Lack of Freedom of Speech for "Super Girls," Li Yuchun

Did anyone read the original article the ac posted the link to? Read the end of the very first line of the article: it

There’s a lot of details on the issue in the Chinese press.

news.yam.com/udn/entertain/20060 … 37175.html

Before you get too worked up about the “politics” of the concert, note that Singaporean singers were also involved. The concert also included Jay Chou, S.H.E., amongst other major Taiwanese stars. The man you question, Yang Kuang-you, is the head of the Taiwanese Entertainer’s Union. He is indeed guilty of not being a core pan-Green supporter… which in the convenient parlance of “with us or against us”, must mean he’s “against” Taiwanese independence, liberty, freedom, baseball, and Betel nut pie.

The scenario plays like this:

  • the original visa applications for the mainland group to perform at the concert was denied without any explanation.
  • Yang pulled some connections with DPP friends, and the visas were eventually approved… but with an 11-point list of conditions. These conditions included:
  • the mainland performers are absolutely not permitted to speak with the press.
  • all press releases/coverage of the concert must be approved by the appropriate propaganda office.
  • absolutely no footage showing mainland performers can be broadcast in Taiwan.

Ah, the defenders of freedom.

The girl is a hero now. As brave reporters tear off their station logo to do “underground” interviews.


Not to let the whole thing backfire on the TI adminstration. There are claims that the name ROC was blotted out of the concert programs.

Right, although the management insist they weren’t involved. The management even made a mildly entertaining retort… “Maybe it was TI activists. They don’t like the name Republic of China, either.”

Interesting eupehmism for colonialism. At least the latter’s in the dictionary.

BTW, did you know that the Chinese used to kill and eat aborigines here? The Chinese used to think that it would make them more warlike in bed. It’s in McKay’s book. Apparently, the Japanese went all out to put a stop to the practice.[/quote]

Now that’s very interesting. When the story at hand is about “killing and eating aborigines,” the Hoklo are known as “Chinese.” When the story at hand is about Taiwan independence, the very same Hoklo are known as “Taiwanese.” No wonder the greens have no credibility with the aborigines, because their grandparents ate them according to “smell the glove.” LOL…

[quote=“smell the glove”]Did anyone read the original article the ac posted the link to? Read the end of the very first line of the article: it

Wow, I

[quote]Do you always get your news from that source, People

I

I don’t think even the MAC has disputed the facts of the “not ban”. Their only point is that they don’t think the “restrictions” in affect should be characterized as “feng kou”. (“Of course the musicians could talk all they want! Just not to the Taiwanese…”)

And as far as mainland wives go, I don’t think you really wanna go down that path. I hope everyone understands that mainland wives face far more legal restrictions on work and life than “foreign wives” from anywhere else in Asia.

Ultimately, this thread comes down to the issue of free speech, right? This is a fairly recent phenomenon in Taiwan. I remember when no one would dare print anything negative about Lee Teng-hui. Hell, criticizing Chiang Ching-kuo could earn you a bullet in the head, as one Taiwanese professor in America found out. So to hear people whine that Taiwan hasn

Oh, I don’t think you’ll find any dispute about that. There’s no doubt Taiwan’s a far, far freer society today than it was 10, 15, 20 years ago. At least they didn’t throw “super girl” into prison for being a Communist. But there’s only so much back-patting that’s interesting.

I personally think the point of this thread is that the CSB administration really has minimal interest in liberal “ideals”, like freedom of speech. The goal of the CSB administration is to keep Taiwanese as distant as possible from mainland Chinese, at any cost to liberty and stability.

I

Well, while this incident was still going on, the DPP-run Mainland Affairs Council that imposed these rules denied there were restrictions on interviews and such. Well, apparently the organizer had enough and produced the restrictions the MAC imposed in written form, and showed that the MAC lied.

Couple that with the propensity of CSB to play with words and not take any of his promises to anybody seriously, I don’t think there is a reason to trust this administration or any DPP-run administration from now on. PRC learned that early in 2000. The US learned that in 2003 and again with the National Unification Council issue now. Most Taiwanese learned that by the end of last year as shown in the elections. Is there anybody left? I only count hardcore TI/ers.

[quote=“cctang”]Oh, I don’t think you’ll find any dispute about that. There’s no doubt Taiwan’s a far, far freer society today than it was 10, 15, 20 years ago. At least they didn’t throw “super girl” into prison for being a Communist. But there’s only so much back-patting that’s interesting.

I personally think the point of this thread is that the CSB administration really has minimal interest in liberal “ideals”, like freedom of speech. The goal of the CSB administration is to keep Taiwanese as distant as possible from mainland Chinese, at any cost to liberty and stability.[/quote]

Here lies the issue.

(and I am not necessarily supporting the MAC decision to do what they did, if they, in fact, did what they did)

Due to the intentions and actions of the PRC, keeping a healthy distance from mainland China IS maintaining liberty for Taiwanese. Conversely, not to do so, as is the intention of Ma, is to threaten these same liberties.

This is not McCarthyism here. China IS a clear and present danger to the liberties of Taiwan and Taiwan’s democracy.

That said, limiting the free speech of a singer (if true) is taking things a bit too far, and I disagree with this action.

Sure, they took most of the aboriginal village leaders and shot them. Then the rest fell into line.

The aboriginals didnt mind having theirs lands stolen by the KMT at all. They were forced to sign documents in a language they could read
(chinese) handing over their properties. Either that or take a bullet in the head. The sort of offer you don’t normally refuse.

But now the KMY try to blame it on others.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]Propaganda is a tool of any government. Sure the naive will deny that their government would ever do something as so underhanded.

I’m just acknowledging that the ROC under the KMT had people that were very good at this particular aspect of the political game…[/quote]

You mean you’re naive… well we knew that already. When the KMT were in government all thse years their propaganda machines had thousands who showed dissent thrown in jail or murdered. The KMT handed out money to lot’s of cronies. Corruption ruled the day.

We agree with you that the KMT were very skilled at that aspect of government.

Chen and the DPP seem to making some large bloopers but they at least don’t go around jailing or killing their political opponents.

Only the KMT will sell out Taiwan to the commies across the strait. It’s all about power and money.

That’s why the aboriginal vote KMT.
Whatever conjectures you have about KMT and aboriginal relationship, it was not as bad as the orginal Chinese immigrants that come 17th and 18th century. Which is why aboriginals don’t like Hoklos to this day.

I think Elmer Fung and Chen Yi would question the partisan nature of this TI administration.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]That’s why the aboriginal vote KMT.
Whatever conjectures you have about KMT and aboriginal relationship, it was not as bad as the orginal Chinese immigrants that come 17th and 18th century. Which is why aboriginals don’t like Hoklos to this day.

I think Elmer Fung and Chen Yi would question the partisan nature of this TI administration.[/quote]
You well know that many articles state that the aborigines vote for the KMT not because they believe in the KMT ideology but for economic incentives.

You don’t even argue that the ‘new generation of KMT could be better’, instead you insist that it was always right, be it 228 or the White Terror or deviate to other topics in such threads.

Anyway, you rarely address the hardpoints in an argument, you’re like the example of what not to be in any debate team. Its not fooling anyone, sidestepping so obviously, it just makes people laugh at the poorly veiled attempts.

Back on topic, I think its already been well discussed. However my stand is that politics shouldn’t be immersed in entertainment media. There are far more pressing issues at hand than caring about what certain celebrities say or do. I don’t think the ROC should’ve been crossed out from the program booklet however. It was done bluntly.

Why should we care anyway

Because it is only through constant vigilance that we can prevent Green Terror from becoming another White Terror.

First they suspend the rights of PRC citizens that land on the free shores of ROC, next they will harass people who set up one-men CCP on the island, soon they will revoke TV stations license that are against TI aggenda…

Only through honest opposition can we check abuse of power in the Green Camp.