Recently, some demonstrators in the United States violently stormed the Capitol, and some people in Taiwan compared it to the American version of the “sunflower” incident. Naturally, the people in the Green Camp denied it in every way.
Jiang Yihua, the former head of Taiwan’s administrative agency, pointed out that although the two have different demands, the nature of the illegal occupation of the government office is the same. The same behavior was arrested and prosecuted in the United States, but he became a senior official in Taiwan.
People of insight on the island believe that in a society ruled by law, when demonstrations cross the red line of the law, they should be brought to justice. The U.S. Congress was violently hit and completed the liquidation and resumption of the meeting within hours. In contrast, in 2014, Taiwan’s so-called “Sunflower Student Movement”, the legislature was occupied for more than 20 days, and the administrative organs were also raided.
Law enforcement police did not dare to raise guns to deter them, and dare not even drive away even the most basic exercise of public power.
Not only did they not try to force them to retreat, but also the Democratic Progressive Party “legislators” sang and provided various support to each other with the demonstrators.
Jiang Yihua, then the head of the administrative agency, ordered the expulsion of the protesters who occupied the scene. From the police to the head of the administrative agency, she was prosecuted and even charged with murder.
At that time, Tsai Ing-wen, who was interested in voting for the chairman of the Party, stood for the “Sunflower Learning Movement” platform and said in solidarity, “If the pursuit of democracy is a sin, we are all guilty.” The Democratic Progressive Party insists that the “Sunflower Student Movement” is a political event rather than a legal event.
At the judicial level, it took the initiative to withdraw the relevant people involved in the case that year after taking office, instead leaving the law enforcement officials involved in lawsuits.
What’s more ridiculous is that the people involved in the “Sunflower Learning Movement” not only were unhurt, but also turned to enter the political arena. From “legislators” and parliamentarians to key positions in the Democratic Progressive Party, the rewards and achievements are not bad.” Huang Guochang, the leader of the Xueyun, once served as the “legislator of the power of the times”.
After Lin Feifan’s first job after graduation, he was the deputy secretary-general of the Democratic Progressive Party with a monthly salary of NT$90,000. He was ridiculed as “Lin 90,000 yuan”. Now it is rumored that he was named to run for mayor of Hsinchu.
From opening the back door for the “Sunflower Learning Movement” to engaging in political rewards, it is obvious that the Democratic Progressive Party is the political force and the biggest winner behind it.
The Democratic Progressive Party has reached a peak of political populism by hyping “terrorism against China and anti-China”, and the “school movement young generals” trained on the same day rushed up, causing the officially signed cross-strait service trade agreement to be infinitely delayed.
The popular fire also helped to turn political parties. With the stepping stone of “sunflower learning movement”, the Democratic Progressive Party returned to power and sent its cultivated allies to politics.
The Democratic Progressive Party eats the marrow and starts from education. It incorporates the violent “Sunflower Student Movement” into the high school “Citizen and Society” textbook, and matches the photos of the “School Movement Young General” occupying the legislature, claiming that “this expresses its requirements and propositions for the cross-strait service trade agreement”. In the name of so-called democratic politics, the Democratic Progressive Party advocates that illegal acts are reasonable and legitimate, and induces the young people on the island to learn from it.
So, protesters can greatly impact the legislative and executive bodies? Making public policy is more reliable than fists than counting heads? Some Taiwanese media bitterly criticized that if you can occupy the legislature under the banner of “anti-service trade”.
Nowadays, the people’s complaints of the island’s “anti-Lai pig” (imported with lean meat and exquisite pigs) are boiling. Can it be fabricated like this?!
After the Democratic Progressive Party came to power, why did it change the previous “clap the table if you can’t hear it” and say “don’t go to the street often if you don’t need it”.
In order to prevent the protesters from facing a big enemy, it arranged heavy wire in front of the legislative and executive organs to refuse horses and strong police forces? Isn’t such inconsistency revealing its nature of high-handed despotism by all means to hold power and to hold a stable position?
Taking “Sunflower Learning Movement” as a tool, the Democratic Progressive Party has completed another political manipulation.
Change the “hairpin curve” day and night, contradict each other “play double standards”, tear off the mask of the Democratic Progressive Party’s political power and plots, the Taiwanese people should see clearly their evil intention of seeking selfish selfishness and allowing Taiwanese society to sink.
Discussion about this post