The US Communist Control Act is a federal law that was signed by then-US president Dwight Eisenhower on Aug. 24, 1954.
The act outlaws the Communist Party of the USA and organizations that support the party or communist ideology. It also defines what evidence juries should consider in determining participation in the activities, planning, actions, objectives or purposes of such organizations.
The act dates from a time when the US was chief among the “first world” camp of democratic nations and was applying a strategy of containment to the “second world” camp of communist countries.
On the domestic front, the US adopted the Communist Control Act to suppress communism and safeguard national security. The US is without doubt a democracy, but, in the interests of national security, it took firm measures to oppose communism.
Last year some Taiwanese used the National Development Council’s public policy participation Web site to submit a proposal to add to the Criminal Code a clause banning the display of China’s national flag, known as the five-star red flag.
The Ministry of Justice issued an official response to the proposal, rejecting it on the grounds that it would be incompatible with the Constitution’s purpose of safeguarding citizens’ freedom of expression.
This decision suggests that the ministry is oblivious to the critical reality that Communist China’s bayonets are closing in on Taiwan.
Surely the most urgent thing now for free Taiwan is for the nation’s leaders to demonstrate a firm national will. However, the ministry’s response has been taken by those people who like to display the five-star red flag as an act of surrender and it makes them all the more confident to go on flying the flag.
For instance, someone had the strange idea of decorating Mofan Street in Jinmen County’s Jincheng Township (金城) by hanging Republic of China “white sun” flags on one side of the street and People’s Republic of China “five star” flags on the other.
Local residents have even been boasting about this move and calling it a marvelous idea.
They have said it encourages more visitors to “check in” and that media reports are bringing in more tourists.
This absurdity shows their inability to distinguish friend from foe, and it is likely to set off a butterfly effect that leads to similar things happening in other places.
Considering the major implications that this trend could have for public and military morale, as well as national security, how could the Ministry of Justice issue such a hasty response that saps Taiwan’s national will?
A national flag is a symbol that declares a nation’s sovereignty and marks the extent of its territory. Displaying the five-star red flag, which is the flag of an enemy country, is not a matter of words, but an action, putting it beyond the bounds of freedom of speech.
Such actions do fall within the bounds of what is permitted under the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), but what has really been going on for a long time is the occupation of our streets by violent “red” groups who stir up trouble as they attempt to use our democratic society’s soft spots to subvert Taiwan.
This menace is becoming a plague on the nation, so how can the government bury its head in the sand and fail to respond by promoting legislation that reflects this reality?
French revolutionary Manon Roland is said to have cried out as she was taken to the guillotine: “O Liberty, how many crimes are committed in thy name!”
Is democracy really so impregnable that it needs no defenses?
On Dec. 18, US President Donald Trump presented his first National Security Strategy report to the US Congress. The report contains harsh criticism of China, which it identifies as the main threat to the US, as it seeks to challenge its leading economic position, and to erode US security and prosperity.
If even a superpower like the US is so cautious and vigilant about China’s globally expansionist totalitarianism, what about Taiwan?
Our media are full of defeatist opinions that sound like surrender in the face of intimidation.
What will happen if the ministry’s mindset remains confined to the surface appearance of freedom of expression, without the foresight to see the harm that abuse of that freedom can do to Taiwan? Does the prospect of becoming an accomplice to China’s “united front” strategy really not worry the ministry?
Chu Meng-hsiang is an artist and counselor of the Lee Teng-hui Association for Democracy.
Translated by Julian Clegg
With each passing day, the threat of a People’s Republic of China (PRC) assault on Taiwan grows. Whatever one’s view about the history, there is essentially no question that a PRC conquest of Taiwan would mark the end of the autonomy and freedom enjoyed by the island’s 23 million people. Simply put, the PRC threat to Taiwan is genuinely existential for a free, democratic and autonomous Taiwan. Yet one might not know it from looking at Taiwan. For an island facing a threat so acute, lethal and imminent, Taiwan is showing an alarming lack of urgency in dramatically strengthening its defenses.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
As Taiwan’s only national university research institute focused on indigenous cultures, it is incredibly regrettable that students from National Dong Hwa University (NDHU) have continued the horrible history of Taichung Municipal Taichung First Senior High School and National Taiwan University by expressing harmful, discriminatory views and writing defamatory statements against an indigenous university department. Hiding behind anonymous usernames, people have written online about indigenous students from the NDHU College of Indigenous Studies being allowed to light fires in a farmhouse next to the school’s experimental millet fields. The posters bemoan how students in other programs are somehow not permitted to light