There is an expression in Chinese, yinjian buyuan (殷鑒不遠), meaning “[the lessons of the fall of] the Yin Dynasty [also known as Shang Dynasty] are still fresh in the memory.” It is a reminder of recent historical precedent serving as a lesson that it would be foolish to ignore.
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) failed in his bid to win the presidency in Saturday’s election, garnering 26.46 percent of the vote. Given that this was his first presidential election, and that he was up against the established and well-resourced Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), this was certainly no failure: As a basis from which to build upon politically, it could be considered a resounding success.
However, the vote count is no guarantee of longevity for Ko or his party. They would do well to learn from historical precedent.
In 2000, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) left the KMT to run as an independent.
His bid for the presidency came remarkably close to success, getting 36.84 percent of the vote, losing to former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) by less than 3 percentage points and leaving the KMT candidate, former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), in the dust. Soong would have won had the KMT nominated him, and had it not been for a corruption scandal that hurt his campaign. Given the result, he could legitimately claim to have been the popular choice of the pro-KMT, blue-leaning electorate.
Soong founded the PFP and initially had some success in building a presence for his party in the legislature. In 2001, the PFP had 46 legislators, albeit in a much larger legislature — 225 seats to today’s 113 — but this number crashed to three out of 113 in 2012 and zero in 2020.
In opposition, the PFP failed to differentiate itself from the KMT, both being major players in the pan-blue camp and obstructing Chen’s agenda. Soong even joined the Lien ticket in 2004 in his second unsuccessful attempt to defeat Chen.
As with Ko and the TPP, when people cast their ballots for PFP candidates, they were essentially voting for the charismatic chairman. However, the inability of the PFP to differentiate itself from the KMT, showing it to be a vehicle for the chairman’s political ambition, led to its loss of influence, importance and electoral support. Soong’s flame flickered and died. When he announced that the 2020 election would be his final bid for the presidency, the future of the PFP was brought into question.
Ko started his presidential campaign saying that his party was above the DPP-KMT rivalry and promised to offer a new politics. He quickly jettisoned that idea when he was offered an — ultimately unsuccessful — alliance with the KMT.
His legislators hold the key to the passage or rejection of policy in a legislature in which neither the KMT nor the DPP have a majority. How Ko wields this power could determine his and his party’s political survival.
If it uses its decisive vote judiciously, it could gain the respect of the main parties and show them that they would need to present reasonable arguments if they want the TPP to support them. Ko and his party must work with the other two parties to devise reasonable legislation and not to block the government’s agenda for purely political reasons.
One of the ways Ko could demonstrate this is by not allowing partisan and divisive KMT legislator-at-large in waiting Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to become legislative speaker.
At the same time, TPP legislators need to cultivate a recognizable, unified political identity and not allow themselves to be merely their chairman’s political avatars.
The longevity of Ko and his party depends on their ability to do so.
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
In competitive sports, the narrative surrounding transgender athletes is often clouded by misconceptions and prejudices. Critics sometimes accuse transgender athletes of “gaming the system” to gain an unfair advantage, perpetuating the stereotype that their participation undermines the integrity of competition. However, this perspective not only ignores the rigorous efforts transgender athletes invest to meet eligibility standards, but also devalues their personal and athletic achievements. Understanding the gap between these stereotypes and the reality of individual efforts requires a deeper examination of societal bias and the challenges transgender athletes face. One of the most pervasive arguments against the inclusion of transgender athletes
When viewing Taiwan’s political chaos, I often think of several lines from Incantation, a poem by the winner of the 1980 Nobel Prize in Literature, Czeslaw Milosz: “Beautiful and very young are Philo-Sophia, and poetry, her ally in the service of the good... Their friendship will be glorious, their time has no limit, their enemies have delivered themselves to destruction.” Milosz wrote Incantation when he was a professor of Slavic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He firmly believed that Poland would rise again under a restored democracy and liberal order. As one of several self-exiled or expelled poets from
EDITORIAL CARTOON
RSS