Chiang Ching-kuo is not a Chi-Com Fellow Traveler

Chiang Ching-kuo is not a Chi-Com Fellow Traveler
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 8, 2008

January 13th is the 20th anniversary of Chiang Ching-kuo's passing. The ruling DPP regime is attempting to drop the Republic of China and the two Chiangs down their Orwellian "memory hole." Commemorating Chiang Ching-kuo gives us the opportunity to uncover the truth about Taiwan's history, to reconstruct our shared memory, and to provide food for thought.

Chen Shui-bian's ongoing campaign to purge all traces of the Two Chiangs from the island has inspired the public to reminisce and reflect upon the elder Chiang's merits and demerits. The public seldom thought about these political issues in the past. Chen Shui-bian's attempt to demagogue the issue has backfired. Instead, a more balanced consensus has emerged. Most people believe that Chiang Kai-shek had both merits and demerits. They believe Chen Shui-bian's determination to define Chiang as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident" is one-sided and imbalanced. After all, Chiang Kai-shek was a staunch "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan." They cannot allow Chen Shui-bian arbitrarily consign Chiang Kai-shek to the lowest rung of Hell. Even if some people are unhappy with the Two Chiangs, Chen Shui-bian's vicious smear campaign against long dead leaders is not something most people are comfortable with.

Chen Shui-bian and the DPP are guilty of deliberately falsifying and editing history in the service of their partisan political struggle. Chiang Kai-shek was guilty of wrongdoing. But Chiang Kai-shek, the "Enemy of Communism and Defender of Taiwan," also made historic contributions. Chen Shui-bian is attempting to eradicate Chiang Kai-shek's historical status as the "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan." He is attempting to redefine him as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident." This is not historical truth. This is political spin doctoring. History is not the servant of political ends. Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party are trying to make political hay out of their anti-Chiang political campaign. They are attempting to convince the public that "Chiang Kai-shek was Public Enemy Number One" and "did nothing to protect Taiwan." They are attempting to convince the public that "Chen Shui-bian is a Great Man of Taiwan" and "innocent of corruption." Their attempts are in vain.

Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party are struggling to falsify and selectively edit Taiwan's history. They are attempting to drive a wedge between the elder Chiang and the younger Chiang. The DPP's tortured logic is: "Chiang Kai-shek is the Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident. Thefore the Republic of China is an alien regime and sold out Taiwan. Therefore mainlanders are Chi-Com fellow travelers. Therefore the people of Taiwan must oppose Chiang. Therefore the people of Taiwan must oppose the Republic of China. Therefore the people of Taiwan people must oppose mainlanders. Therefore the people of Taiwan must demand Taiwan independence."

This kind of logic is crudely unconvincing. Yet in recent years it has reigned supreme on Taiwan's political scene. Is Chiang Kai-shek really the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident?" Can his historical record as the "Enemy of Communism, and Defender of Taiwan" simply be deleted? If one hates the elder Chiang, does that mean one must overthrow the Republic of China? Does demanding the overthrow of the Republic of China mean that mainlanders or political dissidents must be classified as "Chi-Com fellow travelers?" Does the need to commemorate the 228 Incident mean that one must demand Taiwan independence? Furthermore, how can one talk about the history of Taiwan, how can one talk about the Republic of China, without talking about Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo? The DPP's torture logic simply cannot stand up to rational scrutiny. The recent wave of anti-Chiang campaigns has given the public the opportunity to reflect.

No one can rewrite history according to his own liking. Yet the DPP has attempted to force fit Taiwan's history into its own Procrustean bed. DPP history seems is apparently frozen at 228 Incident, 1947. Chiang Kai-shek is apparently forever frozen as the "Chief Culprit in the 228 Incident." The DPP has left Chiang's historic contribution as the "Enemy of Communism and Defender of Taiwan" on the cutting room floor. It is doing the same with Chiang Ching-kuo, Chiang Kai-shek's successor. Hence such logical non sequiteurs as equating commemoration of the 228 Incident with demands for Taiwan independence.

The Democratic Progressive Party's version of Taiwan's history cites only the 228 Incident or White Terror. Taiwan's economic miracle, gradual democratization, educational opportunities, economic equality, Taiwan's elevation to the status of the head of the Four Asian Tigers, have all been edited out of Taiwan's history. The DPP's interpretation of national identity and democracy is erected on the quicksand of historical revisionism. That is why the DPP is in its current pickle.

And yet incredibly, Chen Shui-bian is still trying to provoke a political backlash with his anti-Chiang political campaign. He is trying to argue that "We must commemorate the 228 Incident. Therefore we must purge all influences of Chiang. Therefore we must overthrow the Republic of China. Therefore we must purge mainlanders. Since the Republic of China, the KMT, and mainlanders are all representatives of an alien political authority, therefore they are all traitors to Taiwan. Therefore they are all Chi-Com fellow travelers." Chen Shui-bian has been struggling for the past year to purge all traces of Chiang and the Republic of China. But take a calm look at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, which Chen Shui-bian has turned into an ideological garbage dump. The public is getting wise to Taiwan's history, which Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party have been attempting to distort and revise beyond recognition. They are becoming aware of the illogic behind Chen Shui-bian and the DPP's Taiwan independence rationale.

Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching-kuo both made valuable contributions and serious mistakes. Their mistakes will be judged by future generations. Their contributions do not need to be deliberately ignored. Chiang Kai-shek naturally bears some measure of responsibility for the 228 Incident. But Taiwan need not forever be torn apart by the 228 Incident. The 228 Incident does not mean we must overthrow the Republic of China or demand Taiwan independence. The two have no causal connection. By the same token, Chiang Ching-kuo also made valuable contributions and serious mistakes. But it is unlikely that anyone living today or in the future will say: "Chiang Ching-kuo did not love Taiwan. Chiang Ching-kuo sold out Taiwan. Chiang Ching-kuo was a Chi-Com fellow traveler."

Since mainlanders and KMT leaders such as Chiang Ching-kuo love Taiwan, are not traitors to Taiwan, or Chi-Com fellow travelers, who precisely are Chen Shui-bian and the Democratic Progressive Party trying to accuse of being traitors to Taiwan and Chi-Com fellow travelers?

蔣經國不是中共同路人
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.08 03:16 am

一月十三日是蔣經國逝世二十周年，在「去中華民國」及「去蔣」的風潮中追憶蔣經國，可以為探索台灣歷史的真相、重建台灣生命共同體的共同記憶，提供省思的線索。

陳水扁「去蔣拆匾」的動作，激起了國人對蔣氏功罪及歷史是非的反芻與省思。國人過去很少細思的這一宗政治公案，經由陳水扁這番撥弄挑激，反而浮現了一種比較平衡公允的社會認知。一般認為，蔣介石功罪兼之，但陳水扁片面欲以一句「二二八元凶」論定，委實有失平允，畢竟蔣氏畢生「反共保台」，不能聽任陳水扁一筆抹殺；再者，即使有些人對蔣氏銜恨不滿，但像陳水扁做到這般鞭屍及羞辱陵墓的地步，此種政治操作亦非一般人所能苟同。

陳水扁及民進黨的罪孽是在為了政治鬥爭而刻意偽造歷史、剪裁歷史。蔣介石的確有錯，但蔣介石「反共保台」亦的確有功。陳水扁一筆抹殺蔣介石「反共保台」之功，只想用「二二八元凶」的帽子扣住蔣介石；這不是歷史真相，而只是現世的政治鬥爭。但歷史終究不是政治的附庸，陳水扁及民進黨欲藉「去蔣拆匾」的動作，求得「蔣介石是台灣罪人，保台無功」，及「陳水扁是台灣偉人，貪腐無罪」的社會結論，自屬枉然。

陳水扁及民進黨在偽造剪裁台灣歷史時，最傷神處是必須將老蔣與小蔣區隔。民進黨的命題邏輯是：蔣介石是二二八元凶→中華民國是外來政權及賣台集團→外省人是中共同路人→所以，台灣人要反蔣→台灣人要反中華民國→台灣人要反外省人→所以，台灣人要主張台獨。

這類的命題邏輯極其粗糙，卻在近幾年主導了台灣的政局，試問：蔣介石「只是」二二八元凶嗎？其「反共保台」的事蹟可以一筆抹殺嗎？憎恨老蔣，就要推翻中華民國嗎？要推翻中華民國，就要將外省人或民主異議者說成中共同路人嗎？還有，「紀念二二八」，就一定要主張台獨嗎？再者，談台灣史，談中華民國，又豈能只論蔣介石而不論蔣經國？這類命題根本禁不起理智思考，這次「去蔣拆匾」風潮正好給了國人一個思索的機會。

尤其，歷史長河，無人可以在事後將之截斷。民進黨卻將台灣歷史，從縱線及橫面上依其政治偏見而刻意加以剪裁。從縱線上，民進黨的台灣歷史彷彿一直停留在一九四七年二二八，因此蔣介石也就永遠停格在「二二八元凶」的階段；自此以後，「反共保台」的蔣介石被民進黨裁掉了，接續蔣介石的蔣經國也被民進黨剪掉了……。因此，才會出現「紀念二二八 →所以要台獨」之類的偏激論述。

另從橫面看，民進黨的台灣歷史，也只見二二八或白色恐怖而已，剪掉了經濟奇蹟、漸進民主、教育公平、均富政策，及登上亞洲四小龍等等。正因民進黨將國家論述及民主思維建立在其變造的台灣史上，所以民進黨的國家治理及民主表現，才會錯亂到今日這種無法收拾的地步。

不幸的是，陳水扁如今竟仍欲藉「去蔣拆匾」的動作，嘗試再次挑撥「紀念二二八→所以要去蔣→去中華民國→去國民黨→去外省人→因為中華民國、國民黨、外省人皆是外來政權 →皆是賣台集團→皆是中共同路人」。然而，歷經陳水扁過去一年翻天覆地的「去蔣／去中華民國」，如今冷靜下來看一看中正紀念堂大廳被陳水扁搞成這幅政治垃圾場一般的猙獰場景，國人還不警覺台灣歷史的真相已被陳水扁及民進黨扭曲切割得面目全非嗎？還不警覺陳水扁及民進黨的命題邏輯之荒誕錯謬已極嗎？

蔣介石及蔣經國皆有功有過。其過，足昭後世炯戒；其功，亦不必故意抹殺。固然，蔣介石應對二二八負一定責任；但無論如何，台灣似乎不必因二二八就必須永遠撕裂，不必因二二八就非得推翻中華民國，就一定要台獨；因為，其中根本沒有必然的因果邏輯。同理，蔣經國亦有功有過，但恐怕今日及後世不會有任何一個有理智的台灣人會說：蔣經國不愛台灣，蔣經國是賣台集團，蔣經國是中共同路人。

如果蔣經國那樣的外省人與國民黨，既愛台灣，又不是賣台集團及中共同路人，陳水扁及民進黨該找誰來做賣台集團及中共同路人呢？念二二八→所以要去蔣→去中華民國→去國民黨→去外省人→因為中華民國、國民黨、外省人皆是外來政權 →皆是賣台集團→皆是中共同路人」。然而，歷經陳水扁過去一年翻天覆地的「去蔣／去中華民國」，如今冷靜下來看一看中正紀念堂大廳被陳水扁搞成這幅政治垃圾場一般的猙獰場景，國人還不警覺台灣歷史的真相已被陳水扁及民進黨扭曲切割得面目全非嗎？還不警覺陳水扁及民進黨的命題邏輯之荒誕錯謬已極嗎？

蔣介石及蔣經國皆有功有過。其過，足昭後世炯戒；其功，亦不必故意抹殺。固然，蔣介石應對二二八負一定責任；但無論如何，台灣似乎不必因二二八就必須永遠撕裂，不必因二二八就非得推翻中華民國，就一定要台獨；因為，其中根本沒有必然的因果邏輯。同理，蔣經國亦有功有過，但恐怕今日及後世不會有任何一個有理智的台灣人會說：蔣經國不愛台灣，蔣經國是賣台集團，蔣經國是中共同路人。

如果蔣經國那樣的外省人與國民黨，既愛台灣，又不是賣台集團及中共同路人，陳水扁及民進黨該找誰來做賣台集團及中共同路人呢？