228政治不正確—道歉沒完了、反省無路走

【縛雞之論】英文拷到 G / D 找中文翻譯
From the end of World War II to a year or two ago, China continuously demanded that Japan acknowledge its history and apologize. If the move does not aim at demanding huge compensation, it is conducting political warfare—oppressing the defeated country and preventing it from rising again. How long should Japan continue to apologize each year before justice is achieved?
Similarly, the remedies of the 228 Incident have been through several phases: from being untold to the first apology, legislation, compensation, and research and organization during Lee Teng-hui's presidency, as well as ongoing transitional justice. While the speed of this process is a matter of opinion, remedial measures have been taken.
Yet, some descendants of the victims of the 228 Incident, mainly political fundamentalist agitators, demand an apology from the perpetrators every year.
Has it become a convenient slogan or a political bargaining chip?
As time passes, Taiwan has democratized, and the question of "who should apologize?" has become increasingly blurry.
Although Lee Teng-hui, a native Taiwanese and the President of the Republic of China, apologized in 1995, looks reasonable. But have his successors, Chen Shui-bian, Ma Ying-jeou, and Tsai Ing-wen, all served as the President, apologized without exception?
"Who should apologize" become an intensive question yet been asked. Furthermore, who should continue to apologize?
This is a profound and thought-provoking question!
This year, Chiang Wan-an, a great-grandson of the Chiang Kai-shek family, was elected mayor of Taipei. Some young activists requested that he apologize on behalf of the Chiangs family. However, there are doubts as to whether the great-grandson of the family can represent the entire Chiang family to apologize. After 76 years, the "requester" and the "requested" are fighting over things that they have not experienced or done themselves is weird.
Genuine apologies involve remedial measures that are being taken and persisting.
Unfortunately, deep-rooted hatred mindset, insincerity, as well as the seductive nature of politically correctness bargaining chips have obscured all reasonable measures to be adopted.
However, who is preventing the Taiwanese from reconciling in the face of the military threat from the Chinese Communist Party? That is a life and death issue for those living in present Taiwan.

戰後一直到一兩年前，中國不斷的要求日本正確認識歷史、道歉，此舉若非旨在要求鉅額賠償，就是在進行政治作戰—戰勝國壓抑戰敗國，不使之得以翻身。每年道歉，要道歉多久才是正義得償？

二二八的處理，從不可說，到李登輝執政時期的首度道歉、立法、補償與研究整理，以及進行中的轉型正義。速度快慢，雖然見仁見智，但的確有在進行補救處理。
不過，部份二二八受害者後代每年要求加害者道歉。到底變成行禮如儀的口號，還是行使政治籌碼？
隨著時間與台灣民主化，「誰該道歉？」面貌已經越來越模糊。
過去，李登輝雖是台灣人，以總統身分道歉，似為合理。之後，同為中華民國總統的陳水扁、馬英九、蔡英文，誰該道歉？誰道歉過？進一步的疑惑是，誰該持續道歉？這是值得深思的大問題！
今年，蔣家的庶系曾孫蔣萬安，當選台北市長。部份年輕人循例要求蔣萬安以家屬身分代表蔣家道歉。庶系曾孫能否代表蔣家來道歉，有很大疑問？而76年之後，「要求者」與「被要求者」為自己沒有經歷過、沒有做過的事情而爭鋒。怎麼看都怪怪的。
真正的道歉是處理，做且持續在補救。
可惜，憤恨太深、太假，政治正確的籌碼太迷人，阻撓一切合理的言行被。
但，台灣面臨中共的武力威脅，誰才不讓台灣和解？這才是真正的死活問題！