The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has always had an uneasy relationship with democracy. It has spoken about it interminably, practiced it little and liked it less. Even after it had reluctantly conceded democratic reform of Taiwan's political institutions, there was no such thing within the party organization itself. Only after two crushing defeats in presidential elections, and the bitter acceptance that it does not have some kind of droit du seigneur on power in Taiwan, has the party itself embraced democratization as a principle of reform. The problem it now faces is that democratization really shows up how far the party has tumbled from its glory days.
The coming election for its chairman is to be the first democratic leadership election the party has ever held. Previous chairman were selected by biddable cabals or simply had their right to the post endorsed by their own flunkies. Even KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (
The problem dogging the party now is just who that rank and file might be. After the election disaster of 2000, Lien organized a re-registration drive to remove from membership lists the millions of members who had joined in the bad old days when it seemed expedient, but had long ago ceased to pay membership dues or take part in party activities. The result was a slimmed down membership of about 1 million.
More than four years later and with another election loss under its belt -- followed, of course, by the "blue terror" of the post-election period -- fewer than 40 percent of those 1 million members have fully paid their membership dues. And of these 400,000 paid-up members, about half are veterans or seniors who either pay no fees at all or pay at a significantly reduced rate.
Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Wang claims that while party rules approved in 2003 say that a member must have paid his or her dues to have the right to vote in party elections, a specific set of rules for the election of the chairman approved in 2001 do not have this stipulation, nor are they covered by the 2003 rules.
Whichever rules lie behind Wang's casuistry, an argument from simple first principles suggests his view is preposterous. You would not expect a club whose membership dues you had not paid to continue to let you use its facilities. Wang is arguing, in fact, for precisely that right.
Wang's sophistry is entirely self-serving. After all, the rump "paid up" membership is dominated by old Mainlanders who will almost certainly vote for fellow Mainlander Ma. For Wang to have a chance he needs the votes of defaulting Taiwanese.
But on all sides there seems to be an assumption that most of the 600,000 defaulters have either forgotten to pay or are too hard up to pay. The truth that dare not speak its name in this affair is that those 600,000 KMT members might not have paid their dues simply because they no longer want to be party members.
Considering what the party has become under Lien's leadership -- a toady for China -- you can't blame them. But it is interesting to note that in terms of dues-paying membership the DPP is probably now Taiwan's biggest political party.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”