The Republic of China (Taiwan) does grant religious liberty to its citizens. It is not enough: it should be founded on it.
by Marco Respinti*
*Conclusions of the webinar “13 July 2007: Who Stole Tai Ji Men’s Victory?”, organized by CESNUR and Human Rights Without Frontiers on July 13, 2024, on the 17th anniversary of Tai Ji Men’s Supreme Court victory.
An article already published in Bitter Winter on July 22nd, 2024.
Whatever the original intention of the American patriots, or of most of them, in the late 18th century, the American War of Independence (1775–1783) culminated in the “Declaration of Independence” from the British Crown in 1776. While unfortunately too many commentators still address that period using the misleading name “American Revolution,” the Americans, prepared or not, were soon confronted with the high task of building a new nation. This went through a serious constitutional process of attempts and revisions that took time and tried to avoid the excesses of both tyranny and chaos. The Americans put their heart and minds in the effort of conjugating liberty and order for granting security and prosperity to all—in a word, aiming at the common good.
It was then that Patrick Henry (1736–1799) stood. He was one of the American “Founding Fathers,” a gentleman from the South who became the first and sixth governor of the state and former colony of Virginia. All the nation-building process of the United States was theoretically and practically guided by the sage and deep words that Henry uttered at the highest of the American War of Independence. On March 23, 1775, that gentleman gave a speech to the House of Burgesses who met in St. John’s Church in Richmond, Virginia. It was a famous patriotic speech known under the title “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death.” He said, “I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience.” So far for an event, the American War of Independence, that of course wasn’t revolutionary at all, but rather conservative in proceeding prudentially through the teachings developed by human wisdom in centuries.
This American anecdote illuminates the path on which humanity should always walk: by learning from the past to imitate good deeds and avoid mistakes. Sadly, this rarely happens.
Now, the United States have been essentially built on the principle of religious liberty. This is obvious but the more one closely studies its founding and development, the clearer it becomes. What is important here is the universal teaching that one can apprehend from this American story. Religious liberty is the cornerstone of every viable human society. It doesn’t mean that securing this fundamental principle at the beginning and core of a human community preserves that society from all mistakes. It means that every mistake can potentially be solved, if the guiding principle is religious liberty.
The case of Tai Ji Men in the Republic of China (ROC) in Taiwan is exemplary. The ROC is a democracy, an ally of the West against rogue states, a bastion of freedom, a country where the rule of law is secured, a pluralistic society. In a word, it is a country that does its best to build a just society. It doesn’t mean it is perfect: it means that it acknowledges the drama of human life and tries to address it for the common good. Yet, the seriousness of the mistakes that the ROC is committing today cannot be simplistically condoned by repeating only that the ROC is perfectible as all human societies are, and that we should forgive some of its trespasses only because its intentions are good and efforts for the better are performed. Rather, we should carefully look at the seriousness of the ROC’s mistakes. I have the suspect that all rests on religious liberty.
Of course, religious liberty is granted by the ROC. But is this enough? The ROC’s problems and mistakes tend to give a negative answer. The case of Tai Ji Men demonstrates it. Religious liberty in the ROC is granted but some of its citizens are curtailed or denied that fundamental human right. How could this be possible?
It is possible because religious liberty is not the cornerstone of the ROC. The ROC grants religious liberty, but it is not essentially built on it. In the long run, this becomes like saying that religious liberty is a concession but not a foundation. The state concedes religious liberty, but this is an act of toleration that presupposes the power to interfere with it whenever the state itself needs, wants, and judges it worthwhile.
It shouldn’t be so. Religious liberty is not a right given by the state. It is an unalienable right that human beings enjoy because of their nature. No power can grant or deny this right. Thus, a state that grants religious liberty but doesn’t put it as its foundational element can also curtail or deny it. This state is flawed. Religious liberty comes before any state and power: it cannot be given; it must be recognized. If and when it is, citizens enjoy it, and the state protects it. When mistakes and misdeeds come in, going back to the foundational role of religious liberty can offer the opportunity to address them properly. But if and when religious liberty is only granted by a state, then that state can conclude that it can be limited based on other interests. This is of course not tolerable, and it is the roots of all misunderstandings and errors that states do to law-abiding, pacific, and patriotic citizens who do nothing wrong by concretely living their right to religious liberty.
In fact, this is the root of all misunderstandings and errors that the ROC inflicts on the law-abiding, pacific, and patriotic citizens of Tai Ji Men who do nothing wrong by trying to concretely live their right to religious liberty. There is more. This becomes the ideological justification of the state for denying Tai Ji Men the real consequences of the repeated rulings of all levels of Taiwanese justice that cleared the movement from all false charges, culminating in the ruling of the Supreme Court on July 13, 2007, which we are celebrating today.
Tai Ji Men has been acquitted of all fabricated accusations. It has been proved innocent of tax fraud. It did not commit any crime. It is free. Yet, some corrupt bureaucrats practically ignore those decisive rulings and still condemn Tai Ji Men to suffer the burden of a condemnation as if it has been instead proved guilty.
The whole Tai Ji Men case is essentially a religious liberty case. Yet, a corrupt branch of the ROC government has manipulated reality to make it appear a tax case only. This is what happens when a state has the power to decide what religious liberty is because its constitution only grants religious liberty instead of putting it at the center, core, and foundation of the nation. Of course, here lies the answer to our question today, “Who Stole Tai Ji Men’s Victory?” It was and is the flawed foundation of the ROC, not built on religious liberty, not taking religious liberty as preceding any other law or action by the state.
“I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience,” said Henry in 1775. History taught Americans that religious liberty must be recognized, not granted. Following Henry, we turn to history as well and remember a famous event in Antiquity. It is the Battle of Gaugamela, which Macedonia and Persia fought in 331 BCE in a place that historians think to have identified in what is today Iraqi Kurdistan. The famous Alexander the Great (356–323 BCE) defeated king Darius III (c. 380– 330 BCE) and paved the way for the Macedonian realm, which Greeks considered barbaric, to become a world empire as Antiquity would never see again.
Greek historian, philosopher, and priest Plutarch (c.46–119 CE) wrote the life of Alexander as one of the forty-eight biographies of his famous “Parallel Lives,” preserving for the posterity a famous sentence by the Macedonian condottiere. Facing the huge and dreadful Persian army, some of Alexander’s captains doubted they could win in daylight and tried to persuade the chief to attack the enemy by night, “and so to cover up with darkness,” Plutarch notes, “the most fearful aspect of the coming struggle.” But Alexander rose in his honesty and proclaimed “I will not steal my victory.”
Only cowards steal victories. All those who lose and deceive others, turning results on their head, commit great injustice. All those who abuse victory cause shame to the nation. All those who boast about victory while in reality they lost cannot champion law. All those who cancel victory denying the fundamental nature of human beings, or the rights religious liberty embodies and enshrines, act like tyrants.
Tai Ji Men won, and no power can ever deny this reality. Yes, powers can curtail the effects of Tai Ji Men’s victory, and this is in fact the evil we are discussing. Henry taught his compatriots to look to history for guidance and they concluded that religious liberty cannot be tolerated only but must be the key law of the land to which rulers and ruled obey. Alexander the Great displayed such a moral quality that he never cheated even on the most violent enemy. The noblest act that a loser running for public office can do is to concede victory to the adversary at the right moment. That is one of the peaks of all civilizations, when honesty, transparency and the strength of humility are displayed to serve as a model to an entire nation.
Tai Ji Men dizi, and the entire world with them, is waiting for the day when their victory will be returned, the ROC will learn from experience, and all officials will be able to say, with clear voice and clear eyes, “I did not steal victory.” That day will come only when religious liberty ceases to be a concession of the state to be revered as the bedrock and architecture of the Taiwanese community.