Opinion Piece: Has Chen Ding-nan 'Returned' Again?

In 1981 (Minguo 70), I graduated from university and returned to my hometown to serve. That year’s county magistrate election introduced the name 'Chen Ding-nan' to the people of Yilan for the first time. Thanks to public dissatisfaction with the Kuomintang’s past corruption, this political newcomer quickly rose to prominence. After taking office, Chen Ding-nan transformed bureaucratic norms and practices, bringing a refreshing change. Even during martial law, he dared challenge central authority—destroying surveillance files from various agencies at the Chung-Hsing Paper Mill, abolishing the practice of playing the national anthem before movie screenings, and pioneering flexible holidays, which later became standard nationwide. His visionary landscape planning after the straightening of the Dongshan River and the establishment of Luodong Sports Park involved recruiting talent from outside, resulting in high acclaim for Yilan’s public works, including the riverside park and sports complex. To combat pollution from cement plants, he used fines to hire temporary staff to monitor factories, significantly reducing air pollution and earning him the nickname 'Chen Qingtian' (Chen the Upright). His strict work ethic led some in the county government to call him a 'harsh official,' and stories of him personally smashing substandard construction with a hammer remain popular among locals. His decisive actions made the 'Yilan Experience' a model in Taiwan’s political arena. Thanks to Chen Ding-nan’s 'Yilan Experience,' the DPP has long touted 'green governance, quality guaranteed,' especially during elections—though later green administrations focused heavily on visible infrastructure projects, ultimately turning into 'debt guaranteed.' Over forty years later, former Magistrate Chen Ding-nan has been almost 'deified' in Yilan (though some question whether his 'uprightness' lived up to the reputation, it hasn’t shaken his standing among locals—'great virtue does not overstep boundaries; minor deviations are acceptable'). He has become a shared 'heritage' of all Yilan residents, yet the DPP doesn’t see it that way, treating it as their 'private property' to be trotted out and exploited during elections. When Lin Chong-hsien received a briefcase from Chen’s wife, it caused a sensation—but unfortunately, Lin later earned the nickname 'Lin the Hundred Million,' leaving one to wonder what the late, lifelong upright magistrate would think if he knew. The same tactic was tried again in the last election with Chiang Tsung-yuan, but it barely stirred interest. Perhaps the marginal effect of the briefcase has diminished, so this time Lin Guo-zhang has abandoned the act. Yet he refuses to let go of Chen’s halo, opting instead to appear alongside the 'Chen Ding-nan Friends Association.' (Chen passed away in 2006; the Chen Ding-nan Education Foundation was established the following year, and his memorial hall opened in 2010. Why form this 'association' only now, after so long? It’s hard not to suspect it was created specifically to boost Lin Guo-zhang’s campaign.) With the foundation setting the stage, Lin Guo-zhang naturally seeks to 'make good use' of it. He claims to have 'served as a lawyer during Magistrate Chen Ding-nan’s tenure,' but calculating the timeline, Chen served from 1981 to 1989, while Lin was born in 1968. When Chen left office, 'Lawyer Lin' likely hadn’t even graduated college—how could he have practiced law? To 'connect' with Magistrate Chen, how will he explain this 'time gap'? He also claims to have 'handled countless legal aid and petition cases,' allowing him to witness 'Chen Ding-nan’s care for disadvantaged residents and his courage to defend people’s rights for social justice.' This is equally puzzling—checking online reveals the Legal Aid Foundation’s Yilan branch was established in 2004. Even if he served as its chair, how was his 'connection' with Magistrate Chen established? He says he dares not claim to be a 'second Chen Ding-nan'—and rightly so, as aside from both having legal backgrounds, they are entirely 'incomparable.' Would Chen Ding-nan ever have placed himself in a whirlpool of lies? Take the escalating 'tainted oil scandal'—perhaps the very Lai Qing-de who endorsed Lin remained absent for a week before speaking, later exposed to have 'deep ties' with the financial backers behind the implicated firms. As a 'German-style executor,' he naturally dares not speak freely. Would Magistrate Chen, who challenged central authority even under martial law, have acted like a head-in-the-sand turtle in such a situation? While Wu Tsung-hsien delivered stern questioning in the legislature, our 'Administrative Yuan advisor Lin' happily acted as a 'beneficiary,' and on July 3—days after the scandal broke—our Premier still brought a group of officials to Yilan to campaign for him. This act of 'private interest over public good' makes any claim of 'emulating' Magistrate Chen a huge joke. This Yilan magistrate race is a clash of 'uprightness' versus 'integrity.' The former refers to a person’s overall image—perhaps someone who 'doesn’t do or hasn’t done' bad things, but not necessarily someone brave enough to speak out for justice. The latter is a psychological trait—someone inherently upright will 'say what must be said,' perhaps lacking smoothness due to their sharp edges, but their actions won’t stray from the right path. So saying 'an upright person isn’t necessarily honest, but an honest person isn’t necessarily upright' might be 'not far off the mark.' Jin Yong’s character Yue Buqun was undoubtedly a 'righteous sect' representative before his true nature was revealed. After Epstein files exposed Bill Gates, his image as a 'philanthropist' collapsed overnight—this is the 'risk' faced by those who project 'uprightness.' Returning to the Yilan race, Lin Guo-zhang’s self-proclaimed 'upright' image clashes with his silence on a food safety issue affecting public health, and his entanglement in 'lying' to borrow Chen’s halo. Can such a person truly be called 'upright'? How many would believe it? Personally, I scoff at it. *Author is an educator