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
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
RSS