Here is a simple question: What is the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP)?
The original TPP was established during the Japanese colonial era by Taiwanese democratic trailblazer Chang Wei-shui (蔣渭水), and the name carries heavy historic significance.
However, the chairman of the new version, Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), has performed a reverse takeover, hijacking the historic party name and coming out with political slogans that are prettier than practical, including: “An inclusive society with national governance, in Taiwan’s name, based on the people,” “Reason, Pragmatism and Science,” “Popular will, professionalism and values” and “Executive power.”
Can Ko’s TPP’s live up to its name? Further observation is needed, but this is doubtful.
Ko once said: “I am deep green.” Yet, the TPP is utterly opposed to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
This is how political parties operate in a pluralistic democracy. However, a key question is, why has Ko relinquished party control by letting TPP Legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) help Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) party convenor Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) use the legislative tyranny of the majority to infringe on Taiwanese’s rights and liberties? To date, Ko has remained silent on this matter.
“Taiwan urgently needs character education. Those with character need to be morally brave. They should speak up when they see something wrong. We need to consider how to create an environment that allows students to see unjust things, and dare to speak out. This is the education we need the most,” Ko said when he was head of National Taiwan University Hospital’s Department of Traumatology in 2013.
Eleven years later, Ko’s words are caricaturesque.
The sinking of the TPP’s political morals and ethics has been glossed over by young Ko supporters, yet not even they can avert their gaze when they see the chaotic outcome of the KMT-TPP legislative collusion.
Human nature is frail. The TPP painted itself as a third political force against the “absolute KMT-DPP polarization,” but the TPP fell into line as a KMT subordinate, a “little KMT.”
What is the political significance of young Ko supporters voting for the TPP then? What would the TPP be without them? This is a problem Ko needs to answer immediately.
Knight Chang is a political worker.
Translated by Tim Smith
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS