Demos Chiang, descendant of Chiang Kai-shek, recently made comments on the use of Chiang Kai-shek’s name as a political tool. From Taipei Times:
The great-grandson of dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) yesterday said he agreed to a certain degree with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s recent moves to purge the remnants of his great-grandfather’s rule as it would prevent the DPP from using his family’s name as a tool to “control fear” in the public in the future.
…”The DPP obviously used the hall controversy as one its major election strategies, but somehow the KMT linked the issue with fear,” the CNA report quoted him as saying. “In this whole mess, the posterity of Chiang Kai-shek became the biggest casualty.” [Full text]
EastSouthWestNorth has a translation of one of his blog entries, which further explains his feelings on the matter. An excerpt can be found here, beyond the jump.
[Image source: ChinaReviewNews.com. Demos Chiang.]
As a member of the Chiang family, I never had the sense of undergoing the ‘anti-Chiang’ process. This could be because the “anti-Chiang” process occurred only when the two President Chiangs were still holding their posts. During those periods, a group of idealistic and brave people challenged the system in order to bring democracy to Taiwan while being oppressed by the totalitarian dictatorship. They opposed the government and they even spoke unfavorably and negative about “President Chiang.” We understand and respect their actions. I believe that “anti-Chiang” was a tactic during the era of struggle for a democratic system. But today Taiwan has implemented a democratic system and we are now in an era of democracy. Once the goal has been attained, the “anti-Chiang” tactic should have been put away in history. In any case, I was probably not yet born or else I was too young at the time. Therefore, the term “anti-Chiang” mean nothing in my memory.
My personal view is that the term “anti-Chiang” contributes nothing positive in the next phase of the development of democracy in Taiwan. No matter which angle you want to look at this, “Chiang” has become a part of the history of Taiwan, whether you like or dislike that name. That era is now history. And history can neither be erased nor severed. Therefore, the subject for discussion in the post-Chiang era is about how turn the “positive” and “negative” memories into effective assets to lead Taiwan down the path of “democracy.” We can approach transitional justice, truth discovery and historical definition and interpretation with a positive attitude in order to “build a permanent democratic system in Taiwan” when we look back to the historical path taken.
