Kai-Sheng Huang, Director of the Democratic Governance Program at the Research Institute for Democracy, Society, and Emerging Technology (DSET), recently published an op-ed in the U.S. think tank Global Taiwan Institute (GTI) titled “Taiwan’s ‘Little Pink’ Resentment: Expulsions, Douyin, and the Edge of Democratic Tolerance.” The article explores how recent deportations of pro-PRC Douyin influencers in Taiwan are more than isolated enforcement actions—they represent a deeper reckoning with the boundaries of democratic tolerance amid rising geopolitical pressure.
The piece opens with the case of Liu Zhenya (劉振亞), a Chinese immigrant influencer known as “Yaya in Taiwan” (亞亞在台灣). Liu gained notoriety after livestreaming her enthusiastic praise for PLA military drills that encircled Taiwan, describing the image of the island draped in PRC flags as “thrilling.” Huang argues that such symbolic performances are not merely provocative—they actively destabilize Taiwan’s information environment by exploiting the very freedoms of a liberal democracy to promote authoritarian narratives.
The Taiwanese government ultimately revoked Liu’s dependent residency and ordered her deportation, along with two other influencers who had also promoted “armed unification.” Citing Article 20(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which prohibits “any propaganda for war,” the courts upheld the government’s actions.
Huang frames these deportations as part of a broader institutional response to a gray-zone challenge: how to defend sovereignty and democratic integrity without undermining the values of legal accountability and pluralism. He argues that these incidents test Taiwan’s ability to balance security and overreach, speech and subversion, and inclusion and exclusion—all while facing growing external threats.
The article notes that this shift signals Taiwan’s increasing willingness to draw clearer lines in defending its democratic order. Huang points out that deportation in the name of security is not merely a matter of law enforcement, but also an act of redrawing the boundaries of citizenship and testing how much pressure a democracy can endure.
Huang emphasizes that the controversy is not just legal or political—it is symbolic. In democratic societies, freedom and identity often exist in tension. When democracy is used to advance authoritarianism and deny national identity, the resulting backlash reflects more than policy disagreement—it reveals societal fragility and moral outrage. As Huang writes, this is a paradox where one element of Taiwanese identity (freedom) is being used to erode another (sovereignty).
The broader public response, he notes, reflects a convergence of geopolitical anxiety, a deepening sense of national identity, and moral outrage at perceived betrayal. These cases are not merely social media spectacles—they serve as a litmus test for Taiwan’s democratic resilience.flects a convergence of geopolitical anxiety, a deepening sense of national identity, and moral outrage at perceived betrayal. These cases are not merely social media spectacles but serve as a litmus test for Taiwan’s democratic resilience.