Before asking what the difference is between the blue camp's Democratic Alliance and academia's Democratic Action Alliance, we should first ask what are the similarities. Looking at the names there is little difference, except for the word "action" in the second. Both begin and end with "democratic" and "alliance." Also, both emerged after the presidential election. If we wanted to compare their etymology, we might say that they were twins.
But there are areas of uncertainty. First, the Democratic Action Alliance is an actual entity that emphasized "a middle force and beneficial social consciousness" in its charter. The Democratic Alliance is, despite much passionate talk, no more than a castle in the air, and aims to achieve no more than approval from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) to incorporate its members into their camp.
Put another way, the Democratic Alliance, come the year-end legislative elections, will be an anti-green force and is completely in accord with the blue camp. It is something very different from the Democratic Action Alliance with its emphasis on a middle way and beneficial social knowledge, for it is blue to the core.
It is interesting to speculate why the Democratic Action Alliance, with its emphasis on balance and the public good, and the purely politically motivated Democratic Alliance have such similar names. Why do they brand themselves in such a similar ways? You might say that it was the result of political sleight-of-hand, or you might simply say that it was a lie.
Former US president Abraham Lincoln is widely thought to have said, "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." Lincoln was referring to deceit. Sadly, the Democratic Action Alliance could only fool us for a month. Even more sadly, it was their own people who saw through the illusion.
The foolish former DPP chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (
The battle between this third power and the KMT has nothing to do with public affairs, but the fact that Cheng has colluded with the Democratic Action Alliance cannot be denied. In the Democratic Action Alliance's anti-6108 declaration [against the proposed NT$610.8 billion arms deal], Cheng led the charge, proving that the two alliances have been made from the same mold. So the secret is out as to whom the two fake democratic alliances are really acting for.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY Ian Bartholomew
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS