Determining One's Own Future

Determining One's Own Future
China Post editorial
by Bevin Chu
May 12, 2009

President Ma Ying-jeou recently told reporters from Singapore that if reelected in 2012, he would consider initiating political, and not merely economic talks with Beijing.

Not surprisingly, this sent Green Camp legislators into a tizzy. Ma Ying-jeou and the KMT, they said, must not be allowed to dictate the process. Every citizen, they said, has the right to determine his or her own future.

How did these Green Camp legislators propose to guarantee every citizen the right to determine his or her own future? Why by means of a public referendum, of course. What else?

As this paper stressed in a three part editorial exploring the differences between a republic and a democracy, endless calls for plebiscites and referendums are the stock in trade of "champions of democracy," i.e., populist demagogues.

Last week opposition Democratic Progressive Party legislators barricaded themselves inside the Legislature. Using brute physical force, they prevented the Legislative Yuan Education and Culture Committee and Internal Administration Committee from reviewing a bill recognizing the academic credentials of Republic of China students on the mainland.

DPP Legislator Kuan Bi-ling objected to recognizing mainland academic credentials. Recognizing mainland academic credentials, she argued, would encourage students from Taiwan to attend mainland universities, because mainland tuitions are lower and mainland diplomas are recognized the world over.

In other words, Green Camp legislators would deny Republic of China students the right to determine their own futures. They would deny them the right to attend mainland universities. They would deny them the right to obtain a higher education because they could not afford the tuition on Taiwan. They would deny them the right to have their diplomas recognized the world over.

Individuals living in the modern world desperately need to understand that a democracy is fundamentally different from a republic. They need to understand that a democracy is not "more or less the same" as a republic. A republic is defined by the legal protections it affords the individual against the power of the collective. A republic is rooted in the Rule of Law. A democracy, on the other hand, is defined by the power it grants the collective against the individual. A democracy is rooted in the Rule of the Mob.

Under a democracy, "champions of democracy" to the contrary notwithstanding, individual citizens do not determine their own futures. Under a democracy, a democratic majority determines the individual's future. Any time an individual's future needs to be determined, a democratic majority will determine it, not the individual. The public will cast ballots in an election, a plebiscite, or a referendum. The results of the public election, plebiscite, or referendum will determine the individual's future. If the results are contrary to the individual's preferences, tough. The public voted. The majority rules. End of story.

Under a democracy, the individual's right to determine his own future is constantly at risk. It is at the mercy of the changing whim of the mob. Under a democracy everything is up for grabs. Everything is subject to a vote, plebiscite, or referendum. Even something as fundamental as the individual's nationality. This, needless to say, is precisely why Green Camp legislators champion "democracy" and vehemently oppose what America's Founding Fathers referred to as "republican government."

Contrast this with a republic. Under a republic the individual citizen actually does determine his own future. Under a republic, the individual citizen possesses constitutionally defined rights. These rights are ironclad. They are, as America's Founding Fathers characterized them, "inalienable." They may not be overridden by elections, plebiscites, or referendums. The individual may not be deprived of them, no matter how many votes "champions of democracy" might be able to rally against the individual. Under a republic, as long as a citizen respects the equal rights of other citizens, he or she may do whatever he or she pleases. Under a republic, anything not expressly forbidden by the nation's laws, including its basic law, its constitution, is automatically permitted.

Naturally this includes the individual's right to pursue his or her own education, according to his or her own best judgment.

Fortunately President Ma Ying-jeou has displayed demonstrably greater respect for these students' rights to determine their own future than Green Camp "champions of democracy." Fortunately for these students, they live under a republic and not a democracy.