What a great movie. It has everything — gorgeous photography, costumes, soundtrack, actors. It’s a busy, multi-layered work, taking you from the putrid trenches of the Great War, where men are showered in each others’ exploding guts, to scenes of the tenderest intimacy. It’s hard to slot, since it’s part war story, part love story, part murder mystery. It’s French (subtitled), it’s long and it’s complex. And during the first half-hour I was afraid I’d nod off. No need to worry; it soon picks up speed, and before long I was utterly engrossed. The ending borders on the sentimental, but only just; while it is close to a “Hollywood ending,” there’s enough of an air of mystery and unanswered questions to keep it on an art-movie footing. Directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, who directed Amelie. The sountrack is the most beautiful I’ve heard this year, along with The Passion and Return of the King. Just see it.

Jerome Keating argues his case for it in the essay below. While I think I’m inclined to agree (I admit, I’d have to do more research before voting for or against it), I’m neither endorsing it nor disagreeing with it, but putting it out as an interesting perspective. Agree or not, it’s sure interesting. If you think the theory is brilliant or inane, let me know.

Democracy: Japan’s Unexpected Legacy to Taiwan
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Hello Kitty, rock stars, comic books, fashion trends, you name it, and Taiwanese youth are entranced with things Japanese. Lost in all this glitter, however, is the much more valuable and often overlooked legacy from the past, democracy.

Democracy in Taiwan? Most point to the Kaohsiung Incident (1979) as the pivotal point in Taiwan’s democratic movement and rightly so. At that time, those outside the party (the tangwai) protested for their rights of democratic expression and participation against the one party governmental monopoly of the Kuomintang (KMT). They were arrested, tried in kangaroo courts and jailed for their efforts but the doors of democracy were being forced open. The free democratic elections of 1996 would still be a long way off, but the outside world was finally beginning to realize the reality of the struggle in Taiwan.

Taiwan’s roots in democracy, however, go back much further, back beyond the start of Martial Law in 1949 and even beyond the infamous 2-28 Incident in 1947. The pursuit of democracy, free expression and representative participation had already been present in Taiwan in the late 19th century.

In a broad sense one might make the case that Taiwan had always been a haven for those fleeing oppressive regimes whether from the Mainland or elsewhere. For centuries as this island fell under the flags of numerous countries, Taiwan took in all types, including pirates, entrepreneurs, and drifters as well as industrious people seeking a new start and a chance for a better life. The sense of Taiwanese consciousness and democracy, however, would come from the Japanese era.

Indirectly this Taiwanese consciousness began when the people slowly realized that the only ones who would really care for them would have to be themselves. When the Manchu Qing Empire lost its 1894-5 war with Japan, the people of Taiwan woke to learn from outside sources that they had been cast off like a stepchild along with the Pescadores (Penghu) and the Liaotung Peninsula to appease the victorious Japanese. Incensed they decided that if others would not help them, they would have to seek their own destiny.

Up until that time the Hoklo, Hakka, and aborigines had fought for land among themselves and the Qing masters had maintained power over the western half of the island by playing one group against the other. This new outside threat made them see that they must fight together.

The Republic of Taiwan was formed in 1895 with its own flag, stamps and laws. To be sure there were mixed motivations and mixed ambitions of all those involved. The fat cat leaders who felt their bread was buttered by playing up to the Qing government fled to China at the first signs of the Japanese. The common people, however, who had a greater attachment to their land kept up the fight against the far more experienced and far better equipped Japanese army.

Naturally the Japanese won, and surprisingly they still gave any citizens who wished, two years to decide on whether to stay in Japan’s new colony or to return to China. Interestingly enough, few takers (less than 1 % of the population) chose to go back to China.

At this point it is important to step back and see the clear democratic movement that had already been developing in Japan. Under the Meiji Restoration (1868-1912), Japan had begun in its own unified effort at westernization.

The Japanese had chosen to follow the German and Austrian model of Parliament where the Monarch (Emperor for the Japanese) maintained great power. They had two parties and a cabinet system of government in the 1880’s. By February 11, 1889 they had drawn up a Constitution (the Emperor’s gift to the people). The First Diet with a House of Peers and House of Representatives was elected and convened in 1890. The democratic experiment was well on its way some time before Taiwan became a part of the Japanese Empire.

With the acquisition of Taiwan in 1895, Japan sought to also have a model colony to showcase to the west. Ten years later by 1905, Taiwan had become Japan’s most valuable colony. Unlike under the Qing Dynasty where improvements were always “too little, too late” and each reform governor would leave before anything lasting or substantial was accomplished, the Japanese had come to stay. They developed the island industrially; they built up a solid infrastructure and brought in vastly needed health reforms.

When the Meiji Emperor died, Japan had moved into its Taisho period (1912—1926) and the sickly Crown Prince Yoshihito ascended the throne. The emperor’s health prevented active involvement making this a time of greater parliamentary development and democratic ideals. Progressive educational reform, experiments in socialism, and a wide range of liberal ideas became frequent topics of discussion at the universities and schools.

By 1915 armed opposition in the colony of Taiwan had ceased and the people began to see that they had a better chance by working within the “harsh but fair” system of the Japanese. Taiwan’s more gifted youth now had a chance to receive advanced education in Japanese universities. There they were exposed to the free discussion of new and varied ideas that ranged from Marxism to a return to the samurai spirit to democracy.

The Taisho period of democracy was known for its tolerance of diversity. The number of future leaders of Taiwan and even of China that were exposed to such discussions in Japan are impressive. Taiwan’s first two 1996 presidential contenders (Peng Ming-min and Lee Teng-hui) cut their teeth respectively in pre and post World War II Japan. Peng in his Taste of Freedom makes special mention of how he found himself treated more as an equal in Japan than in the colony of Taiwan.

By 1921, a lot was happening in Taiwan also. The special powers granted to the colonial administrators were taken back and Taiwan fell under the rule of the Diet. The people of Taiwan immediately petitioned for the right to participate in democracy and elect their own representatives to that Diet.

The magazine Taiwanese Youth promoting Taiwanese consciousness and awareness would be published in Japan. While officially banned in Taiwan, it and the ideas discussed at the universities were filtering back to the colony. In 1925 the people witnessed that universal suffrage was granted to all males in Japan, to commoners as well as to the wealthy and property owners. This raised the question, why not here in Taiwan.

Don’t be mistaken, Japan’s attitude toward Taiwan was that of colonial masters. The Japanese like the British, French, and other colonial powers saw a threat in too much colonial participation. Taiwan’s representation in the Diet did not come easy. Petitions were repeatedly rejected (over 15 times); some petitioners were briefly jailed as troublemakers and others were harassed. The courts and laws, however, protected them and those jailed were soon set free. At the same time, the newly formed Taiwan Cultural Association (1921) would offer programs throughout Taiwan educating the people on culture and rights.

Democracy in Japan would not survive the economic troubles and military power struggles of the 1930’s. The samurai militarists would gain control and Japan would enter and lose World War II. The roots of democracy, however, had gone deep enough so that after the war it was possible for Japan to quickly reestablish a functioning democracy again in less than ten years. This time the power of the Emperor as well as that of the militarists would be removed from the equation.

For the Taiwanese the fruit of their efforts came too late. Finally in 1945 prior to the end of World War II, the people achieved representation in the Diet. No sooner would they gain but they would lose. After the war, Taiwan would be put under the KMT the rulers of the Republic of China. It was back to square one, except that these “rescuing” invaders would prove to be far more brutal than the Japanese. Taiwan would have to struggle again.

During this period in China, Sun Yat-sen’s efforts for democracy had born fruit in 1911, but they were quickly lost when Yuan Shih-kai seized power. After his death in 1916, the warlord period followed. Then two one party state Leninist organizations, the KMT under Chiang Kai-shek and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would vie for power. At first the KMT gained the upper hand. Given lists of CCP party membership in Shanghai and elsewhere, the KMT subsequently massacred all CCP members they could get their hands on. World War II intervened here and afterwards it was the CCP that was seen as less corrupt by the people and the KMT were driven to Taiwan in 1949.

Some have falsely tried to justify the KMT’s stranglehold of martial law (until 1987) by saying that the Taiwanese were not ready for democracy. The opposite could not be truer. Taiwan was more than ready for democracy in 1945; it was the oppressive, one party Leninist KMT that was not.

The KMT would use the excuse of 2-28 to systematically kill off many of the Taiwanese intelligentsia who had been schooled in hard knocks democracy under the Japanese. Again like in Shanghai the KMT gained lists of names. They carefully noted any leaders who came forth to express the people’s grievances. Those involved were either killed or imprisoned and tortured in the following period of white terror. By the time the Kaohsiung Incident took place in 1979, the people knew well that democracy always has a price.

One cannot deny that the KMT has made positive contributions to Taiwan and one cannot tar all the KMT with the same brush. Not all accepted the Leninist justification for their control but their silence whether intentional or not gave it sanction. The failure still of any admission and action as to how much of KMT party assets really belong to the people of Taiwan is an example of such continued silence. So also is the continued silence on all who were singled out to be killed or silenced in 2-28 and the white terror. The ghosts of the past do not disappear simply because one is silent.

For many in the KMT, it is a bitter pill to swallow to have to admit that they were not the ones that brought democracy to Taiwan. It is a bitter pill for the Leninists among them to admit that while giving lip service to democracy, in practice for over 40 years they did the opposite and would have to learn the meaning of democracy from the Taiwanese who in turn had learned it from the Japanese.

There are many in the KMT and spin-off People’s First Party (PFP) and New Party (NP) who will go to their graves choking on this pill. This is evident by the fact that these parties have yet to offer concrete positive programs and demonstrate a consciousness of the people of Taiwan. They continue to see things only in terms of one party rule, winner take, all and complain about the loss of their mainland “entitlement,” doubly lost because of what had happened to them in 1949 on the mainland.

Across the Strait the victorious other oppressive Leninist one party government still rules. The people there have no democratic experience or history to draw on like in Taiwan. Sun Yat-sen’s brief republic of 1911 is still used in propaganda to justify the ruling power’s position and image. The people suffer (albeit in ignorance) a lack of suffrage, a free press and information and therefore free choice. The People’s Republic of China is a regime that has no sympathy, toleration or appreciation for Taiwan’s long road to democracy.

And as for Japan, well Taiwan owes it a lot more than Hello Kitty.

It’s that time of the week again to visit Chaos in Iraq to remind yourself that the war in Iraq is still going on, and in fact is worse than ever. As always, great photos, great articles; a great service.

And be sure to scroll down to the story on bloggers in Iraq. As I suspected, blogs like Iraq the Model are quite the exception; by now, precious few bloggers in Iraq see our occupation as a good thing for their country.

For the latest on how America continues to win over hearts and minds in Iraq, check out James Wolcott’s lengthy excerpt of a piece from the conservative (and unlinkable) Economist. You really won’t believe what you read. And the dry English humor of the authors is quite priceless.

A new record for this site.

Update: Now 130. Also, a good thread going on over here.