅的候選人還要好。他在網站上如此吹噓:感謝 24,775 位美麗的倫敦人,他們讓我成為他們心目中市長的首選。我在 20 名參選人中排名第 9,創下了外星人在地球上競選公職的新紀錄。

垃圾桶臉伯爵自稱是星際太空戰士。

(選舉結果正式宣布,各笑話參選人華麗出席 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-XubUsTy1s)

之後在 2019 年議會席位選舉中,垃圾桶臉伯爵與現任首相保守黨魁強生,代表粗暴瘋子怪物黨 (Monster Raving Loony) 的水桶頭勳爵(Lord Buckethead),還有William Tobin一起在Uxbridge選區競選。

Tobin的競選目標是得到零票,他是一名因為外派在國外生活了15 年而失去投票權的英國人,不過即使不能投票他還是可以參選,於是他花了五百英鎊對此事做出抗議。代表還我艾摩黨(The Give Me Back Elmo Party)的代表芝麻街主角艾摩,也在該選區中和強生一較高下。

我已經有 25 年沒有在英國生活了,因此我也無法投票,但或許我應該掏出 500 英鎊,讓自己參加下一次選舉。

其他笑話黨包括無地農民黨(The Landless Peasant Party)和投給自己彩虹夢想票黨(The Vote For Yourself a Rainbow Dream Ticket Party),該黨在 2005 年Cardiff North選舉中得到一票。是的,您當然可以在英國選舉中把票投給自己。

不過有時後開玩笑也會贏得選舉,例如本名為Stuart Drummond的安格斯猴子(H'Angus the Monkey),於 2002 年成為Hartlepool首位也是唯一一位直選市長,任職三屆直至 2013 年該職位被廢除為止。

以等待奇蹟為主要方針的生日派對黨(Birthday Party),和OOOG的Al-Zebabist Nation(譯者不會翻)、原子兒童(Children of the Atom)、透過歌曲闡述世界和平(World Peace Through Song)都參加了2015年的大選。

至於和自由民主黨黨魁Tim Farron在Westmorland and Lonsdale 選區競爭的炸魚條先生(Mr Fishfinger),他承諾為所有人提供免費釣魚竿,以及爭取炸魚薯條店免稅。他還表示會致力於脫歐以為選民服務 ("fully codmitted (committed) to making Brexit work for the codstituents (constituents)".)

(註:此處是玩文字遊戲,cod 是鱈魚,代用於 com/con)

記者小說家 Auberon Waugh 代表愛狗黨(The Dog Lovers’ Party)在North Devon參選,他的口號是讓你的狗過更好的生活;代表絕不斷章取義水果黨(The No Fruit Out of Context Party) 的Tom Barber,則是於 2001 年在Battersea選區主張打擊比薩裡加鳳梨這種禍害。

此外自由開趴黨(The Freedom to Party Party),花俏服飾黨(The Fancy Dress Party)和開趴無法黨(The Can’t Stop the Party Party)也經常出現在競選活動中,遺憾的是泰迪熊聯盟(The Teddy Bear Alliance)已經不再是個政治實體。

世界其他地方也有一些笑話黨,如澳洲的日曬溫蕃茄黨 (The Sun Ripened Warm Tomato Party) ,捷克的啤酒之友黨(The Friends of Beer Party)、波蘭的愛波蘭啤酒人黨(The Polish Beer-Lovers' Party)和俄羅斯的啤酒愛人黨(Beer Lovers Party)。

儘管有這麼多笑話黨,我認為如果為愚蠢的政黨舉辦奧運的話,我的祖國英國肯定會是金牌數冠軍得主。

最後,如果台北市長能適當理解我這篇文章並加以實踐,提出一些非常荒謬和無用的候選人……那麼至少能在嚴肅的選舉中搏君一笑。

Tinkerty Tonk… 掰掰。


Tuesday, February 15, 2022

Ukraine & Taiwan, same same, but different

Ukraine is the world’s top story at the moment as it awaits the next move by the Russian aggressor, and while it is a very different country to Taiwan, there are striking similarities between the two in terms of external pressures from a bullying neighbour and the factors behind that aggression.   

Both share a group of countries around the world they can class as staunch friends, almost allies. The old saying of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ holds true in both cases with countries who do not view China or Russia in a very good light.

Both have historical ties to their adversary but are out-gunned and out-numbered by them and both have a staunch determination to not be subject to another’s authority.

It is certainly not unreasonable for anyone living in Taiwan to be watching the Ukraine situation closely and draw some observations and lessons from it. As a journalist, drawing comparisons is somewhat of a mixed blessing, it helps illustrate points you are trying to make, but you also lay yourself open to criticism and cries of “Oh, yes but you forgot about this/that.” 

That said, here are some of the obvious similarities between the two countries and worrying parallels with the situation on the borders of Ukraine which has sparked such a strong reaction from around the world.   

The first and most obvious is that they are under direct threat by a far more powerful neighbour with which they have close historical links. 

Ukraine became a part of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) after World War II (1945), but regained its independence in 1991 after the breakup of the  Soviet Union. Taiwan was similarly tossed into the geopolitical melting pot after World War II and was placed under the governance of the Republic of China (ROC), freeing it from Japan’s colonial era. 

Obviously, self-government came about in different ways with Ukraine walking away from the Soviet grip after the collapse of communism in 1989, while Taiwan escaped communism when ROC troops lost the Chinese Civil War and fled to the island.

So not exactly the same, but very similar historical backgrounds. Both countries now find themselves under threat from their larger and more powerful historically-linked neighbours. 

Russia, like China, wishes to expand its sphere of influence. President Putin has bemoaned the loss of the former Soviet republics as much as China bemoans the ‘loss’ of Taiwan as part of the mainland’s territory, as it did over Hong Kong for so long prior to 1997. 

The two have also indulged in overt imperialistic moves with Russia invading and annexing the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014 and China staging what amounts to a military takeover of the South China sea in recent years. (Somewhat ironically, it was originally claimed by the ROC in 1947 before The People’s Republic of China (PRC) revised the claim in 1952.)

The direct threat of military force is also present in both cases, although Taiwan has been living with that threat for a lot longer than Ukraine. It is estimated Putin has amassed well over 100,000 troops within striking distance of the Ukraine border, while China is thought to have anywhere between 2,000 to 3,000 missiles pointing at Taiwan.

There is also the strategic importance of both places. Taiwan is very much part of the United States Pacific front line of defence against any possible aggression from China, while Putin fears Ukraine is getting politically too close to Europe, thus weakening Russia’s southern and western flank.

Aside from wanting to expand its sphere of influence, Russia is also concerned about ideological leakage from a country which is politically far more open and free than itself. 

Ukraine is an open democracy with a free media with its leaders elected without any undue influence. Russia cannot boast of such things, and even if it tries to pretend the same is the case, it clearly is not. The Kremlin is able to manipulate elections and suppress genuine dissent. China clearly has the same concerns when it comes to Taiwan’s fully functioning democracy, I obviously don’t need to go into detail on this point for you dear reader. 

There is also political pride and the desire which is strong in any leading politician to get into the history books as someone who has achieved what they see as a huge positive for their country. Political vanity is not a factor which can be ignored as it is a powerful motivator, particularly among dictators. 

Likely membership of supranational organisations is also a factor in place for both Ukraine and Taiwan. China has kept Taiwan from joining the United Nations (UN) via its power of veto and works aggressively to prevent it being part of any other global grouping, to the extent of even throwing a tantrum over the nature of its participation in global sporting events, let alone anything more important, like the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Ukraine is already a member of the UN but Putin is worried it will join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) which will only bring it closer to its western allies and further isolate Russia. Just a few days ago Putin shocked the world by saying allowing Ukraine to join NATO would increase the prospects of a Russia-NATO conflict that could turn nuclear.

While shocking, Putin’s threat of nuclear war appears little different to the regular outpourings of various Chinese political and military leaders as they bluster and threaten and indulge in overflying the island with jet fighters on a regular basis. 

So there are a myriad of historical and background factors which bring Taiwan and Ukraine together against a similar adversary. They are very different countries, but very much share the same ideals and desires.

While this column comes to no real conclusions and can hardly be deemed an opinion piece, it is food for thought given the nature of the global response to Russia’s sabre-rattling towards Ukraine.

The US has asked China to encourage Russia to back off Ukraine. "We would hope that the Chinese would play a role in encouraging the Russians to do the right thing," US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said a few days ago. 

She made this comment against the background of China always expressing concerns over the integrity of border security and sovereignty  in UN discussions but her comment sparked a terse response from Zhang Jun, China's ambassador to the UN..

"Our message is consistent and clear: resolve any differences through diplomacy," he said . "Stop hyping up the tension," he said. "Russia's legitimate security concerns should be seriously addressed.”

Even if the current Ukraine situation calms down and peace and stability returns, it will likely be in the same situation as Taiwan in the future, with the same threat hanging over it in the absence of a major shift in policy towards it from its more powerful neighbour. 

One thing Taiwan can take heart from is the aggressive response from the western democracies to the Russian threat to Ukraine.  

That, if nothing else, would appear to be good news for Taiwan that for all sorts of reasons it can likely rely on its global friends, particularly the United States, to stand by it. 

Tinkerty Tonk...

Click here if you would like to read this story in Chinese. 


Saturday, February 12, 2022

The Establishment

中文在下方

In many countries there exists a group of dominant people who, for various reasons, consider themselves to be natural born leaders and, for some amorphous reason, should be running things. Taiwan is no exception. 

The collective noun for such groups is ‘The Establishment’ a term first coined in the 1950s by  British journalist Henry Fairlie, who said, “By the Establishment, I do not only mean the centres of official power, though they are certainly part of it, but rather the whole matrix of official and social relations within which power is exercised. The exercise of power in the United Kingdom  cannot be understood unless it is recognized that it is exercised socially.”

It is a term that has since slipped into common parlance, particularly in the media. In the United Kingdom the establishment is sharply defined and easy to identify. If you asked pretty much anyone in the UK, including teenagers or those even younger, who ‘The Establishment’ was they will tell you it means the Royal Family, the landed gentry (dukes, earls, lords and suchlike), and some might include the police and the army. Others might also add in lawyers, industrialists, bankers and even church leaders. 

If you ask the same people which political party do people in these groups represent, they would say without hesitation The Conservative Party. The Conservative, or Tory, party is very much the political party of the establishment and it is widely known Queen Elizabeth II favours the Conservative party, although she would never express any political opinion publicly.

In the United States it is White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPS) who make up the bulk of the establishment, as they have done since the independence of the colonies after the Revolutionary War and subsequent peace treaty in 1783. Hong Kong has a new establishment which since 1997 has become any pro-Beijing group, many of which are now highly influential, for one reason or another.

Generally speaking, establishment people are richer members of a society and seen as being more self-interested and caring less about the common man.

Establishments in any country wield background power no matter which party is actually in power. In the UK for example, a Labour government would still have to do battle with rich and powerful industrialists, bankers and titled people, who would mostly tend to be on the side of the Conservatives. Study US politics for five minutes and you will see the same is happening there right now with the Democrats and Republicans.

In Taiwan it is easy to see which political party represents ‘The Establishment’. It is Kuomintang, and given they ruled under martial law from 1949 to 1987 it is no real surprise that actions during those years have left a legacy which considerably underpins the political power they wield in terms of who their rich and influential friends are. 

However, the establishment does not get its own way all the time, despite the disproportionate amount of background power they wield, and those opposed do get to win elections. As is the case now in Taiwan and the United States. 

Britain has fallen back to the establishment Conservatie Party and now has a Prime Minister who is one of the social elite, went to one of the most expensive schools, a top university and is pretty much the poster boy of what an establishment figure is. His cabinet consists of billionaires and broadly the same kind of person he is.

The entrenched privilege of the so-called elite means they not only have background influence via their friends, families and network of like-minds, but they also tend to display an arrogance that they are the ones who should control things. This attitude largely built on money and that background existing influence. It is one of the main reasons political parties in opposition to establishment parties have to be smarter and work harder in office.

One theme that runs true when an establishment party is in opposition is in the nature of the way they behave. Often they will criticize the incumbent administration’s actions without coming up with ideas or policies of their own. This is evident in the US at the moment with the Republicans, and the KMT do this all the time.

I struggle to remember a statement from the KMT which first criticized something the DPP were doing and then immediately came up with a counter policy or suggestion of how things should be done differently.  

They, like the Republicans, seem devoid of any real policies aside from broad sweeping statements which really amount to little more than “Well, we would just do a much better job”.

The elitist arrogance shines through with many statements the KMT makes about current government policy. It is a similar picture with Eric Chew’s planned visit to the United States. 

Considering themselves to be historically in tune with the US as well as a good friend for so many years, it is likely he expects to receive a warm welcome. One wonders if it will be a case as it seems more likely they will say “Well yes, but that was then, and this is now”. I’m sure the KMT’s recent opposition to US pork imports will not be forgotten simply because their referendum failed and the ban never happened.

Being an opposition party is not easy and it would appear the KMT still have not fully got used to the idea even after a term and a half out of power. They simply do not seem to be able to get used to it, or, as the establishment, they feel in the natural course of things they will be running the country again soon, because somehow that is the way it will be and the establishment will always win in the end. 

Remember, the KMT did not have to work very hard to win power back from the DPP’s Chen Shui-bian whose popularity collapsed towards the end of his term because of corruption scandals. 

When I was a young journalist an older and far more experienced colleague told me…”Remember with elections, a party does not win, the other side loses.” That has been true for many elections I subsequently covered and in most cases it was mistakes that dictated the outcome, not successes.  

So the KMT are unused to winning back power from a steady, stable and relatively popular incumbent party, and the learning curve is a steep one for them ahead of the local elections at the end of this year and the Presidential election in two years.   

Losing their arrogance and inbuilt assumption that they are the natural leaders has to give way to making themselves more electable by forming solid policies and a stream of ideas so voters actually see them as a credible party. Simply constantly criticizing everything the DPP does will not get them very far. 

This is assuming the DDP does not make some huge policy errors in the meantime. Outside of that seemingly remote possibility, the only thing the KMT can do is prove they have new and progressive policies backed up with data and budgets to differentiate them from the incumbents.  

Promising to run the country somehow ‘better’ than the other side doesn’t wash with most voters who look for specifics come election time. A manifesto with solid and practical goals, properly planned and budgeted for is what they need to have, not broad and meaningless aims.

It would be refreshing to see some intelligent, well researched and backed-up ideas being put forward, rather than us all having to put up with the constant mud-slinging. Speaking for myself, I find it tedious and boring.    

Tinkerty Tonk...

從建制派看國民黨

 2022 年 2 月 11 日 2987 人閱讀

許多國家都有一群佔主導地位的人,出於各種原因他們認為自己是天生的領導者,更出於某種不明確的原因,他們認為掌權的應該是自己。台灣也不例外。

「建制派」就是社會的高層頂尖人士

這些團體的統稱是「建制派」(The Establishment),這是 1950 年代英國記者亨利.費爾利(Henry Fairlie)提出的術語,他是這麼說的:「建制派不僅指公共權力中心,雖然他們肯定是其中的一部分,更是行使權力的整個官方和社會關係矩陣。除非意識到權力是在社會上行使,否則無法理解權力如何在英國運作。」

此後該術語成為一個普遍用語,尤其被媒體廣泛使用。在英國建制派的定義明確且易於識別,如果你問英國的任何人,包括青少年甚至更年輕的人,他們會告訴你這意味著皇室、仕紳(公爵、伯爵、領主等),也可能包括警察和軍隊。有些人也會把律師、企業家、銀行家甚至教會歸類為建制派。

如果你問這些人,建制派群體中的人代表哪個政黨,他們會毫不猶豫地說保守黨。保守黨,或也就是托利黨,很大程度上是建制派的政黨,眾所周知伊麗莎白二世女王偏愛保守黨,儘管她永遠不會公開表達任何政治觀點。

在美國,自獨立戰爭和隨後的 1783 年和平條約以來,白人盎格魯撒克遜新教徒 (WASPS) 構成了大部分的建制派。 而香港的建制派,則是自 1997 年以來的親北京的團體,其中許多現在具有極大的影響力。

一般來說,建制派人士是社會中相對富有的成員,被視為比較自私,對普通人也較不關心。

而無論實際政府是誰,任何國家的建制派都掌握著幕後權力。例如在英國,工黨政府仍須與傾向於站在保守黨一邊的企業家、銀行家、有頭銜的人士、頂級律師等群體奮戰。只要研究美國政治五分鐘,你會發現同樣的事也發生在民主黨人和共和黨人之間。

在台灣很容易看出哪個政黨代表建制派,是國民黨。鑑於他們在 1949 年至 1987 年期間實行戒嚴令,那些年的統治鞏固了他們和有力的朋友的政治權力,這並不奇怪。

儘管擁有不成比例的權力,建制派也不能一直為所欲為,對立方也會贏得了選舉,就像現在台灣和美國的情況一樣。

至於英國則已經又回到建制派的保守黨,現任首相就是公認的社會菁英,就讀於英國最昂貴的學校之一,進入頂尖大學,如果你需要幫建制派做張宣傳海報,他就是海報上那個代言人。他的內閣由億萬富翁組成,和他大致是同一類的人。

這種所謂的菁英擁有根深柢固的特權,他們不僅透過他們的朋友、家人和志同道合的組織得到幕後影響,而且還傾向於表現出他們應該有控制權的傲慢,這種態度在很大程度上是建立在金錢和他們既有的影響力上。這就是為什麼反對建制派的政黨執政時,他們必須更聰明並且更努力。

當建制派成為反對黨時,有一個不變的特質,那就是他們通常批評現任政府,卻無法提出自己的想法或政策。這一點在目前美國共和黨身上很明顯,國民黨也一直是這樣。

圖片來源:翻攝自華視新聞YouTube頻道

國民黨表現的就只是失去權力的不安與躁動

就我印象所及,我想不出國民黨在批評民進黨正在做的事情之後,立即提出一項對應政策,或是建議如何以不同的方式處理。

與共和黨人一樣,除了空泛而籠統的聲明,國民黨似乎沒有任何真正的政策,而這些聲明實際上只不過是「我們會比你們做得更好。」

國民黨對當前政府政策的許多意見都展現了菁英主義的傲慢,這與主席朱立倫計劃訪問美國的情況相似。

國民黨認為自己一直是與美國為善的政黨,也是多年來的好朋友,可能希望黨主席訪問時受到熱烈的歡迎。不過你不禁要懷疑這個可能性,因為對方似乎更有可能說:「是的但那個時候是那個時候,現在是現在。」我相信國民黨最近對美國豬肉進口的極力反對,不會僅僅因為公投沒有過關禁令沒有實施,就會被忘得一乾二淨。

當一個反對黨並不容易,即使在失去執政權一個半任期後,國民黨似乎還沒有完全習慣這個想法。或許他們根本無法適應,或許作為建制派他們認為自然而然很快就會再次治理這個國家,因為建制派終將獲勝。

但是不要忘記,當年的總統陳水扁因醜聞而聲名狼藉,國民黨不必非常努力就從民進黨手中拿回政權。

決定選戰勝負的是誰錯誤較多、較嚴重

當我還是一名年輕記者時,一位年長且經驗豐富的同事告訴我:「記住,在選舉中不是一方贏了,而是另一方輸了。」我隨後報導的許多選舉都是如此,在大多數情況下,決定結果的是錯誤,而不是成功。

國民黨一定不習慣從一個穩定和相對受歡迎的執政黨手中奪回權力,因此在今年年底的地方選舉和兩年後的總統選舉之前,他們的學習曲線將會十分陡峭。

他們必須摒除他們是天生領導人的傲慢和假設,必須透過可靠的政策和見解來贏得選票,這樣選民才能真正將他們視為一個可信的政黨。僅僅不斷地批評民進黨所做的一切,不會讓他們走得太遠。

這是假設民進黨在此期間沒有犯一些重大的政策錯誤,而犯這種錯誤的可能性目前看來可能性也不高,因此國民黨唯一能做的就是證明他們有新的和進步的政策,以數據和預算為後盾,和現任執政者做出區別。

光是口頭承諾以某種比對手「更好」的方式治理國家,並不會被大多數在選舉時間注意細節的選民認同。他們需要穩固實際的目標以及完整適當的計劃,而不是空泛而無意義的方向。

如果國民黨能夠提出一些聰明的,經過充分研究並且有證據支持的想法和政策,那將會令人耳目一新。就我自己而言,目前所有人不得不忍受不斷的扔泥巴伎倆,實在非常乏味和無聊。

留言評論

延伸閱讀