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.
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