Abstract
The aim of this study is to present a construction of the history of the prison system in Taiwan in the context of the intertwined structures of penal discourses and the governmentality of the state. The prison system in Taiwan has been subject to different ruling political regimes, ranging from colonised, authoritarian to liberal-democratic systems between 1895 and the present. The history of imprisonment can be divided into six stages, each of which consists of distinct governmental strategies that shape prominent penal discourses. My purpose was to uncover the exercising power of governmentality, further shaping, guiding and affecting the penal discourses via rationalities and technologies upon which prison administration depends.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It is argued by Garland that for a long time we were trapped in the presumptions of ‘a regime of truth’ in which the penal rationale and juridical authority of institutions were transparent and self-evident. However, the contemporary period is one in which penological optimism has given way to a persistent scepticism about the rationality and efficacy of modern penal institutions (Garland, 1990, p. 4).
The Manchu Dynasty of the Chinese Empire took over from the Ming Dynasty in 1644 and was ended in 1911 by the succession of modern China, which abolished the imperial system. The political organisation of the Manchu was based on that of the Ming Dynasty, but it was more centralised. The civil service examinations, long proven to be an efficient way of recruiting officials, was retained, along with the traditional bureaucracy. By the eighteenth century the Ching Dynasty had reached its peak. It was a period of peace and prosperity. However, by the end of the eighteenth century things started to change. Owing to lack of production and a growing population, the economy fell into recession. The financial resources of the Ching had been depleted, due to foreign expansion, and large-scale official corruption was common. The nineteenth century was marked by a steady increase in foreign pressure from the West and Japan. This, coupled with internal decay, financial problems and the pull of opium, brought about the fall of Imperial China [the Ministry of Education (MOE), 1999].
In his major book, The Division of Labor in Society, Durkheim employs his evolutionary functionalism to examine the changing basis of social solidarity, as primitive functionalism societies, integrated by the similarities underlying mechanical solidarity, evolve into advanced societies integrated by the differences underlying organic solidarity. Primitive societies are composed of a small number of similar individuals who constitute a homogeneous, undifferentiated mass. The strong emotional reactions to infractions of the strict moral code are embodied in the collective conscience—that is, shared, strongly held beliefs, values, and sentiments.
In the US Library of Congress Country Study of Japanese History, gives an explicit description of how Taiwan was taken over by Japan. The war between China and Japan arose from the conflictual interests in Korean affairs. With assistance from several Japanese nationalistic societies, the illegal Tonghak (Eastern Learning) nationalistic religious movement in Korea staged a rebellion that was soon crushed by Chinese troops. However, Japan responded with force and quickly defeated China in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894–95). After nine months of fighting, a cease-fire was called and peace talks were held. The Treaty of Shimonoseki accomplished several things: recognition of Korean independence; cessation of Korean tribute to China; cession of Taiwan, the Penghu Islands, and the Liaodong Peninsula (the southern part of Manchuria) to Japan; and opening of Chang Jiang (Yangtze River) ports to Japanese trade. It also assured Japanese rights to engage in industrial enterprises in China.
Meiji, (1852–1912), reign name of the emperor of Japan from 1867 to 1912. He ascended the throne when he was 15 years old and took power when the political regime of the Tokugawa military house was relinquished to the emperor. This was the Meiji restoration, a pivotal event in the modern history of Japan, for it meant the downfall of Japanese feudalism and the forging of a new and modern state. During the period of Meiji rule, Japan was transformed into a modern industrial state. A constitution which followed the German system, adopted in 1889, provided for a diet with an upper house selected mainly from the peerage, and an elected lower house to advise the government. The cabinet was not directly responsible to the diet but was regarded as above politics and responsible only to the emperor. When the Meiji period ended in 1912, Japan was a world power (The Columbia Encyclopaedia, sixth edition, 2000).
Matthews (1999, p. 30) points out that a classic example of radial design is to be found in Pentonville prison in North London, which was run on the principles of non-communication and strict separation. Furthermore, there was no necessary contradiction between improving conditions in prisons and maintaining their deterrent value in this model of prison. It is noted that the radial design used in the majority of Victorian prison still remains in evidence.
With the aim of achieving a ‘Lenin-style’ political party, the Kuomintang party had tried for a long time to establish a “one-party rule” system. After moving to Taiwan, the party was rebuilt, to the effect that the party’s control was secured by Chiang Kai-shek’s close associates. A centralised ruling structure was established later in Taiwan and materialised the goal of the ‘party rules the country’. The Kuomintang regime brought into Taiwan an insidious “secret police politics”, which is traditionally seen in Chinese politics. Secret politics and secret information are inseparable, as one would not hesitate to inform against a relative for self-protection. Under the KMT’s authoritarian politics, fellow Taiwanese suspected each other, and this also helped KMT’s control of Taiwan greatly. The secret police in Taiwan was usually called the ‘secret military agency’. The secret military agency was feared so much by the people at the time, just like the police force in the Japanese era, that the mere mention of its name would ‘silence a crying child’. During the period of the 1950s and 1960s, KMT secret police incriminated the innocent and terrorised people, and prisons became the places where political prisoners were held (Kiyoshi, 1996, in chapter 10).
Chiang Kai-Shek’s KMT state had officially asserted itself as the ‘Republic of China (ROC)’ instead of ‘Taiwan’ in order to claim that the Republic of China was the only legitimate political regime standing for the whole of China. However, this was not accepted by most countries, who regarded Taiwan as one part of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Currently, Taiwan maintains diplomatic relations with 29 countries in the name of the ‘Republic of China.’
This official propaganda is commonly found on the cover of the Taiwanese Correctional Journal, which is the only journal addressing the prison management and system in Taiwan. In addition, this concept is also emphasised in the prison manuals for uniformed staff.
References
Adler, M., & Longhurst, B. (1994). Discourse, power and justice: Towards a new sociology of imprisonment. London: Routledge.
Bosworth, M., & Sparks, R. (2000). New directions in prison studies: Some introductory comments. Theoretical Criminology, 4(3), 259–264.
Carrabine, E. (2000). Discourse, governmentality and translation: Toward a social theory of imprisonment. Theoretical Criminology, 4(3), 327–349.
Chen, K.-H. (1994). The imperialist eye: The cultural imaginary of a sub-empire and a nation-state. Taiwan: A radical quarterly in social studies, 17, 149–222.
Christie, N. (2000). Crime control as industry (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Cohen, S. (1985). Visions of social control. Cambridge: Polity.
de Haan, W. (1994). Abolitionism and crime control, the theoretical and political priorities of critical criminology. In J. Muncie, E. McLaughlin, & M. Langan (Eds.), Criminological perspectives. London: Sage.
Deng, Y-Z. (2000). The truth of Kuomintang’s core organisation. Taipei: Udn Group.
Durkheim, E. (1985). The division of labor in society. New York: Free Press.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of prison. London: Penguin.
Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Garland, D. (1990). Punishment and modern society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Garland, D., & Sparks, R. (2000). Criminology, social theory and the challenge of our times. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 189–204.
Gordon, C. (1991). Governmental rationality: An introduction. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheat sheaf.
Huang, C.-L. (2004). Corrections of the 21th Century. Taipei: So-Ci.
Huang, G-T. (1989). Japanese governors in Taiwan during the period of Japanese colonization. Taipei: Pahmier.
Huang, S-D. (1996). An analysis of political tolerance in Taiwan. Soochow Journal of Political Science, 6, 1–38.
Hudson, B. (1996). Understanding justice. London: Open University Press.
Hudson, B. (1998). Punishment and governance. Social and Legal studies, 7(4), 553–559.
Ignatieff, M. (1978). A just measure of pain: The penitentiary in the industrial revolution 1750–1850. London: Macmillan.
Jacobs, J. B. (1977). Stateville: The penitentiary in mass society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jacobs, J. B. (1983). New perspectives on prisons and imprisonment. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press.
Jessop, B. (1990). State theory: Putting capitalist state in their place. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Kiyoshi, I. (1996). Taiwanese 400 years of history. Taipei: Lanchin Press.
Kong, Y.-J. (2000). Immigrant regime and indigenous society: The formation of Kuomintang’s social base since self-reform, 1950–69. Taipei: Paddy Country.
Mathiesen, T. (2000). Prison on trial: A critical assessment. London: Sage.
Matthews, R. (1999). Doing time: An introduction of the sociology of imprisonment. London: Macmillan Press.
MOE (1999). Chinese history chronology. Taipei: MOE Press.
MOI (1952). Social reports and statistics in fifty years during the period of Japanese colonization. Taipei: MOI Press.
MOJ (1988). Historical chronicle on corrections. Taipei: MOJ Press.
Pang, C.-K. (1992). The state and economic transformation: The Taiwan case. New York and London: Garland Publishing.
Pecheux, M. (1982). Language, semantics and ideology. London: Macmillan.
Rose, N., & Miller, N. (1992). Political power beyond the state: Problematics of Government. British Journal of Sociology, 43(2), 173–204.
Rusche, G., & Kirchheimer, O. (1939). Punishment and social structure. New York: Columbia University Press.
Ruggiero, V. (1998). The country of Cesar Beccaria: The myth of rehabilitation in Italy. In R. P. Weiss & N. South (Eds.), Comparing prison systems. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach publishers.
Scott, J. C. (1977). Patron-client politics and political change in Southeast Asia. In S. W. Schmidt, L. Guasti, H. L. Carl, & C. Scott (Eds.), Friends, followers, and factions: A reader in political clientalism. California: University of California Press.
Segal, L. (1990). Slow motion: Changing masculinities, changing men. London: Virago.
Sellin, T. (1944). Pioneering in penology: The Amsterdam houses of correction in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Sheh, L.-Z. (1996). Criminology and criminal policy. Taipei: Wen-Sen.
Sim, J. (1994). Tougher than the rest: Men in prison. In T. Newburn & E. A. Stanko (Eds.), Just boys doing business. London: Routledge.
The Columbia Encyclopedia (2000) 6th edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
Wang, T.-M. (1999). The transformation of law during the period of Japanese colonization. Taipei: Lian-Jing Press.
Weiss, R. P. (1998). Conclusion: Imprisonment at the millennium 2000—its variety and patterns throughout the world. In R. P. Weiss & N. South (Eds.), Comparing prison system: Toward a comparative and international penology. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Publishers.
Winckler, E. (1992). Taiwan transition? In political change in Taiwan. In Cheng & Haggard (Eds.), The transformation of public and social movement. Taipei: Hoover Institution Press.
Wu, C.-Z., & Chai, C.-U. (1994). The history of prison building. Taipei: Chyun-Ping Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hsu, HF. State Power and Penal Rhetoric: A Historical Analysis of the Prison System in Taiwan. Asian Criminology 1, 21–36 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-006-9005-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-006-9005-9