By Chin Ching 秦靖
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) tries to give the impression that he has sympathy with the deep-green side of Taiwanese politics.
However, he criticized President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and Vice President William Lai (賴清德) by saying that they should no longer worship the Chinese sea goddess Matsu (媽祖) and martial god Guan Gong (關公), because, in the green camp’s logic, anyone from China can be seen as “fellow travelers” (同路人) of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Ko seeks to use this argument to distort the green camp’s call for “resisting China, protecting Taiwan” (抗中保台), and thereby ingratiating himself with the blue camp to attract their votes.
Jesus Christ was a Galilean Jew, but does this mean that non-Jews cannot worship him? Many Taiwanese believe in China’s Matsu and Guan Gong, the Chinese god of war, and that is an expression of freedom of religion. Why should the followers of these deities be labeled with the political ideology of “one China”?
British and French in the past believed in Catholicism, and some of them still do. Does this mean that the Hundred Years’ War between them was in vain? By appealing to the “territorial principle” to stir up political tensions, Ko is showing his true colors.
It should also be noted that the Chinese communists are atheists who have no gods in their hearts and do not respect them. In that case, how can China’s Matsu and Guan Gong be the CCP’s fellow travelers, as Ko says?
Who exactly are China’s fellow travelers? The CCP’s military planes harass Taiwan almost every day, but they have turned a blind eye to it, while mocking the government for not shooting the Chinese planes down. They keep trying to gaslight Taiwanese by arguing that that the “1992 consensus” is the best way to protect Taiwan, while completely ignoring the international interpretation that “one China” means the People’s Republic of China, not the Republic of China.
These fellow travelers of China always assume unilaterally that the Democratic Progressive Party government has been provoking Beijing. Some even imagine that the government was happy about Wuhan’s lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic. When Ko accuses the government of hating China, so that he can cause confrontations between the blue and green camps, he is letting down his intellectual background.
Taiwan does not need a politician such as Ko, who objectifies and deprecates women. He has an anachronistic approach to modern life, thinking of himself as an emperor and calling subordinates “eunuchs” or even “dogs.” He is fickle, acting like an opportunist who swings back and forth, often contradicting himself on specific issues.
Many of Ko’s supporters are sick of blue-green confrontations.
However, as he adds some red to the white camp and tries to be the blue camp’s shared leader while attracting votes from the green camp simultaneously, how can supporters claim he gradually attempts to encompass all colors of the political spectrum?
Chin Ching is an educator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.
