The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has always had an uneasy relationship with democracy. It has spoken about it interminably, practiced it little and liked it less. Even after it had reluctantly conceded democratic reform of Taiwan's political institutions, there was no such thing within the party organization itself. Only after two crushing defeats in presidential elections, and the bitter acceptance that it does not have some kind of droit du seigneur on power in Taiwan, has the party itself embraced democratization as a principle of reform. The problem it now faces is that democratization really shows up how far the party has tumbled from its glory days.
The coming election for its chairman is to be the first democratic leadership election the party has ever held. Previous chairman were selected by biddable cabals or simply had their right to the post endorsed by their own flunkies. Even KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (
The problem dogging the party now is just who that rank and file might be. After the election disaster of 2000, Lien organized a re-registration drive to remove from membership lists the millions of members who had joined in the bad old days when it seemed expedient, but had long ago ceased to pay membership dues or take part in party activities. The result was a slimmed down membership of about 1 million.
More than four years later and with another election loss under its belt -- followed, of course, by the "blue terror" of the post-election period -- fewer than 40 percent of those 1 million members have fully paid their membership dues. And of these 400,000 paid-up members, about half are veterans or seniors who either pay no fees at all or pay at a significantly reduced rate.
Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Wang claims that while party rules approved in 2003 say that a member must have paid his or her dues to have the right to vote in party elections, a specific set of rules for the election of the chairman approved in 2001 do not have this stipulation, nor are they covered by the 2003 rules.
Whichever rules lie behind Wang's casuistry, an argument from simple first principles suggests his view is preposterous. You would not expect a club whose membership dues you had not paid to continue to let you use its facilities. Wang is arguing, in fact, for precisely that right.
Wang's sophistry is entirely self-serving. After all, the rump "paid up" membership is dominated by old Mainlanders who will almost certainly vote for fellow Mainlander Ma. For Wang to have a chance he needs the votes of defaulting Taiwanese.
But on all sides there seems to be an assumption that most of the 600,000 defaulters have either forgotten to pay or are too hard up to pay. The truth that dare not speak its name in this affair is that those 600,000 KMT members might not have paid their dues simply because they no longer want to be party members.
Considering what the party has become under Lien's leadership -- a toady for China -- you can't blame them. But it is interesting to note that in terms of dues-paying membership the DPP is probably now Taiwan's biggest political party.
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
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS