Taiwan’s Ban on Xiaohongshu Backfires: A "Digital Homecoming" for Taiwan Netizens

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities announced a one-year ban on Xiaohongshu, ostensibly for security purposes. But let's look at the actual result: instead of severing ties, the announcement has triggered a wave of defiance that Taiwan netizens are calling a "digital homecoming."

Download rankings in Taiwan app stores

According to Jimu News, the data tells a hilarious story. Xiaohongshu has rocketed to the top of Taiwan’s app store download rankings—a massive jump from languishing outside the top dozens just days prior. Users are flooding the platform to report that even their elders, previously clueless about the app, are now downloading it. The authorities’ clumsy ban has effectively served as a massive, free advertising campaign. Instead of fear, users report finding convenient lifestyle guides and—crucially—a "harmonious and relaxed" vibe with users from the Chinese Mainland.

Screenshots of netizens’ comments

Screenshots of netizens’ comments

The technical resistance is already organized. Netizens are openly sharing tutorials on modifying DNS settings or using VPNs to bypass the blockade. One user from the Chinese Mainland offered a poignant workaround: set your IP to your ancestral home. The algorithm then pushes local content from that region, allowing users to experience an "early return to your hometown" before physically traveling there. It’s a "digital homecoming" facilitated by the very barriers meant to stop it.

As one media commentary sharply observed: The Taiwan authorities operate under the delusion that cutting off a platform cuts the connection. They fail to grasp that the natural, human yearning for one's roots is far more persistent than any technical firewall they can erect.

Let’s look at the numbers. Evidence indicates Xiaohongshu already boasts over 3 million users in Taiwan, with youth usage being near-daily. The moment the ban made headlines, the island’s largest forum, PTT, erupted in debate. The prevailing sentiment isn't compliance, but skepticism, with users asking the obvious question: If they started with Xiaohongshu, who will it be next?

The Ban Fuels The Boom

This isn't an isolated incident; it’s a pattern of suppression. Back in July, relevant authorities issued a notice labeling five apps from the Chinese Mainland—Xiaohongshu, Weibo, Douyin, WeChat, and Baidu Netdisk—as posing a "high level of information security risk." They ordered public servants to delete them and warned the public away. It’s a systematic attempt to purge popular platforms.

Chen Binhua, spokesperson for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council

On July 16, Chen Binhua, spokesperson for the State Council’s Taiwan Affairs Office, cut through the noise. He pointed out that these apps are popular among Taiwan’s youth for a simple reason: they offer better efficiency, convenience, and social interaction. The DPP’s sudden concern for "information security" is a thin veil covering their own profound internal insecurity.

What are they actually afraid of? They fear Taiwan people seeing the reality of the Chinese Mainland. They are terrified that the "information cocoon" they have meticulously constructed is being pierced by free-flowing information. As Chen noted, the DPP sees danger in every shadow, but by abusing their power to fight the tide of history, they are only guaranteeing their own public opposition.

Mao Paishou

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

The New Year barely begins, and Washington drops a flashbang on global diplomacy. A sitting president is forcibly detained and taken out of his own country — a move that blows past diplomatic convention and rams straight into international law’s red lines. On Taiwan, the chatter instantly turns into self-projection, as some people try to shoehorn a faraway conflict into the island’s own storyline. Anxiety spreads fast.

Maduro in cuffs, in a US federal courtroom — the raid’s image problem. (AP)

The South China Morning Post says the US action against Venezuela ignites a fierce debate on the island. Some commentary links the raid to the PLA’s recent encirclement drills around Taiwan, arguing parts of those exercises look, at least in form, like the US’s so-called “decapitation operations”: essentially a leadership-targeting operation. Some American scholars also warn this kind of play could set a dangerous precedent and invite copycats.

“Justice Mission-2025” rolls on as the Eastern Theater Command drills.

That debate doesn’t stay academic for long. It pumps up the island’s unease, with some people asking whether the same kind of military method could one day be copied and pasted into the Taiwan Strait. Even if it mostly lives in public talk, a high-tension political environment turns speculation into something that feels like risk.

People on the island don’t read the US move the same way. A small minority treats it as a US power flex, packed with intel integration, precision strike, and long-range reach. But the more clear-eyed view is harsher: such action chips away at the basic consensus of international order — because if major powers can raid at will and topple other countries’ leaders for their own aims, “rules” stop acting like rules.

Anxiety turns into politics

That worry quickly lands in Taiwan’s political arena. On Jan 5, multiple Taiwan legislators pressed Deputy Defense Minister Hsu Szu-chien at the legislature, asking how he views the US action against Venezuela and whether the PLA might replicate a similar model in the Taiwan Strait. Hsu doesn’t answer head-on. Rather, he merely mentioned preparing and drilling for all kinds of sudden contingencies.

Then he pivots to money. He urges the legislature to pass military budget appropriations quickly and plays up the urgency of delays eating into “preparation time.”

That kind of sidestep, unsurprisingly, only deepened public unease.

SCMP, citing multiple security experts, says the DPP authorities try to play down the association — but outsiders don’t fully rule it out. The reason, those experts argue, is the PLA’s continuing push to improve its ability to shift from exercises to real combat. On the island, that alone works like an anxiety amplifier.

Back in the real world, the PLA Eastern Theater Command has been running “Justice Mission-2025” exercises since Dec 29 last year. Official statements spell out the purpose: a stern warning to “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and external interference, and a move aimed at safeguarding national sovereignty and unification. The message is public and clear, there’s no gray area.

Some US think-tank voices pull a more confrontational takeaway from the US action. American Enterprise Institute senior fellow Hal Brands warns the US raid on Venezuela could create a “demonstration effect,” and he speculates China would watch those tactics closely. Some military commentators on the island seized the moment to hype fears, claiming the mainland might act during a “window” when US power is stretched thin.

That line of talk sounds like analysis, but it functions like a panic pump. US scholar Lev Nachman even says bluntly on social media that if a sudden military action hits the Taiwan Strait, the island could suffer “instant collapse” — not just militarily, but as a psychological shock to society.

KMT Chairperson Cheng Li-wun, in an interview, points to Donald Trump repeatedly stressing a shift of strategic focus toward affairs in the Americas. She says the Venezuela incident should be examined through the framework of international law, and she calls for disputes in any region to be resolved by peaceful means rather than force.

Cheng also reiterates the KMT position: uphold the “1992 Consensus,” oppose “Taiwan independence,” and urge Lai Ching-te to clearly oppose “Taiwan independence,” not touch legal red lines, and avoid continuously raising cross-strait conflict risks.

Rules talk meets reality

International reaction also turns critical of Washington’s approach. Multiple governments and regional organizations speak up quickly, condemning the action as a violation of the UN Charter, which explicitly prohibits using force to threaten or violate another nation’s territorial integrity and political independence. The telling part is the silence: the Western countries that often talk about “international rules” either zipped their mouths, or danced around the question this time.

Reuters says that even though China, Russia, and others clearly condemn the US behavior, the Trump administration is unlikely to face strong pressure from allies as a result. That selective muteness, by itself, drains the credibility of the international order.

On Jan. 5, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian commented again, saying the US actions clearly violate international law and the basic norms of international relations, and violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. China calls on the US to ensure the personal safety of President Maduro and his wife, immediately release them, stop subverting the Venezuelan government, and resolve issues through dialogue and negotiation.