Democratization in Asia: Young Democracy in Taiwan from a US perspective

Abstract

Most East Asian Countries after the WWII have been on the track of Democracy promoted by the US, and civil right protection is one important indicator of how well the democracy has been promoted. This paper closely analyzes the level of democracy by examining civil right protection in Taiwan, Republic of China, as an indicator of democracy growth compared to the protection and promotion in the US civil right standards, therefore, draws a conclusion of how well the democracy have been promoted in Taiwan.\r\nAfter 1945 atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima ended the world war in East Asia, the globe was divided into two ideological spheres, liberalism versus nationalism, the United States versus Soviet Union, North versus South, West versus East, and democracy versus communism. Prior to the World War II, the world was not so concerned with human right; after the war, human right is a basic factor of democracy and liberalism. Freedom of choice becomes an important lesson for an open world and a free trade market. The United States promoted democracy along with its open market to the rest of the followers in a demand that human right is a clear guideline for the foundation of democracy. One important factor that the US has left out was to clearly define what the human right is, and how it is recovered into the hand of people instead of propaganda for states to pounder.\r\nOne obvious right identified as a human right is the voting right. Many Asian countries have progressed in the past sixty years with the freedom of choice in terms of their political beliefs, but the democracy is still in its childhood. The young democracy has many years to grow, and yet, many well-progressed Eastern countries have stopped looking forward to a democratic adulthood meaning the process has been at halt without further improvement. One of the important reasons for its stall is civil right protection. When people do not have a good channel to seek justice in their civil rights, democracy is still not a guaranteed one. When democracy is depending on which leader leads the country, and the equal opportunity of civilian is not guaranteed, there creates a deficiencies in civil right protection, consequently, defeats the purpose of democracy.\r\nThe Rising Asia Pacific Region:\r\nOpportunities and Challenges for Cooperation\r\n339\r\nWhat is the definition of human right? How are human rights being protected? How is it monitored? And what is the protection mechanism if human rights are claimed but not exercised? What are different interpretations of human right? Should culture difference play a role in human rights interpretation? Is majority vote democratic? By asking these questions, it helps to address some of the vagueness of today’s general understanding of human right – voting right.\r\nThis paper focuses on the US Civil Right Policy compliance review process for the foundation of human right protection with comparison of Eastern human right progress and interpretation to clearly mark the short fall of Eastern human right progress. The age of Asian democracy is still young, but the Eastern cultures are very old. They do not have a full understanding of the linkage between democracy and human rights. Is it American’s ignorance about not clearly identifying the link? Or, are the Westerners taking it for granted that human rights are just part of the phenomenon having an open market, meaning free trade is democracy?\r\nThis paper will focus on comparison of the US civil right review process and to identify the “lack of” Asian human rights interpretation and common definition. Section I is a background description of contemporary historical events led into the bipartisan world. Section II describes the needs of democracy and human right connection. Section III explains one of important mechanisms of civil right protection under education systems. Section IV describes East Asian human right progress and conveys the meaning of civil right in Taiwan, Republic of China with empirical survey data, Section V compares between the matured and the young democracy, and Section VI draws a conclusion.