In response to recent incidents that haunt the society, from an increasing number of rallies to enhanced security after the Taipei MRT stabbing incident, the government resolves to boost police numbers. This sets off concerns and worries over tolerance of police force turning into abuse of power. During the Sunflower protest in March, for example, the picture of a police officer clubbing unarmed students in protest has set off an alarm of the Ma Administration’s turning this country into a police state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic, and political life of the population.

 

Do you agree or disagree with the idea that the boost of police force is the solution to social disturbance? Give specific reasons or examples to support your ideas.

 

 The increase of police force is not a panacea (萬靈丹) to social demonstrations (抗議、示威). People in a democratic society are allowed to assemble (集會) and demonstrate what they insist on, whether their purpose is simply for their own or the welfare of the society. Once a legion of (眾多的) people who go out of their houses and put their jobs aside protest something or maintain and safeguard their rights, there must be something infeasible (不合理) and detrimental (有害) to the society. Meanwhile, negotiation (協商), rather than the deployment (配置) of police force, plays a pivotal part (扮演一個核心角色) to break through the bottleneck (突破瓶頸).

 

 The recourse to (訴諸於) police force in appeasing (平息) social protests adds fuel to (加油添醋) the contention (爭議). To terminate (結束) the so-called social disturbance (社會動盪不安) from the perspectives (觀點) of the authorities concerned (有關當局), the suppressive (鎮壓的) power from the police, instead of any other avenues (管道、途徑) possible to solve the thorny (棘手的) problem, emerges as (成為) the exclusive (唯一的) vehicle (手段). Once police force is manipulated (操作) by the state apparatus (國家機器), it is much easier for demonstrators to have an intense confrontation (激烈對抗、衝突) with the police. Under the severe conflicts, the common people have no alternative but to (不得不) confront the armed (武裝的) police. Consequently, the protesters end up with (結局以～為收場) injuries, the application of public power leaves much to be desired, the prestige (聲望) of the administration is seriously stained (玷汙), and the controversy is still bubbling up (沸騰). The polices powerful intervention in a social protest forms an impediment (障礙), not an assistance, to quench (平息) a social campaign (社會運動).

 

 Social protests are not uncommon (相當普遍) in a democratic society. In other words, those who hold a demonstration cannot, and should not, be referred to as (被視為) dissidents (異議份子) and troublemakers bringing turmoil (混亂) to the society. Rather, those yearn for (渴望) social justice, wish to get rid of (去除) social symptoms (社會症狀), and supervise (監督) the establishment and practice of national policies. The authorities concerned cannot merely resort to (訴諸於) police force but show their utmost sincerity to negotiate with the protesters. No one will take to the streets (上街頭) if living happily, justly, securely, and wealthily.

 

認識李正凡老師

 

※李正凡老師【必讀好書】

 

※李正凡老師【必上好課】