One can never find the so-called "blue thinking methodology" in any books on thinking methodology, because it's a unique product of Taiwan's media, certain political groups and their supporters. What is "blue thinking methodology?" We can get a clear picture from the following examples.
One, President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) son, Chen Chih-chung (陳致中) -- who is now doing his military service -- took a day's leave after the Ministry of National Defense officially suspended leave for most military personnel. He was severely attacked by politicians who never questioned why KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (連戰) and PFP Chairman James Soong's (宋楚瑜) sons didn't have to do military service for health reasons.
Two, when Chen asked for business leaders' advice about government personnel, he was immediately criticized as ruling the nation through conglomerates. Some even compared him with the late president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), saying that business groups would never interfere with politics during Chiang's rule. This is laughable, because no one dared interfere with politics under the dictator's rule.
Three, Beijing has constantly claimed that it's taking good care of the health of the Taiwanese while obstructing the nation's participation in the World Health Assembly (WHA). After the president retorted that Beijing's claim was a lie, he was surprisingly criticized by Clara Chou (
Four, pan-blue politicians criticized former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) for purchasing a mansion at the Hong Si Villa. But they have forgotten that Chiang had many residences across the nation. They never questioned the acquisition or ownership of these presidential residences. Nor did they intend to investigate why Soong's son, Allen Soong (宋鎮遠) -- a US-based computer engineer -- was able to buy five houses in the US.
Five, after Lee left his post, he was criticized as interfering in politics when he commented on Taiwan's political situation. But Chiang held his post for five terms in violation of the Constitution before he passed away in 1975. Not only was his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (
Six, since these politicians hate Lee so much, they clamored for a cut in his annual security budget. Isn't it bizarre that they didn't know that the maintenance costs of the two Chiangs' cemeteries are much higher than the cost for Lee's bodyguards?
Seven, they made up the rumor that Lee's wife, Tseng Wen-hui (
Eight, whenever the 228 Incident is mentioned, they tell us not to live in the past.
Nine, they like to criticize Chen and Lee as autocratic and arbitrary. Are the incumbent and former presidents really worse than the two Chiangs?
Ten, they lashed out at the president for his poor handling of the Pachang Creek tragedy. But they were silent on Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (
There are many more examples. In conclusion, the principle of the "blue thinking methodology" is that pan-blue politicians are always right.
Li Hsiao-feng is a professor of political history at Shih Hsin University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS