RECENT TV COMMERCIALS by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) make me worry about Taiwan's future. How can it be OK for the KMT to use its party assets to distort facts? It professes to love Taiwan while making it look bad. Its ideology is pro-China and anti-Taiwan.
Look at their claim that the economy is so bad people can't make ends meet. China sees tens of thousands of mass uprisings a year; Taiwan does not. Using a scorched earth tactic, the pan-blue legislative majority blocks the budgets that would develop Taiwan's economy and national security, and then blames the government for being ineffective.
Then they say that Taiwan must therefore unify with China.
Should Taiwan really become a part of China, an empire of lies?
Unfair aspects of the election system were abolished after the authoritarian era ended, such as electoral district divisions and the KMT using its party assets to secure votes. The strong influence the party still has over the judiciary makes the elections extremely difficult for the pro-localization democratic pan-green camp. No matter how hard it tries, it cannot win a legislative majority. It would be a catastrophe for Taiwan if the KMT, which works closely with Beijing, won a two-thirds legislative majority.
The cooperation between the pro-China New Party and the forces in the KMT supporting former chairman Lien Chan's (
Taiwan is the only democratic country in the world that has a presidential candidate like the KMT's Ma Ying-jeou (
Is he a fit candidate for a democratic country?
Facing such a grim outlook, the pan-green politicians must consider their options.
To win votes, candidates need to mobilize the public and appeal to moderate voters. But pan-green voters also face the problem of whom to vote for, as pan-green politicians are competing against each other. It's not easy to accumulate enough votes to win a legislative seat, but with candidates attacking each other, tens of thousands of votes are lost to the green camp if one of them loses, and then the legislative seat is lost.
Two years ago, the Democratic Progressive Party won the Kaohsiung mayoral elections by a razor-thin margin, resulting in a year of lawsuits. What if the party had lost those few thousands ballots?
Pan-green politicians competing against each other -- regardless of what party they represent or how well they are doing in polls -- must take the initiative to step back and give their votes and their support to the opposing pan-green candidate. At first this might seem to mean throwing away one's political future, but it will benefit the pan-green camp and all of Taiwan. In any case, it is far more preferable to letting a pro-Chinese party win these seats.
Doing so would create more room for Taiwan and take a candidate out of a difficult situation while showing him or her as open-minded, sensible and democratic, thus creating new possibilities for future elections.
Politicians need to move the public. Whoever steps back to make way for another pan-green candidate will move both his or her own voters and those in other districts, showing them that pan-green politicians truly fight for Taiwan's future and not for themselves or for partisan benefits. Taiwanese will remember a candidate stepping back for the greater good.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in Taiwan.
TRANSLATED BY ANNA STIGGELBOUT
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS