For the presidential poll in March, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) strategists should employ optimism rather than the defeatism that DPP candidate Frank Hsieh (
Ending defeatism cannot be accomplished without an energetic campaign to counter accusations that the DPP is to blame for everything that has gone wrong with the country -- or even that things went wrong to begin with.
For years, the idea that the DPP has been responsible for an "economic downturn" in Taiwan has been beaten into the consciousness so vigorously and with so little resistance that it has become received wisdom. Every day we hear about Taiwan's "slouching" or "limping" economy or, if we listen to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), about people struggling to make ends meet and barely eking out a living.
These economic "doldrums" and the DPP's culpability are examples of mythmaking, the result of a campaign of lies that successfully tapped into the irrational and uninformed fears of people who, in many cases, have never had it better.
At times the public seems to inhabit a psychological realm that can border on the downright gullible. As a result, a long series of reports on big retail companies making record profits, the stock market reaching new heights and unemployment falling to its lowest level since February 2001 were ignored.
Instead, everything is seen through the gloomy lens of pessimism: GDP growth is "only" 5.9 percent; unemployment is at a "high" level of 3.9 percent. What many fail to realize, however, is that GDP growth of 5.9 percent is more than respectable, while a unemployment rate of 3.9 percent would be the envy of many a country.
Part of the problem is comparing Taiwan with developing countries such as China -- a practice most unfair, as Taiwan is a modern, developed country and double-digit GDP growth will never happen again. The US, Germany, Britain and France haven't experienced sustained growth of this magnitude in decades, if ever, and economists there would be dancing in the streets if they experienced Taiwan's 5.9 percent growth.
Developing countries like China, Thailand and India have primitive economic circumstances and social and environmental dangers that are rarely factored into long-term economic forecasts.
True, there are grounds for complaint for middle to low-income workers. They rightly say that their wages have not risen -- for close to a decade in some cases -- in response to inflation. But instead of noting the effective absence of labor unions -- an important feature of most advanced economies -- and confronting employers who prefer to reroute entitlements into unpredictable annual bonuses, the government is blamed, even though it can only legislate for the minimum -- and minimal -- wage.
With all its faults, the DPP came to power at a time when the very paradigms of international relations were being shaken. Blaming the government for this is invidious. Love it or hate it, the DPP didn't orchestrate the Sept. 11 attacks, the US-led "war on terror," the invasion of Iraq, the US subprime mortgage crisis or record oil prices.
Once and for all, as it prepares for the March elections, the DPP and its presidential candidate should get their act together and light a candle in the dark to ward off the imaginary monster of economic failure.
Such myths have only ever helped the KMT.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic