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
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS