Over the weekend, a group of young Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers launched a soul-searching campaign, urging the DPP to engage in introspection and to shift more of its attention to disadvantaged groups in line with the party's founding goal of pursuing social fairness and justice.
One of the initiators of the campaign, the DPP's candidate for the Taipei County commissionership, Luo Wen-jia (
Luo, a protege of President Chen Shui-bian (
After almost six years in power, the performance of the DPP administration has disappointed a number of pan-green diehards, with some gloomily wondering whether the DPP is losing its ideals and ability to improve itself. It has also alienated a large segment of the party's grassroots supporters, the very people who had helped to elect the then 14-year-old DPP in 2000.
Some supporters are beginning to wonder whether the DPP has turned into the equivalent of the old Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime it used to fight against -- a corrupt party leading a corrupt government. This kind of sentiment was especially prominent in the wake of the recent spate of scandals plaguing the DPP administration -- one of them being Kaohsiung's problematic MRT project. An Aug. 21 riot, ignited by Thai laborers protesting against their poor living conditions, unexpectedly brought to light a complex influence-peddling scheme in which ranking government officials apparently exploited Thai workers while pocketing money from the project's construction funds.
In the early days after the formation of the DPP, its members frequently attacked the KMT government with biting criticism for granting privileges to certain groups. They spoke of their hopes for reform with honesty and uprightness.
Back then, whenever they touched upon issues of national or civic unfairness, such as the special pension system for teachers, civil servants and military personnel, the DPP was full of fire, trumpeting social fairness and justice.
It has been almost six years since the DPP took power, but how many of the unfair regulations it criticized so severely back then have changed? What happened to the DPP's reform promises and its image of being honorable and free of corruption? Is there any difference between the DPP's current behavior and that of the late-era KMT regime? While it remains to be seen whether the "New DPP Movement" will be a boon or a liability for the DPP, it is clear that only by returning to its founding spirit and original goals will the party be able to represent the hopes of its supporters.
If the DPP remains the way it is now, it will no longer be fulfilling the purpose of its existence, and will have trouble getting the support of the voters it needs to hold power.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS