The presidential and legislative elections take place on Saturday. Every election is important and the main characteristic of these elections is generational change.
Five years ago, Justin Trudeau, then 43, became prime minister of Canada; in 2017, Emmanuel Macron, then 40, was elected president of France; the same year, Jacinda Ardern, then 37, became prime minister of New Zealand; and last year, Sanna Marin, 34, became prime minister of Finland.
We live in a time of generational change, and the baton is being passed to men and women of the younger generation as they take over to lead people into a new era.
The Taiwanese elections are a clear manifestation of this.
First, from Keelung to Pingtung, there is a difference of almost 25 years in the average age of the candidates of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
This equates to a whole generation and, fittingly, these elections are indeed about generational differences.
The average KMT candidate is 62 years old and the party claims that the experience of its candidates is what makes it the only viable choice.
However, what kind of experience do they have?
By comparison, some of the distinguishing features of the DPP’s candidates are that they have no complicated vested business interests in their baggage, and they have gone to the best schools at home and abroad, graduating from Yale, Harvard and National Taiwan University.
If the DPP’s candidates, whose average age is 38, are elected, their uncomplicated background, capability and energy would allow them to build a new vision for the next 20 years.
Surely all the education and training they received were undertaken with the intent that they should be the nation’s leaders.
Given the wisdom of voters, why should they not make the best of this opportunity for these candidates and themselves?
Another cross-generational characteristic that is closely related to Taiwan is the generational change in China: The 1990s was the decade when China went from poverty to development, and the 2020s are set to be the decade when it slips from development into decline.
Economically, the US’ trade and technology sanctions and the outflow of foreign businesses are likely to result in economic decline in China, just as Japan slipped into decline in the 1990s.
Socially, the turmoil in Hong Kong, China’s inability to respond to Hong Kongers’ demands for direct elections and the reliance on police violence against young protesters would also lead to domestic economic decline and increased unemployment.
The inability to respond to social demands would lead to suppression of the public by the paramilitary Chinese People’s Armed Police Force, and Hong Kong would become the fuse that sets Chinese cities on the path from stability to upheaval.
Tragically, in the face of these generational changes, the older generation in the People First Party (PFP) and the KMT have made it clear that they have no vision for the future
They have slid from opposition to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) through fear to friendliness and then sycophancy, making the CPP’s views their own.
As people around the world condemn the CCP and Hong Kong police for their violence and cruelty against young protesters, candidates on the KMT’s legislator-at-large list have expressed their support for Hong Kong’s police force.
While democratic governments respond to the global situation by passing anti-infiltration legislation, the KMT and the PFP are throwing their lot with the White Wolf’s [Chang An-le (張安樂)] China Unitification Promotion Party, using various insinuations to block national security legislation.
Does the KMT not have even one person left with an international outlook?
It is not surprising that such a political party would nominate s its presidential candidate someone who abandoned his position as mayor of Kaohsiung and kneels more than he walks.
It is, in fact, only fitting.
The elections represent a generational change in Taiwan. The nation’s outstanding young people and all Taiwanese have an opportunity to lay the foundations for the nation’s next 20 years.
Mike Chang is an accountant.
Translated by Perry Svensson
US president-elect Donald Trump continues to make nominations for his Cabinet and US agencies, with most of his picks being staunchly against Beijing. For US ambassador to China, Trump has tapped former US senator David Perdue. This appointment makes it crystal clear that Trump has no intention of letting China continue to steal from the US while infiltrating it in a surreptitious quasi-war, harming world peace and stability. Originally earning a name for himself in the business world, Perdue made his start with Chinese supply chains as a manager for several US firms. He later served as the CEO of Reebok and
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
US president-elect Donald Trump in an interview with NBC News on Monday said he would “never say” if the US is committed to defending Taiwan against China. Trump said he would “prefer” that China does not attempt to invade Taiwan, and that he has a “very good relationship” with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Before committing US troops to defending Taiwan he would “have to negotiate things,” he said. This is a departure from the stance of incumbent US President Joe Biden, who on several occasions expressed resolutely that he would commit US troops in the event of a conflict in
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 —
RSS