Ever since Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) claimed on election night that the election was "unfair," the blue camp has adopted a more radical stance, trying to seek justice through the pressure of a would-be mass movement. Through live media coverage, the public have been treated to mostly radical politicians giving passionate speeches at mass demonstrations. Some politicians have even said that these protests will never end if they do not have their way.
Yet many are discovering that the pan-blue camp's political demands and methods of protest are chaotic. This more or less explains why internal opinion is divided on its post-defeat direction. Not only was Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
What these incumbent lawmakers care about the most is maximizing their chances of being re-elected. Previously, being either a hawk or a dove could prove profitable: Under the special multiple-member-district system, legislative candidates do not have to win support from a majority of voters. Instead, they have only needed to secure votes from a small group of die-hard supporters.
Sometimes, candidates from the same party rely on different pools of voters. The hawks are therefore attempting to attract "deep-blue" supporters at the protests, while the doves, unable to attract these elements, are worrying about the party losing its grassroots supporters.
The interests of a party and its candidate often contradict each other. Maximizing a blue-camp lawmaker's personal interest may not tally with the overall interests of the pan-blue camp.
For the hawks, for example, apart from consolidating the support of the "deep blues," it seems that their actions since the presidential election have failed to attract new supporters.
Many in the localization faction of the KMT, on the other hand, were elected with the support of local forces. But as the party's grip on local factions has loosened, the ability of the pan-green camp to appeal to grassroots sympathies has grown, together with an increase in pan-green administrative resources.
And all this occurs as Taiwanese consciousness continues to increase.
Many pan-blue lawmakers who are pro-localization are incapable of hunting for a new source of votes in the face of their radical colleagues' rigid appeals to the "deep blues."
Under such circumstances, they surely must feel that their political careers are seriously threatened.
In the previous legislative election, the percentage of votes received by the green camp exceeded 40 percent for the first time, while that of the pan-blue camp dropped to 50 percent.
For the legislative election this December, if pan-blue camp lawmakers -- of whatever tint -- do nothing but vie for existing electoral resources and care for nothing but their political careers, the resources they need to survive will soon peter out.
Today, the pan-blue alliance's most urgent task is to rethink its direction and development, rediscover mainstream thinking and explore new channels of winning votes. The blue-camp's new spring will never arrive if its political elite can only fumble about "consolidating the central leadership."
Wang Yeh-lih is a professor of political science at Tunghai 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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS