One can never find the so-called "blue thinking methodology" in any books on thinking methodology, because it's a unique product of Taiwan's media, certain political groups and their supporters. What is "blue thinking methodology?" We can get a clear picture from the following examples.
One, President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) son, Chen Chih-chung (陳致中) -- who is now doing his military service -- took a day's leave after the Ministry of National Defense officially suspended leave for most military personnel. He was severely attacked by politicians who never questioned why KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (連戰) and PFP Chairman James Soong's (宋楚瑜) sons didn't have to do military service for health reasons.
Two, when Chen asked for business leaders' advice about government personnel, he was immediately criticized as ruling the nation through conglomerates. Some even compared him with the late president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), saying that business groups would never interfere with politics during Chiang's rule. This is laughable, because no one dared interfere with politics under the dictator's rule.
Three, Beijing has constantly claimed that it's taking good care of the health of the Taiwanese while obstructing the nation's participation in the World Health Assembly (WHA). After the president retorted that Beijing's claim was a lie, he was surprisingly criticized by Clara Chou (
Four, pan-blue politicians criticized former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) for purchasing a mansion at the Hong Si Villa. But they have forgotten that Chiang had many residences across the nation. They never questioned the acquisition or ownership of these presidential residences. Nor did they intend to investigate why Soong's son, Allen Soong (宋鎮遠) -- a US-based computer engineer -- was able to buy five houses in the US.
Five, after Lee left his post, he was criticized as interfering in politics when he commented on Taiwan's political situation. But Chiang held his post for five terms in violation of the Constitution before he passed away in 1975. Not only was his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (
Six, since these politicians hate Lee so much, they clamored for a cut in his annual security budget. Isn't it bizarre that they didn't know that the maintenance costs of the two Chiangs' cemeteries are much higher than the cost for Lee's bodyguards?
Seven, they made up the rumor that Lee's wife, Tseng Wen-hui (
Eight, whenever the 228 Incident is mentioned, they tell us not to live in the past.
Nine, they like to criticize Chen and Lee as autocratic and arbitrary. Are the incumbent and former presidents really worse than the two Chiangs?
Ten, they lashed out at the president for his poor handling of the Pachang Creek tragedy. But they were silent on Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (
There are many more examples. In conclusion, the principle of the "blue thinking methodology" is that pan-blue politicians are always right.
Li Hsiao-feng is a professor of political history at Shih Hsin University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS