The Republic of China: Government Without Newspapers?

The Republic of China: Government Without Newspapers?
China Post editorial
by Bevin Chu
February 11, 2009

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground."
-- Thomas Jefferson

'Thomas Jefferson was savaged by the press. He was excoriated by the press. He didn't like it. He said to one Philadelphia paper: "Nothing in this paper is true, with the possible exception of the advertising, and I question that." And yet that wise Thomas Jefferson said, "If I had to choose between government without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the latter."'
-- Jack Anderson, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist

In 1996, Lee Teng-hui was elected president of the Republic of China. Green Camp "champions of democracy" reveled over the fact that Lee received an absolute majority, and won by a landslide. In particular, they waxed eloquent about Lee's "stunning 54% victory."

When asked why the 54% figure mattered so much to them, some of these "champions of democracy" explained. "Why because it gives Lee a clear mandate, of course! This clear mandate authorizes him to do whatever it takes to lead the country in the right direction."

The "right direction" of course, being towards Taiwan independence. In other words, in the minds of these Green Camp spokespersons, because Lee had received a "clear mandate," he could ignore the Republic of China Constitution and do "whatever it takes" to promote a "Nation of Taiwan."

These Green Camp spokespersons were the living embodiment of the democratic premise that a "democratic majority," i.e, a bigger gang, gives the winning camp carte blanche. These Green Camp spokespersons were the living embodiment of the democratic premise that a "democratically elected" president is an elective monarch. These Green Camp spokespersons were the living embodiment of authoritarian reactionaries in liberal progressive clothing.

In 2008, Ma Ying-jeou was elected president of the Republic of China. Ma received an even larger absolute majority than Lee "Father of Taiwan" Teng-hui. Ma won by an even larger landslide than Lee "Moses" Teng-hui. Ma received 58% of the vote, against Lee's 54%.

Does Ma's even "clearer mandate," Ma's even more "stunning 58% victory," authorize Ma to "do whatever it takes?"

No it does not. It does not because the Republic of China is a republic, not a democracy. In a republic "democratically elected" officials are bound hand and foot by the nation's basic law, its constitution. In a republic "democratically elected" officials may not do "whatever it takes." In a republic "democratically elected" officials may do only what the constitution allows them to do, nothing more, nothing less.

Deep Blue spokespersons have accused Ma Ying-jeou of being a champion of "du tai," i.e,, an independent Taiwan under the cover of the Republic of China. They suspect he cares more about opinion polls than he does about the constitution he swore to uphold. Some of these polls assert that an overwhelming majority on Taiwan consider themselves "Taiwanese, not Chinese," and oppose eventual reunification with the mainland.

Deep Green spokerspersons have accused Ma Ying-jeou of "rolling back press freedoms." They point to the National Communications Commission (NCC) amendment to the Satellite Radio and Television Act, allegedly directed at the Deep Green talk show, Da Hua News, on SET TV. Da Hua News has savaged Ma Ying-jeou. It has excoriated Ma Ying-jeou.

According to the logic of democracy, Ma Ying-jeou's "clear mandate" authorizes him to do both. According to the logic of democracy, Ma Ying-jeou has a "clear mandate" to promote an independent Taiwan in the name of "mainstream public opinion," and to roll back press freedom in the name of "restoring social order."

According to the logic of a republic however, Ma Ying-jeou has absolutely no mandate to do either. According to the logic of a republic, Ma Ying-jeou is constitutionally bound to defend the Republic of China's sovereignty and territorial integrity against creeping independence, and to defend the Republic of China's press freedoms against creeping censorship.

The Republic of China has undergone a second change in ruling parties. The first and second changes in ruling parties should have taught both the Blue Camp and the Green Camp a sobering lesson.

What lesson is that? Why that numerical superiority is not political legitimacy. Numerical superiority is merely might, not right. Might does not make right. It never has, and never will.

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Bill of Rights, knew that "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." Jefferson knew that the temptation to trample over press freedom would be too powerful for "democratically elected" officials to resist. Jefferson knew that only a republic, with its constitutional guarantees against majority oppression, held any hope of forestalling the natural tendency for liberty to yield, and for government to gain ground.

Ma Ying-jeou, who was educated at Harvard, professes to be an admirer of America's republican values. As such, Ma should boldly defend the Republic of China Constitution, which Sun Yat-sen explicitly modeled on America's republican constitution.

As Republic of China president, Ma should unequivocally affirm that he will defend to the death the political sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of China, and the press freedoms guaranteed in the Republic of China Constitution.