Participant Observer Update

Catching up

Taiwanese students rally in support of
Hong Kong's democracy movement

I have been thinking about blogging again for quite a while now. So, instead of just thinking about it, I thought the best way to go is to just shut up and start writing.

It’s been a year since the Sunflower Movement. I observed an obvious fatigue among the social movement activists after the Movement and the anti-Nuclear Power Plant No.4 protest. I must say, I felt tired and drained, too, after tracking social movements in Taiwan for the past few years. Many students and young activists told me they felt a sense of loss, as if something was missing, or the feeling of losing direction.

Some young activists were angry, because they thought April 10^th, 2014 was not the right time to exit the Legislative Yuan (LY). They thought they should continue to occupy the Legislature until the LY dropped the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement (CSSTA) altogether. Some activists complained the decision making process to exit the LY was too authoritarian. There were also complaints about a selected number of movement “leaders” receiving more attention than others and were utilizing their popularity to further their own cause.

The students and young professionals then split into many groups to advocate for the causes they care most for (I plan to write about the splinter groups in a future article). The activists called such move “diverging advance and converging attack (分進合擊)”. 

Critics of the activists say the “diverging advance and converging attack” strategy was merely an excuse for the activists’ own infighting and inability to collaborate with each other. To be fair, the Sunflower Movement was never a unified group. It was an “umbrella” mechanism at best. The Movement consisted of fifty-some different student groups, NGO and civil society and social groups. Therefore, it is more fitting to describe one of the aftermaths of the Sunflower Movement as an emergence of additional social groups and then, political parties now known as the “Third Force”.

What’s been happening?

Even though, compared to 2013 and the beginning of 2014, the frequency of street protests has dwindled significantly, it does not mean the cases I have been following became stagnant. Here are some updates:

Dapu, Miaoli (苗栗大埔)

Ms. Peng Hsiu-chun (彭秀春), Widow of Chang Sen-wen (張森文) of the Chang Pharmacy (張藥房), and the three other families, whose homes were torn down by the Miaoli County government on July 18^th, 2013, were due in the Taichung Superior Court on June 25^th, 2015 for their cases against the Miaoli County government and for the returning of their land and rebuilding of their homes.

Ms. Peng is now a regular at the monthly farmer's market on the National Chengchi University campus is Taipei. She has her own booth where she sells ginger candy, tofu dessert and jam. 

Chen Wei-ting (陳為廷), the graduate student from National Tsing Hua University who threw his shoe at Miaoli County Commissioner, Liu Cheng-hung (劉政鴻) was found guilty by the Taichung branch of the Taiwan High Court on June 25^th, 2015. However, the court also decided that Chen did not have to serve any sentence or be reprimanded in anyway. In the verdict, the High Court also criticized the Miaoli County Commissioner for using harsh measures to expropriate the Chang family’s home and land and acted callously when he insisted to go to the Chang’s temporary home to “pay his respect” to Mr. Chang, who was found drown in a ditch near his home.

Huaguang Community (華光社區)

May 28^th, 2015 - Five defendants stood trial for obstruction of justice for the April 24^th, 2013 forced demolition of homes in the Huaguang Community. On April 24^th, 2015, two years after the initial demolition, members of the Huaguang Community, the five defendants and student supporters took to the streets again to plead with the government to drop the charges and to assist with settlement and lives of the former Huaguang Community residents.

May 12^th, 2015 – Huaguang Community residents and advocates protested at the Taipei City Government for the Da-an district police department blocking the road leading to the community a day before the scheduled demolition. The fences erected by the Da-an police department around the community also prevented other residents of Huaguang Community from going back to their homes.

Losheng Sanatorium (樂生療養院)

Student activists for the preservation of Losheng Sanatorium discovered that the guardian of the Sanatorium had been renting sections of the Sanatorium for filming. The guardian of the Sanatorium was charging the film crew NT$10,000 per day to film on location. However, the film crew did not preserve the structure of the Sanatorium and instead was spray painting the walls of the Sanatorium and did not return the walls and structure back to their original state. On June 17^th, 2015, the residents of Loshen Sanatorium and their supporters went to the Ministry of Welfare and Health to protest.

The advocates demanded 1) Consultation of the Sanatorium residents, experts of historical artifacts and the Ministry of Welfare and Health should be held before renting the structure; and 2) the money earned from renting the location should be used for the preservation of the Loshen Sanatoirum buildings.

Meanwhile, the cracks on the grounds of Loshen Sanatorium continue to widen.

For information on Losheng Sanatorium: Afternoon Tea at Losheng

Yuanli Township in Miaoli and Wind Turbines (院裡反瘋車)

Uncle Ching-jin at protest in Taipei

After a year and half of protesting and 7000 hours of guarding the seashore, Infravest Wind Turbine Co. and the residents of Yuanli reached a compromise. Last September, Infravest agreed to remove two of the four wind turbines in Yuanli Township. The criminal cases against the Yuanli residents were tried and most of the residents were found not guilty. Except for Uncle Ching-jin (清金阿伯). He was found guilty of the crime of coercion and sentenced to ten days in prison for blocking an Infravest Co. truck for mere nine seconds.

On the other hand, some positive did come to the Yuanli Township: 1) members of the

Uncle Ching-jin at his farm
Photo credit: 苑裡掀海風

Yuanli Self-Help Group ran in last November’s local election, and Zoe Chen (陳薈茗), resident, activist and daughter of the leader of the Yuanli Self-Help Group, is now the borough chief of the Fang-li Borough; 2) residents of Yuanli and supportive youngsters started two organizations to promote their agricultural products and community services. The organization for the promotion of Yuanli’s agricultural product is named “Seawind of Yuanli (苑裡掀海風)”, and the organization for community service and the promotion of the township is called the “Yuanli Sealine Family (苑裡海線一家親)”. I bought their “Filial Rice” and dried raddish at the farmer’s market. They were very good.

I wish I could say, from now on in Yuanli, everyone lived happily ever after, but that would be far from the truth. Last week, Infravest Wind Turbine Co. filed civil lawsuits against the student activists and asked for two million dollars compensation for property damage. 

For information on what happened in Yuanli: Wind Turbine Troubles

The Taipei Dome and the protection of trees (松菸護樹)

Farglory Co. workers
blocking tree protectors

After more than a year of protest and the election of Dr. Ko Wen-je as mayor of Taipei. The Farglory Construction group is still struggling to finish building the Taipei Dome. The Taipei City government launched a series of investigations on the possible corruption, safety issues and problems with preservation of historical artifacts on Farglory Construction Group. After many very public back and forth critiques between Farglory Construction Group president Chao Teng-hsiung (趙藤雄) and Dr. Ko and meetings between their teams, the story of Taipei Dome continues, and the trees are still there, for now. As someone who was born in that neighborhood and lived there until my family relocated to the United States, I am watching with interest and attention.

Participating and Observing (and what to watch out for)

DPP presidential election candidate
Dr. Tsai Ing-wen in Washington DC

In the following months, look out periodically for the Participant Observer’s "Election Edition" as Taiwan moves toward its 2016 presidential and legislative elections, as well as the continuation of my observation on social movements in Taiwan, among many things.

Lastly, I wrote an article last year on the “minor adjustment (課綱微調)” of textbooks proposed by the Ma Ying-jeou administration. The issue is again making the news as students from more than two hundred high schools came together to demand the Ministry of Education to abolish the changes in their text books, which will be introduced in classrooms this coming Fall.

There will be a street protest on July 5^th 

So, lots of events happening in Taiwan worth paying attention to, and I will do my best to document them and to share my experience. 

(For information about the minor adjustment of high school textbooks:Party-State Reemerges Through Education in Taiwan)

P.S. We adopted a new puppy after my dog of 16 year, Mr. Snuggles, passed away a year ago. Her name is Hanji, Taiwanese for "Sweet Potato". 

Reflection on “Social Movement in Taiwan since 2008” Workshop

This is the reflection article I wrote for the EATS' (European Association of Taiwan Studies) Newsletter on the Conference on "Social Movement in Taiwan since 2008" held at SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies) of University of London on June 25th.

**************************

Sunflower Movement Roundtable

Civil society is one of the vibrant features of Taiwan’s democracy. During Taiwan’s liberalization and democratization, social movements led by segments of civil society sprung over Taiwan’s political landscape. Since the election of President Ma Ying-jeou in 2008, Taiwan has experienced a resurgence of social movements, beginning with the Wild Strawberry Movement, where students and young protesters demand the government to respect the citizens’ right to expression and to assemble. The Wild Strawberry Movement became the first major student movement since the 1990s.

Since 2012, under President Ma’s second term, Taiwan experienced an eruption of social activism. The rising discontent over the Ma administration’s public policies, such as land expropriation, the eviction and forced demolition of citizens homes to make way for science parks and glitzy shopping areas and hotels, lawsuits against elderly laid off workers, the continue construction of the nuclear power plant, treatment of soldiers, coupled with growing apprehension over increasing Chinese influence over many sectors in Taiwan, invoked a series of small, persistent, “guerrilla- style” protests, as well as large demonstrations attended by tens of thousands participants.

Dr. Bi-yu Chang discussing my presentation

In June 2014, I had the pleasure and honour to be invited as a presenter and participant at the “Conference on Social Movement in Taiwan after 2008” sponsored by the Centre of Taiwan Studies in the School of Oriental and Africa Studies (SOAS) at the University of London. Spearheaded by Dr Dafydd Fell, the Centre of Taiwan Studies at SOAS is a hub for all things Taiwan. From Taiwanese films, arts and music screening to historical and political lessons, I learned the Centre of Taiwan Studies offers interdisciplinary studies to those who have chosen make Taiwan as the focus of their studies. The “Conference on Social Movements in Taiwan after 2008” was the most comprehensive conference dedicated to social movements in Taiwan and the issues associated with the movements I’ve attended. Moreover, since the conference was organized prior to the Sunflower Movement in Taiwan, an additional roundtable event was added for all the conference participants to speak to and interact with SOAS students interested in Taiwan’s largest social movement to date. Several social movement themes were presented at the conference. They are: (1) Environmentalism; (2) Humanism; (3) Energy; (4) Land; (5) the China Factor, and (6) Strategies and effectiveness of social movements in Taiwan.

On the Environment 

National Sun Yat-sen University sociology professor and environmental activist, Professor Chiu Hua-mei focused her discussion on the evolution of environmental movement against industrial pollution in Kaohsiung City, Taiwan’s second largest city. Since Kaohsiung became an industrial city in Taiwan, many lauded its development of heavy industries and credited such development for the creation of jobs and prosperity. According to Dr Chiu, the City is divided into zones where various heavy industries, such as petrochemical and steel industries and power plants, made Kaohsiung their permanent home. What made Professor Chiu’s presentation exceedingly interesting was her elucidation on the different protest groups in Kaohsiung and the methods the groups use in protests. According to Chiu, the earlier protests in Kaohsiung were grassroots, mainly organized by local residents – farmers and fishermen – who were disgruntled by land grabbing and water pollution. The more massive protests against heavy industry pollution came in the 1980s but environmental activism suffered a down turn in the 1990s. Fascinatingly, Chiu informed the conference participants that it was as late as 2007 that the first professional environmental organization was founded. There on after, Kaohsiung’s environmental activism became more specialized and vigorous. Moreover, observers began to see the participation of urban residents and members of the middle class.

Professor Dafydd Fell of SOAS

With the middle class and urban citizens as additional participants, environmental activism in Taiwan surged. In the presentation under the title, “The Revival of the Green Party in Taiwan”, Professor Dafydd Fell’s discussion was a wholesome complementary to the surge of environmentalism through Taiwan. Fell contended that the Green Party performed better than any time in the Party’s history in the 2012 election. With the increase of constituents becoming more aware of environmental and energy issues, the Green Party in Taiwan, according to Fell, has found its policy niche to become and remain politically relevant.

One of the relevant environmental issue explicated by National Taiwan University’s Ming-sho Ho, was the protest against Naphtha Cracker Plants in Taiwan. According to Ho, this particular movement has been a persistent and consistent trend in Taiwan’s environmentalism. Ho traced the protests against Naphtha Cracker from 1987 to 2011 and concluded that due to increased public awareness of the tremendous pollution brought on by the petrochemical industry, new petrochemical projects are also increasingly difficult to establish. Environmental movements, according to Ho, are also becoming increasing less partisan. Most importantly, with the professionalization of environmental NGOs, mobilization is now more effective, and therefore, the protests are now more successful.

Energy and Land Issues

Professor Ho Ming-sho of NTU

Environmental activists in Taiwan often share the same protest grounds as the energy policy advocates. For example, the anti-nuclear energy activists also strongly advocated against the continuation of dumping nuclear waste on Orchid Island. Dr Simona Grano of the University of Zurich explicated the resurgence of the anti-nuclear protest since 2011. Grano personally participated in many environmental protests while conducting fieldwork in Taiwan. Grano also observed a surge of large-scaled anti-nuclear protest the past few years. The anti-nuclear protest drew tens of thousands participants to the streets. The protests were a family affair with parents bringing their young children and sometimes performing drills in case of a nuclear melt down. Anti-nuclear energy protesters even occupied Taipei Main Station and Zhongxiao West Road in the most recent protest in April.

Just as the citizens felt the nuclear energy issue is closely related to the welfare of one’s family, land grabbing and the demolition of homes is another issue that became very close to the minds and hearts of Taiwanese in recent years. Home demolition and land grabbing in places such as Dapu Borough of Miaoli County and the Huaguang Community in Taipei accompanied by images of excavators moving into farm land where rice was two weeks away from harvest and the borough residents properties scattered in ditches sparked the consistent and persistent “guerrilla type” protests through 2013 with the young protesters eventually occupying the Minister of Interior for forty eight hours.

I was responsible for presenting social movements sparked by land issues. I followed the administration’s attempt to expropriate citizens’ land for the past three years. What cultivated my interest was, when I went to Taiwan to conduct the last round of my dissertation research, I saw a video on television of an excavator mowing down a rice farm in a place named Dapu in Miaoli County. I then began researching the issues relating to Dapu and realized the Miaoli County government had been expropriating county residents’ land in order to make way for an extension of a science park, as well as an extra highway and a crematorium. The endeavor led to the demolition of several homes in Miaoli County and the victims of forced demolition committing suicide.

My presentation consisted of more than fifty photographs I took while observing the demolition and protests. This was the first time I used a tremendous amount of photographs for an academic presentation, and I received more feedback from the audience than some of my other panel discussions. My presentation at SOAS demonstrated the importance of field work and the extent to which images help deliver messages to the audience.

Strategies and Effectiveness of Social Movements

Professor Bi-yu Chang and J. Michael Cole

The most important part of the SOAS conference was the presentation and discussion of the strategies and the effectiveness of social movements in Taiwan, as well as the extent to which Taiwanese have chosen to deal with “the big elephant in the room”, as so eloquently stated by Professor Hsu Szu-chien of Academia Sinica. As many social movements as the panelists discussed at the conference, the most significant matter was, to what extent is the protest effective? What should be considered as a successful movement? What is not? This particular topic was hotly discussed at SOAS.

According to presenter J. Michael Cole, the success of a social movement should not be measured only by the number of participants at a protest. Cole argued, movements such as protest against demolition in Dapu Borough, the protest against the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement led by the Black Island Nation Youth Alliance and the Alliance against Media Monster, are successful because the movement organizers made sure the government cannot ignore them and their respective issues are kept alive. Large protests such as the ones sponsored by Citizen 1985 to ensure proper treatment of military recruit, after an army corporal was tortured to death, were too predictable and organized for the government to be intimidated, though the Citizen 1985 demonstrations often drew tens of thousands of participant. Social movements that are too predictable and organized combined with the lack of effort to follow-up with the responsible government agencies and politicians have failed to cultivate the changes of law and to keep the issue alive.

Conclusion

The SOAS conference not only provided a platform for vigorous academic discussion on the surge of social movements in Taiwan after 2008, it was also a forum for academics, and activists to discuss not only research but to also share participation experiences in different movements. This was what I’ve never experienced in other conferences on Taiwan. The interdisciplinary and cross-professional nature of the conference should be encouraged, as I have learned tremendously from other conference participants.

Lastly, the SOAS conference also brought to the forefront an issue that cannot be ignored – the influence of China, as the China factor was one of the reasons for the student occupation of the Legislative Yuan and the Sunflower Movement. Moreover, the movement against media monopoly, the demolition of Mainlander communities in Taipei, land expropriation in Miaoli County and elsewhere in Taiwan, all in the name of progress, development and investment, all bear the influence of China.

I find the roundtable on the Sunflower Movement that was open to all students extremely important, as I was often asked why the young protesters in Taiwan decided to all of a sudden adopt the illegal mean of occupying the Legislative Yuan. The roundtable discussion on the Sunflower Movement allowed the discussants to explain to a broad audience on the causes, strategies and effectiveness of the Sunflower Movement. It was imperative to explain that the Sunflower Movement did not come out of the blue. It was a manifestation of the discontent and grievances toward the Ma administration after more than a year of non- responsiveness.

As the Legislative Yuan in Taiwan initiates yet another extraordinary session this week, the issue of Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement and the oversight bill lingers and are waiting to be resolved. Young activists are preparing for more demonstrations (Citizen 1985 is gearing up for a protest this weekend on the one year anniversary of their massive, 250,000-participant protest last year) for as long as the government remains nonresponsive to the demand of the citizens. Conference as the Conference on Social Movement in Taiwan is extremely helpful for academics and activists to not only share their research but also learn from each other’s field of expertise.

Professor Fan Yun of National Taiwan University

My second presentation was on the origin of the Sunflower Movement.
I find it imperative to give context to the movement.

Professor Szu-chien Hsu of Academia Sinica, Institute of Political Science

Is Academic Freedom Under Assault?

My article published by the Thinking Taiwan English Platform.

Students and academics should be encouraged to care for and to participate in social issues and politics, whether they support government policies or not.

It’s been a tough week for social scientists in Taiwan. It began with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Su Ching-chuang’s (蘇清泉) grilling of Environmental Protection Administration Minister Wei Kuo-yen (魏國彥), who was scheduled to answer questions on nuclear waste disposal, about what social scientists and the departments of sociology at universities do exactly. This was followed by Su’s tirade accusing faculty and students at public universities of “causing chaos on the streets” and his call for “education budget redistribution.” Then KMT Legislator Lu Hsueh-chang (呂學樟) stepped in and led an investigation team, organized by the Legislative Yuan’s Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee (司法及法制委員會), into Academia Sinica, the nation’s top research institution.

The purpose of Lu’s visit was ostensibly to inspect the conditions of Academia Sinica’s staffing and performance enhancement after the institution’s restructuring (組織改造後員額編制及業務績效提升情形). According to Lu, Academia Sinica had a budget of more than NT$5 billion (US$165.8 million) for the past five years and experienced a 2% staffing increase during the same period. Given this, he said, the public has the right to examine the institution’s progress and quality of its research.

Lu’s visit to Academia Sinica would not have sparked such outrage among academics had it not happened at such sensitive time, or if he had not made such a splash of his views on certain academics and what research institutions ought to be doing.

Questioned by the press, Lu said that members of Academia Sinica had behaved in an irrational and impolite manner when they greeted President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) last month with Sunflowers, banners, and slogans as ma arrived at the institution to deliver a keynote speech at a conference on the sovereignty disputes over the Diaoyutai Islands. Ma’s visit came a week after the end of the Sunflower Movement’s three-week occupation of the Legislative Yuan in protest against the Cross-Strait Services Trade Agreement (CSSTA) with China, and less than less than a month after an estimated half-a-million people took to the streets to express their support for the Sunflowers.

Professor Chen Yi-shen. Photo credit: Paul Jobin 

Several hundred researchers, staff, and students from Academia Sinica, including Institute of Sociology research fellow Chiu Hei-yuan (瞿海源) and associate research fellow Wu Rwei-ren (吳叡人) of the Institute of Taiwan History, greeted President Ma outside the venue where he was to deliver his speech with banners that said, “Taiwan’s future is for the people to decide (台灣未來，人民做主),” or “Legislative Oversight on Cross-Strait agreements! (兩岸協議，立法監督).” Some protesters also held sunflowers while they chanted “Restore Constitutionalism, Defend Democracy (重建憲政，捍衛民主)” at the president. Later on, associate research fellows Chen Yi-shen (陳儀深) and Shiu Wen-tang (許文堂) of the Institute of Modern History, along with Paul Jobin, an associate professor at the University of Paris Diderot, held protest posters in silence inside the conference room as President Ma addressed his audience.

Such behavior from members of Academia Sinica, according to Legislator Lu, was administratively unethical and inappropriate. Lu further criticized the nation’s top research institution by arguing that Academia Sinica was subordinate to the Presidential Office, and that therefore the president was Academia Sinica’s boss. “Who would do such a thing when one’s boss visits?” Lu asked. Employees at Academia Sinica are the president’s staff and should naturally make recommendations to the president, he said. However, yelling at the president is “incongruous.” Lu suggested that Academia Sinica reflect on the incident.

But he wasn’t done. Lu then opined that while institutes of natural sciences and engineering were conducting “vigorous, outstanding research,” academic work by the Institute of Political Science and Institutum Iurisprudentiae had gone astray. Researchers should not be so critical or so vocal in their opposition to government policies, he said, as employees at Academia Sinica are also public servants. Taking part in protests, he added, violates the Civil Service Administrative Neutrality Act (公務人員行政中立法). Lu recommended that the institutes that “went astray” be merged and “reconstituted.”

Professor Huang Kuo-chang

Lu’s visit and comments sparked outrage among members of Academia Sinica and academics at other institutions of high learning. Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), an associate research fellow at the Institutum Iurisprudentiae and a key leader during the Sunflower Movement’s occupation, said that Lu was “utterly ignorant” and that even former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) had not had such authoritarian tendencies. In an interview with the Chinese-language Storm Media, Michael Hsiao (蕭新煌), the director of Academia Sinica’s Institute of Sociology, sounded equally unimpressed with Lu. Echoing Huang, Hsiao called Lu ignorant and added that as a legislator, Lu should represent the people and not act as a mindless follower of his party. 

Weighing in, Modern History associate research fellow Chen Yi-shen (陳儀深) pointed out that the purpose of Academia Sinica as the “highest national research institution of the Republic of China” was to serve as the country’s top research entity. Consequently, academic freedom should be at the heart of Academia Sinica, he said, adding that caring for and paying attention to society were naturally part of an academic’s work and research.

Worryingly, Lu’s outburst appears to be just one in a series of attempts by the administration and its allies in the KMT to keep academia in line. In 2012, KMT Legislator Alex Tsai (蔡正元) threatened to slash the budget of the Institutum Iurisprudentiae in half if the institute’s research fellows continued to speak against the Want Want China Times Group’s attempt to purchase China Network System (CNS), which would have affected a quarter of households nationwide. Many academics from Academia Sinica were vocal in their opposition to the deal, which they feared would create a media monopoly by a company that had vast business interests in China. Besides threatening to slash the budget of the law institute, Tsai argued that it was none of the academic’s business to protest against a commercial merger and that the academics were motivated by anti-government media outlets for political reasons.

Notice from Ministry of Education to NTU

Back in 2010, the Ministry of Education had issued a notice to National Taiwan University (NTU) requesting the university to “reflect and improve the contents of its PTT Gossip board.” The ministry claimed the university’s Internet discussion board was permeated by “all kinds of political articles” and added that it hoped the university could rid the Internet forum of “political party employees” and create a “clean environment” for its users. The ministry further requested NTU strongly regulate posts that strayed from “academic and teaching purposes.”

The sustained efforts by the government to keep academics and students from engaging in politics and social issues with the threat of selectively limiting or curtailing the distribution of research and education funds — or simply by discrediting and smearing those who disagree with the government — are grounds for grave concern. It’s difficult to determine whether KMT Legislator Su is truly that ignorant about the fields of sociology and social sciences, or that he was merely attributing the blame for what he considers “social instability” to social scientists and their students. The notion that academics and students should stay within the confines of the university and research centers, or that they should only conduct research that is directed by an administrative entity, is absurd.

Social science is a vast discipline. It consists of many fields, including psychology, sociology, philosophy, anthropology, economics, political science, and law. It studies society, its institutions, and how and why people behave as they do as individuals or as groups within society. In order to study these essential elements of society and research the variables that affect these elements, systematic, vigorous fieldwork is always required. Whether they conduct surveys, interviews, or engage in participatory observation, being physically close to the research subject is key to the ability of social scientists to carry out robust research. To urge political scientists or sociologists to only “stick to research and academia,” or to order them not to care about the impacts of a certain policy is impossible, if not downright offensive.

Most importantly, academic freedom is one of the essential elements of a democracy. Such freedom gives academics the ability to investigate, examine, and present their findings without fear of being monitored, reprimanded, or fired when the conclusions are not to the government’s liking. It is also through academic freedom and openness that students are able to learn and discuss vast subjects inside and outside the classroom and make their own interpretations of various phenomena and theories. Academia is the first sector in which authoritarian governments extend their tentacles to restrict and control people’s thoughts. Taiwan prides herself in her democracy. Academics and students should be encouraged to care for and to participate in social issues and politics, whether they support government policies or not. They certainly should not be penalized for doing so.

A Day in the Life of a ‘Li Zhang’

My article published at the newly launched Thinking Taiwan English platform with more photos.

Although we don’t see or hear them very often, the local pillars play an essential role within their communities and in election time.  

“Come in, come in! Sit down and have some tea!” the cheerful voice calls out as I open the door to Mr. Huang’s first-floor office just outside Taipei. On any given day, various members of the community gather at the table for pu’er tea, snacks, fruit, and sometimes alcohol. On the day of our appointment, Mr. Huang, or “Ah-Chuan,” as everyone calls him, was sampling white wine with his friends.

Ah-Chuan is head of a ward, or “Li” (里). According Article 59 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法), “Villages/Wards shall each have a chief of village/ward, who, upon the instruction and under the supervision of the mayor of township/city, or chief administrator, shall handle village/ward affairs and carry out commissioned tasks”. In other words, the job description of the head of a ward, or “Li Zhang,” is generic, which leaves plenty of room for the elected to maneuver on the community services he provides. A Li Zhang is elected every four years with no term limit. Case in point: Ah-Chuan has been the Li Zhang of his ward since 1981.

“I think of myself as part of the service industry, and I very much enjoy helping members of my community. I was born here, and my family is from here. I don’t get paid to do what I do. What I receive for my elected post is an operational fee of NT$45,000 per month, which I have to utilize wisely to pay office bills and other miscellaneous things.

“Oh! See that activity center next to this office? I helped get that for the people here,” A-Chuan explains proudly.

Li Zhangs like Ah-Chuan were a factor in Taiwan’s political fabric long before

democratization. They play an integral role in the electoral success of politicians and their parties, and did so even when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was the only party running in elections. Under the previous multi-candidate system for legislative elections, the candidates were ranked according to the number of votes each received, and those with the largest numbers of votes were elected. In other words, KMT candidates relied on people like Ah-Chuan to promote them with the ward’s voters and to encourage them to vote for them. According to Ah-Chuan, his ward carries approximately 5,000 votes (about 1,900 families).

The Li Zhangs operate at what could be called the “super grassroots” level. Through his frequent interactions with the locals, Ah-Chuan is not only familiar with the members of the ward and their lifestyles, he has also established a sense of camaraderie with them. Throughout my visit with Ah-Chuan, I saw a constant flow of elderly residents who came to his office to use the blood pressure machine he had acquired for them. He always greeted them and asked about their health.

Ah-Chuan’s office is a trove of political memorabilia, photographs with central government

officials, awards for service and philanthropy, and commemorative plaques of excellence. There are also urns filled with expensive tea — Huang collects tea for a hobby — and statues of deities like Guan Gong and Matsu. There are also several CCTV monitors mounted on the wall, which allow Huang to keep track of the comings and goings in the neighborhood, or, perhaps more importantly, to see when a guest is coming.

As I entered Ah-Chuan’s office, I discovered that my cup of aged tea was already waiting for me at the table.

Our lunch consisted of a large bowl of the Huang family’s famous stewed pork and eggs, stir-fried cabbage and water spinach, stewed radish, fish, green onion and eggs, and two kinds of soup. The lunch guests were all members of the community and included the owner of a sound equipment company who often provides sound systems for political campaigns, a former head of the fire department in the district, a former KMT legislator, and an employee of the district government.

As the guests wolfed down the delicious local cuisine, the conversation focused almost exclusively on current political events, with a strong dose of political gossip.

“Eat more, eat more!” Ah-Chuan encouraged us as he dropped a stewed egg in my bowl. “These are just country dishes, but this is very Taiwanese! You won’t have them in America.”

Two police officers also showed up and informed Ah-Chuan that they were investigating a noise complaint from a ward resident and thought it best to visit the Li Zhang first, as he might be able to shed light on the matter. The officers said the complainant claimed he’d heard loud noises in the middle of the night, possibly from a mentally challenged person.

“There is no such person living in that lane,” Ah-Chuan said confidently as he waved his hand dismissively. “And I haven’t heard anything. You are more than welcome to investigate, but I know for a fact that no mentally ill person, or even a loud person, for that matter, lives in that lane.”

As he’d predicted, the investigation turned up nothing.

Numerous individuals came in and out of the Li Zhang’s office in the afternoon. One was tempted to ask how Ah-Chuan manages to keep track of everyone and everything. Asked about his daily routine, Ah-Chuan said, “I’m so busy. I am like a 7-Eleven, you know, like a convenience store. I offer all kinds of service to those who ask. I do everything around here, acting as mediator between two quarreling neighbors. If someone’s street light is broken, someone needs help filing his taxes, someone has questions about receiving public assistance or pension for the elderly, traffic accidents.”

Anyone who doubts that a single man can accomplish all these things need only look at his business card, on which appear no less than five titles, all dealing with community matters. Ah-Chuan also serves as chairperson of the District Dispute Committee (區公所調解委員會). The previous days, he’d had to help resolve a total of 33 disputes, and he did not hesitate to tell me how exhausting some of those meetings could get. But it matters: The decisions of those committees are binding and are recognized by the district court.

Ah-Chuan was also very keen to point out that he has no political party affiliations. He did admit, however, that the KMT city party headquarters had asked him to join the party on several occasions. Ah-Chuan nonetheless served as “consultant” in his district for the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九)-Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) ticket during the 2012 presidential election, though he quickly downplays his influence over voter decisions.

“Ay! Do you really think that I have that much influence over people?” he exclaimed when I asked him about lobbying votes for a particular candidate and party. “If I tell you to vote for someone, would you really listen to me? Of course, not! We’re in a democracy, and people vote however they want! Who’s going to listen to me?”

“Do you really think that young people are going to listen to me?” he said, throwing his hands up in the air in resignation. Maybe he was being a little tongue-in-cheek.

Some people refer to Li Zhangs as “Tiao-a-ka” (柱仔腳)in Taiwanese or “Zhuang Jiao” (樁腳) in Mandarin, which literally means a“pillar.” Politicians and political parties need these “pillars” to prop them up and keep them on the good side of the electorate both during and off election season. Ah-Chuan personally detests being called a “Tiao-a-ka,” as the term carries the connotation of vote buying and corruption, two things that continue to plague Taiwanese politics.

As much as Ah-Chuan hates to admit it, his views undeniably have a certain amount of influence over the residents he knows so much about.

When I press him to say something more about his political influence, he says that he provides “explanations” and “interpretations” of government policies to ward residents on a regular basis. While he doesn’t recommend any particular political candidates to the residents (even if they ask), he does tell them his opinion on which political candidate has a record of providing for and helping the community, he tells me. Raising his fist for dramatic effect, he then adds that Taiwan needs “a real man” to lead the country.

As I step out of his office into the scorching heat outside, Ah-Chuan calls out in a friendly voice, “Come back to have lunch anytime, OK?”

Foot soldiers like Ah-Chuan are almost invisible in Taiwan’s political scene, as they blend perfectly with the communities they live in. They are seldom in the news, yet despite Ah-Chuan’s claims to the contrary, the outcome of local elections is often determined by whether Li Zhangs like him favor a particular candidate over another. Unsurprisingly, almost every single candidate that Ah-Chuan has favored over the more than three decades he has served as Li Zhang has been elected.

Ketty W. Chen is Director of Research Programs at the Association of Public Issues Studies (TAPIS) in Taipei.

My pu'er tea

White wine sampling

The community gym inside of the community center

Closed circuit TV watching over the neighborhood

Ah-Chuan's famous milk fish rice noodle soup