Although the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) list of -legislator-at-large nominees has been well received, from the perspective of long-term development toward a more mature democracy, the list raises concerns.
I can’t say it is a bad list, because it is the freshest list the KMT has ever put forward. However, a party’s legislators-at-large differ from political appointees in that their main task is to defend the party’s policies, which means the focus is on their loyalty and contributions to the party.
Some of the nominees do have an image of freshness, but several might have joined the party just to get nominated. Even those who were already KMT members have seldom spoken up for the party.
In liberal, diverse societies, ideas on the direction in which the country should develop naturally differ. The formation of parties allows people with the same views on the nation’s future to strive for the realization of shared political ideals. Thus, in a mature democracy, party politics is a fight over ideals and party members tend to cherish the same ideals.
As such, a party’s -legislator--at-large nominees should be individuals who have fought for the party’s ideals and are able to boost its image. In other words, the ideal legislator-at-large should both be loyal to the party and have a fresh, clean image.
Based on these standards, nominees such as KMT incumbents Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and Pan Wei-kang (潘維剛) are acceptable. Antai Tian-Sheng Memorial Hospital superintendent Su Ching-chuan’s (蘇清泉) nomination is perhaps the most appropriate, because his hospital serves grassroots voters in pro-green Pingtung County, which surely benefits the KMT’s image.
Loyalty and contributions to the party are even more important than a fresh image, so nominations should be based on party ideals. Thus, the KMT should ideally look for candidates who can add to the party image. Only if not enough talented candidates are found within the party should it start looking elsewhere.
If long-term contributors to the KMT are inferior to people outside the party, then who would defend the party in future? In addition, this might also encourage opportunists.
From this perspective, is there no one among the KMT’s lawmakers that have a fresh image who has been excluded on this occasion? Judging from my long-term involvement in and understanding of the KMT, the party has lost out by not nominating people like legislators Liao Wan-ju (廖婉汝), Chu Fong-chi (朱鳳芝) and Vincent Chang (張顯耀). Their weakness is that they are not “fresh” enough because of their firm political views, but how can it be better for a political party to give priority to rookies with no political experience at all?
New lawmakers have neither political experience nor a strong understanding of party ideology. Won’t they simply become voting machines? Or are they destined to become millstones around the party’s neck when it discovers that the views of rookie legislators contradict those of the party?
Given the public’s longstanding negative impression of politicians, the broad-based praise of the KMT’s nomination list has been notable. However, this is a phenomenon that should simply not exist in a mature democracy.
The fundamental cause of political chaos in Taiwan can be traced back to political parties’ lack of clear and definite ideas and ideals, with many politicians leaning toward whichever side is stronger.
A party that fails to unite its members with ideals and nominate internal talent as -legislators-at-large will perhaps win temporary praise, but that is not necessarily a good sign for the long-term development of Taiwanese democracy.
Lin Huo-wang is a professor in the department of philosophy at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS