I Saw 3 Years Ago That Shen Boyang Was No Ordinary Man! Now the "Yang Current" Sweeps Taipei — the First Man Wanted by the CCP 【Interview by Ba Jiong】

In this episode, Ba Jiong interviews Puma Shen, Associate Professor at the Graduate Institute of Criminology of National Taipei University and co-founder of Kuma Academy, discussing the cognitive warfare faced by Taiwan, disinformation and conspiracy theories, China's legal framework targeting Taiwan, as well as the achievements and future plans of Kuma Academy in promoting civil defense.

Video link:

Full transcript:

Hello everyone, I'm Ba Jiong. Today I am very pleased to have Professor Shen Boyang, Puma, with us. Actually, I wanted to invite him about more than a year ago. I probably started paying attention to him when he appeared on Holger Chen's live stream. That time, I thought, wow, this guy has real depth, and I really, really wanted to invite him for a chat. Because I've noticed that among many young people, there has recently been quite a big reversal regarding 'resisting China to protect Taiwan' and cognitive warfare, so I wanted to invite Teacher Puma to share his insights. Let's first ask Teacher Puma to briefly introduce Kuma Academy and his background to everyone. Oh, just call me Puma. I am an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of Criminology at National Taipei University, and I am also the chairman of Doublethink Lab. A little over a year ago, I co-founded Kuma Academy. How did you decide back then to give up a teaching position in the United States and come back to Taiwan? Actually, I hesitated for a long time, because the teaching positions in the US honestly offer decent compensation. Moreover, the academic environment in the US is relatively simpler than in Taiwan. My advisor knew that I would return every year to participate in all kinds of movements, um, and he thought: ah, you care so much about Taiwan, you should go back to Taiwan; what's the point of staying in the US to teach? You're just teaching Americans. So I told him, but I want to learn more about American experiences in the US. They told me, if you really want to know about American experiences, can't you just call and ask? At that time, I made up my mind decisively, gave it up, and returned to Taiwan. Could you tell the audience what Kuma Academy does? I think the main reason for Kuma Academy is that we often say: attacking Taiwan is not as effective as buying Taiwan, and buying Taiwan is not as effective as deceiving Taiwan. That means, for China, having Taiwan surrender directly is definitely its cheapest cost. And to make Taiwanese people surrender, the best way is to make Taiwanese people lose their will to resist. In the early days, it was basically spreading rumors, saying how strong the PLA is, and so on. That's why we recently published the book 'What to Do If Grandpa Strikes' to let everyone know that it's actually not that exaggerated. But just that isn't enough. If you distrust the government, or distrust the US, while harboring more illusions about China, you might also surrender. To us, psychological defense is part of civil defense. Therefore, a very crucial mission of Kuma Academy is to let everyone know that even if war breaks out, there are actually many things you can do, and the consequences of surrender might be even worse. So letting everyone understand this actually brings a significant effect to overall civil defense.

I often hear the argument that during the eight years of the Ma administration or the previous KMT era, there was no such thing as selling out Taiwan; Taiwan was still the Republic of China, and Taiwan was still Taiwan. Therefore, if you let someone other than the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) or the non-localist camp govern, Taiwan would not be dragged into war, nor would it be deceived or sold out. Thus, this is a false issue. I think we can break this down into a few points. First, everyone has probably heard of asymmetric warfare. Yes, but in reality, we are somewhat forced into asymmetric warfare. The main reason is that our previous weapons preparations were insufficient. During those eight years, when your weapons preparations are inadequate, it is already too late to prepare now, because weapons require logistics and maintenance; it takes time for them to become operational. So, we are forced to discuss asymmetric warfare. That is the first point. Second, speaking from my area of expertise, cognitive warfare or information warfare, Taiwan's primary response to the adversary should be the Political Warfare Bureau of the Ministry of National Defense. Within political warfare, there is the Psychological Warfare Division and the Psychological Warfare Group. These squadrons should theoretically have commanders, but the budget for these commanders was cut by 800 million, and no one is there to lead this command and combat. Without that, our political warfare simply cannot counter China's strikes. That is the first point. The second point is that, theoretically, we should have many state security personnel in China gathering intelligence; otherwise, how would we know what China is doing? Even North Korea has a bunch of spies in China. However, during those eight years, they recalled all National Security Bureau personnel—all of them. So, our regular establishment of personnel there is now zero. Not to mention that our intelligence gathering there was cut off, and they even opened the door to let them come over to gather intelligence. Yes, through tourism, students, and so on. So, why do I say the gates were thrown wide open? The main reason is what happened during those eight years. I feel that some Taiwanese people don't know what's wrong with them; they treat China like a democratic country such as the United States, Taiwan, or Japan, thinking, 'If you open up to their investment, exchanges, and students, what could possibly happen? We Taiwanese can manage it.' But I don't know why they always use this mindset to view China. First, they do not understand the evil nature of China. Second, they really do not have a clear understanding of China's claim that Taiwan is a part of China. From their Anti-Secession Law to the military mobilization action they passed last year, and up to what I believe will be their next move—the introduction of a 'Taiwan Basic Law'—they are deliberately framing Taiwan within a civil war context. They are saying, 'Today, I am using this legal framework to attack you, but I am not conducting military operations to convince other countries.' We travel to the U.S. and Japan, and we have many exchanges with them, but the U.S. and Japan do not claim that we are a part of them, right? Therefore, people's understanding of China is insufficient. One of the very important missions of Kuma Academy is that we actually offer courses on understanding China, specifically to help everyone learn more about it. But the sad thing is, not to mention the government, even our private media does a very poor job of reporting on China. For example, take the recent White Paper Movement. Regarding the White Paper Movement, some Chinese students who supported it were arrested upon returning home. This, from the movement itself to the aftermath, was major news, and international media reported on it extensively. However, some Taiwanese media reported absolutely nothing; there was zero coverage. So, people's understanding of China has become dependent on channels like yours—they have to get accurate information about China from elsewhere, which is actually a very terrifying thing.

You just mentioned that the CCP has always been trying to frame this as a civil war, so things like "special military operations" and so on. Um, even though our president tells the outside world that whether it's Taiwan or the Republic of China, um, we are a country that is not subordinate to the CCP, constitutionally we are still in a civil war. Right, right, our constitution itself has major issues. Right, constitutional reform is actually very important. Another thing is what China loves to say the most: "Oh, we're working on this Basic Law of Taiwan; we've already talked with your borough chiefs, we've talked with your legislators, and I've talked with your former president too." So that's why regarding Ma Ying-jeou going to China, public opinion is actually no longer the main point; the point is that he is helping design that legal framework. When he goes there, they can claim, "Yes, we've met and talked with him twice, and regarding what the details inside should be, etc., we actually share a mutual consensus. A minority in Taiwan, like, uh, like Ba Jiong, like Kuma Academy, these are a minority of elements. When the time comes, we need to protect the majority of Taiwanese people, so we must deploy troops." What he wants is to establish that kind of legal room. A few weeks ago, I saw a Kuomintang legislator, Kao Chin Su-mei, claiming head-on that Taiwan doesn't need war preparedness and Taiwan doesn't need weapons, because these things attract war. When I heard that, I naturally thought it was quite laughable. How do you view this matter? It's like what we often say: the last one to sign a peace agreement was Tibet, right? Just look at what it has become today; a peace agreement is merely an excuse they use. The most important tool for me to annex Taiwan is a peace agreement. Um, and if a peace agreement cannot be reached, I will naturally resort to other measures. Right, it's just like Hong Kong: you talk about "One Country, Two Systems," but in the end, now, they haven't honored such a commitment at all, right. Legal texts or contracts, to them, are completely "historical documents"; they simply will not abide by them. Yet many people mistakenly believe that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is someone you can negotiate with. In reality, it beats you to death step by step; in the end, it really won't be any different from the White Terror. I think it will only be far more severe, exactly identical to what is happening right now in East Turkestan. It just wants to brainwash and cleanse you. It will eliminate your intellectuals first, and now, because of social media, it will eliminate your influencers and eliminate your politicians, and then use those inside who are more compliant and, uh, believe in the CCP to serve as internal proxies. That is precisely the method it uses to rule. Right, like after Xi Jinping entered his third term, the moves against Taiwan have grown bigger and bigger, especially after the constitutional revision in 2018 during his second term. The sanctions against Taiwan—whether economic, military drills targeting Taiwan, or military aircraft circling Taiwan—have clearly become more and more frequent and serious. The likelihood of the CCP, or this lunatic Xi Jinping, using military force against Taiwan is growing larger and larger, the probability higher and higher. Because naturally we feel that, since we are preparing for war, um, and we are training civil defense. Reasonably speaking, we want to raise the overall cost of an attack; right, so that if he attacks, he'll hesitate and think, "There are a bunch of people over there who know this and know that, so it's naturally going to be troublesome." Um, but the premise of this is that the things we do actually reach his ears. Reasonably speaking, no matter the wartime period, even hostile nations inevitably have communication channels. Um, but China has shut these communication channels down. Um, which means Xi Jinping might not have a grasp of the accurate situation at all; he is surrounded by a bunch of people who only give him... right, right, accurate information, just like Putin, right, so he might make completely wrong decisions, and on top of that, he cannot tolerate anyone criticizing him. Right, right, right. Current cognitive warfare is being branded as a conspiracy theory, right? More and more young people feel it's just a fake issue. Um, so do you see any way out or solution to this?

I think a quite important point about conspiracy theories is that when responding to them, you have to go all out. Let me give you an example: for instance, regarding issues like the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and gangsters, the Chinese approach works like this. First, they claim that public safety in Taiwan is terrible. Then, when someone says public safety is actually okay, they reply, 'You don't know how terrible public safety is because the police simply refuse to make arrests.' Why don't the police make arrests? Because the police are all in cahoots with gangsters. And why are the police in cahoots with gangsters? Because the DPP is full of gangsters. It is an entire large-scale conspiracy theory, and its sole purpose is to tell you that the DPP is full of gangsters anyway, so you shouldn't trust them. When I was conducting tests, I found that quite a few people probably believe these things, though I don't think the proportion is extremely high. But once, when my home was getting its internet re-cabled, the guy in his twenties who came to run the cables started talking to me about this. He said there are super many gangsters in the DPP, it is just hard for us to prove it. But let me tell you, they are all gangsters. However, I think how the government responds is very crucial. Is it a conspiracy theory? Because after all, you can never find a political party that is completely free of any gangsters; that is actually very difficult. Yes. So if you come out and say, 'Oh, we have zero gangsters,' and things like that, it actually backfires. What the government should do is, first, come out and tell everyone: That is right, there are gangsters in the DPP, and they fall into two different categories. One category dates back to the early non-partisan (dangwai) era; when the DPP was founded, in order to win elections against the Kuomintang (KMT), they actually let a lot of gangster proxy members join the party. Oh, this was a mistake of that era. And later on, we also encountered gangsters who washed their reputations. After washing their reputations, they wanted to participate in politics, which is yet another kind. Well, then we can honestly tell everyone: As part of transitional justice, we had some past shortcomings, and now we are reforming ourselves to hopefully eliminate this kind of past proxy membership. But on the other hand, regarding those gangsters who later on have completely clean criminal records, or whose children want to enter politics, should we set up a basic set of rules specifying under what circumstances such a situation allows someone to run for office? And we allow them to run, because after all, if someone wants to step forward and participate in politics, no rule says they cannot, right? Yes. Then, make the standards clear, so the DPP will properly face this matter. Actually, once you finish explaining all this, people have no way to pass down the conspiracy theories any further. Yes. But our approach is not like this. People just come out and say, 'Oh, what gangsters are you talking about?' and when they act like that, it ultimately plunges them right into the quagmire of conspiracy theories. Ah. As for how the CCP deals with these conspiracy theories or rumors, do they lay out their lines very early on? Usually, we look and find it is about half a year to a year in advance. That early? Yes. Anyway, I just test out every single line. And whichever line gets hyped up, I keep pushing that one. So sometimes you might see them try out maybe ten topics, and those ten topics might completely yield no results, but suddenly one topic starts spreading downward. There is one conspiracy theory that I think is quite outrageous, which is the one about Tsai Ing-wen having an abortion. Actually, I knew about this Tsai Ing-wen abortion thing very early on, around 2020 or 2021, because back then there was a Little Pink who also posted on their website about Tsai Ing-wen having some relationship with Lee Teng-hui and that Wang fellow, claiming they had an illegitimate child. Wow, I saw that one video had 150,000 to 170,000 views, which is outrageous. Right, that 150k to 170k, right? But it had six different versions; one version reached over a million, and another had around 800,000. And later on it had a total of about eight versions, and even though they got deleted, adding them all up came to somewhere between 6 million to 8 million views. This means quite a few people in Taiwan have watched it.

Probably about a million people, watching it multiple times across different versions. Because I run psychological experiments where I ask the public to read conspiracy theories and then rate whether they believe them or not, it's about 10%. Why I cannot understand this? Its characteristic is that the abortion part is just the very end of the entire conspiracy theory.

Meaning, if you go and debunk the abortion part or whatever, it is completely meaningless, because the core of the whole conspiracy theory is simply that Tsai Ing-wen wants to destroy the Republic of China (ROC), because she is very close to Taiwan independence elements, walking very close to them, because she not only has an illicit affair with Taiwan independence elements but also had a child with them, and then later the child wasn't born so she had an abortion. The main point is that she wants to wipe out the Republic of China. So everyone knows that China does this to target people who have a passion for the Republic of China, and it indeed works on them because they are very afraid of the Republic of China being destroyed. The government's response method is actually just this: from now on, whenever you speak, just keep talking about the Republic of China.

Taiwan, yes, that is exactly what needs to be said to these people. But when he says this, the people on the other side will be dissatisfied. There is a group of people in Taiwan who say, how can you say that? How can you tell the Republic of China to just say Taiwan? Right? So this will also lead to more controversy. Conversely, what is Taiwan's threat to the CCP? Well, because China has always had a crisis of governance, that is, why is the Communist Party the only legitimate party to rule China? Why should everyone choose me? I have to convince everyone. Yes, and when convincing everyone, there is a very important reason, which is that the economy is good.

So in the past, they always used the good economy to convince everyone, but when the economy is bad, you have to find other reasons. Actually, there should be many other ways to do it, but Xi Jinping chose to use ideology and nationalism, like, wow, the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, the Chinese people must get rich, must stand up, and used this way to hold onto everyone. It is indeed very successful, but it has also created many Little Pinks. When you talk about this, the public will start to feel, okay, what you said is very right, the Chinese people should stand up! But what exactly is going on with Taiwan?

Why can Taiwan still stand on the side? This is unreasonable! So when he chose to use this rejuvenation of the Chinese nation as the legitimacy of his rule, Taiwan's very existence became a threat to him. So, actually, it has nothing to do with whether Taiwanese people are provoking or what Taiwanese people are doing or establishing. Honestly, this is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. He said this, and now he cannot turn back. People might have a feeling that even if he thinks in his heart, is attacking Taiwan really right? But he already.

He cannot turn back, he must keep moving in this direction. We mentioned the Chinese-funded Douyin, okay, like more and more Western countries, the United States and some European countries have also started to legislate that government departments cannot use Douyin or Xiaohongshu and the like. Actually, I found that the Russian government has been doing this for a long time. China has been attacking abroad, saying that Europe and America are discriminating, but they dare not scold Russia for also discriminating. And Taiwan cannot, the government cannot, now it cannot, but a group of young people will appear who think, is it necessary? It is just like IG's Reels or YouTube's Shorts. Look at it from several levels. First, I will talk about the level of young people. The level of young people is that, honestly, even if TikTok does absolutely nothing to us, collects nothing, and just uses these soft things to make you feel, hey, watching this is quite good, etc.

At this time, it can attract a lot of audiences to this platform and then form a path dependency. As long as it does one thing that caters to China during a war, we are finished. That is to say, because it is a Chinese platform, yes, and we cannot talk to a Chinese platform and say, shouldn't you improve this or that? This is impossible. So as long as it spreads one false rumor or one conspiracy theory during a war, and these people are influenced, honestly, Taiwan will have problems. So what we need to prevent is not just the present, but the future. What TikTok can do to us, because it is in a place without the rule of law, you cannot use the law to demand it. Today, Facebook or your IG, Twitter, they are American companies, under pressure from the US Congress, with laws, you can still send them letters and ask them to do something. This basically does not exist with TikTok, you don't have it.

Doing these things, but the second point I think is also a concern, is that if it is not young people, but I later found that many people over 60 also use it. But there are two types of people over 60, one is that they really downloaded TikTok, and the other is that someone will download TikTok videos and upload them to Line, so it is equivalent to them constantly seeing TikTok content in Line, or they watch it in YouTube Shorts today, because it will also be uploaded there. Then this becomes a concern, that is to say, assuming we finally managed to get rid of TikTok and really banned it, but they can still see it, they can see it in Line, and they can still see it in YouTube Shorts, then the effect of that ban is equivalent to nothing.

will not be complete. Um, so this is a fairly important dilemma that we are currently facing. I have seen several creators in China doing TikTok; they upload simultaneously everywhere. Knowing the risk, they diversify. At that point, the effect is that we simply cannot block it anymore. So looking back, to truly block this, honestly, we might still have to rely on friend-or-foe awareness. Um, because the stronger a person's friend-or-foe awareness is, the more alert they will definitely be about this. Let me give a simple example: there is a study looking at Taiwan's Pan-Blue and Pan-Green camps, but when it comes to those who are neither Blue nor Green—or people who hate both the DPP and democratic forces—for this group of people,

using TikTok versus not using TikTok makes an enormous difference in attitudes toward China. Those who use it view China with completely positive evaluations, while those who don't have mostly negative evaluations of China; it becomes polarized into two extremes. And this completely aligns with China's united front tactics, because China aims to influence the fence-sitters. Why try to influence the extremes? The extremes will naturally stay extreme. As long as I target those in the middle who are indifferent or less sensitive to politics and influence them, I can succeed. And obviously, the effect is remarkable. To us, this means it is eroding our friend-or-foe awareness. Um, please, because I found that Taiwanese people's...

Global perspective, of course, the media also bears responsibility, which causes many Taiwanese to harbor misunderstandings and misinformation about the international community. That is, Western countries are already watching whether you want to be a citizen of the People's Republic of China and what you want to do, yet you still believe, "I am Zhonghua (Chinese)," or "I am Chinese Taipei," or "I am China." How should Taiwanese people improve this situation? I think this comes down to Taiwan's rather shallow-pan culture.

Oh, and the main premise behind this is essentially because we are not a normal country. Consequently, whenever we try to discuss normal issues, it very easily flares up into the unification-independence debate, and everyone gets boxed into it with no time to think about other things. But because Taiwan's international standing has improved over the past few years, my feeling is that gradually, more and more people are following international news—definitely more than before. Coupled with current AI technology, I think it makes a difference. It's possible that within the next six months, reading foreign media will become extremely easy for everyone; someone could easily feed reports from several mainstream international outlets to you, so honestly, they won't need to stick strictly to Taiwanese media. I think this shift might lead to some different perspectives among people. But returning to what was said earlier: if our unification-independence issue is not resolved first, if our status as a nation is not resolved, other issues are difficult to discuss. That is the tragedy. When we cannot become a normal country, many topics...

will be shelved. Once shelved, perspectives turn shallow; once shallow, people stop caring about other important matters. Hopefully, if this country can quickly become normal, we will be able to foster a flourishing debate on many issues. Let's do one last question:

Having spent these past few years doing public science communication for Taiwan, or giving up your position in the US to return to Taiwan, do you feel the efforts you made over these years have yielded any results? I think there are still results. For instance, in the earliest days when we talked about this cognitive warfare, people in Taiwan were actually very unfamiliar with the term. Right, but later it became a household phrase; even though it got somewhat stigmatized, it was brought to the forefront. Right, and another aspect is civil defense—the Kuma Academy part. In the earliest days, about two years ago, when Taiwanese people were asked, "Are you willing to surrender? Are you going to fight?" Back then, when asked, "If a war breaks out, what are you preparing to do? Are you going to enlist, or what?" The number of people who said they would do civil defense in the polls was zero—no one. Later, up until last year, 2% of respondents said they wanted to do civil defense; this year, it reached 18%.

Right, 18% of people answering phone polls said yes, they want to do things related to civil defense. Although 23% still say they would surrender, look: the number of people willing to do civil defense is already close to catching up with those wanting to surrender. This is huge growth. I think it probably has a lot to do with Chairman Tsao. Because whatever we do reaches only a niche audience, but when the news reported that Chairman Tsao was willing to make donations to civil defense, national defense, and so forth, that voice...

happening suddenly, I think there might be a huge difference. So, at the end of our video, why don't we share what plans Kuma Academy has coming up, or how the public can get involved? I think we will just continue to roll out these related courses continuously, and they are constantly being offered all across Taiwan, so we hope everyone will actively sign up. Of course, our registrations sell out in seconds, but coming up in June and July we will launch online courses. With online courses, everyone can learn by themselves at home, and after you finish learning, we will give out a practice voucher. That means when you're done studying—say, if you think, 'Hey, I want to practice bandaging, I want to do this and that'—we will tell you where the nearest venue is located. We'll set up the materials there and dispatch teaching assistants, so you can go on-site to practice. Mhm, and beyond that, we will also offer parent-child discounts, and we will produce children's editions of civil defense reading materials, which will also be launched this year, plus we will make handbooks.

And even more so, we will conduct large-scale drills. Large-scale drills are actually pretty fun, so we hope everyone will come and take part. For those who have taken the course, we will have people playing the PLA chase after you. We have trained a group of 'PLA troops.' Oh wow, I want to join too, that sounds so fun! Because we want everyone to know, you can't just finish a class and feel like you've mastered it; it requires constant practice, otherwise you're bound to forget. Especially when you're being chased, you get nervous. Now, we have a rule: when encountering the PLA, no one is allowed to fight back—meaning if you're about to be captured, you cannot counterattack. Under that high-stress condition, things you usually know how to tie up properly end up poorly tied; that kind of experience is important. Mhm, one session we call Blue Zone Action, where we try our best to use this method to keep everyone constantly engaged in this matter and constantly updated with the latest information. Furthermore, there are our handbooks, as well as parent-child activities, because many parents also want to participate, gradually building up this momentum, hoping to...

...reach the goal we set back then, which is to have at least 10% of Taiwan's population become very familiar with these things. Mhm, and when the time comes, that is what our defensive civil defense can accomplish. Now, going forward in Taiwan, I think next year we should enter into a discussion: with the National Armed Forces fighting at the front, and us having defensive civil defense personnel, do we also need offensive personnel? If medical personnel are attacked, who will protect them? Last time when I attended your course, I wanted to be that offensive person. Because when various countries organize civil defense, there are still offensive elements. That's right, whereas Taiwan has a...

...very troublesome issue: the moment you discuss this, everyone says, 'Oh, oh, do you want to form a militia? Are you trying to provoke China?' But in reality, to be fully prepared for a war, someone has to charge at the front, and someone has to provide protection at the rear; this is a very normal division of labor in society. In fact, we need legal frameworks allowing these things before we can move further forward. So how do we push for legal amendments? How can society hold public debates? There should be some forums, and scholars should step forward to write opinion pieces. I believe these are all important discussions! Ah, even if people don't take up guns, if the PLA arrives today and people drive dump trucks to surround them, is that allowed or not? It's allowed? Exactly, so what the legal basis is, and what our government permits us to do, should all be made known to the public, rather than simply slapping on a label saying, 'Hey, you want to attack like this, are you trying to train a militia?' But logically, whether I train...

...or do not lead troops, what business is it of yours, China? All right, today we are very grateful to Teacher Puma for joining our interview; it was truly an honor. Okay, that's all for today's video. If you liked it, remember to subscribe; if you didn't like it, be sure to block me. I'm Bayou. See you next time, bye-bye.