Last Saturday's elections were one of the hardest fought local government polls ever in Taiwan. They resulted in a crushing defeat for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) dominance in local government has now created a siege situation around the central government. Apart from analyzing subsequent political developments, we might look back over the social impact of political conflict in the last few years from the perspective of "human nature."
After the power transition in 2000, Taiwan entered a phase of "competitive democracy," in which the results of every single central and local government election are seen as providing crucial momentum heading into the next elections. As a result, beginning in 2000, every single election has created a political storm. This situation is not likely to change until after the presidential elections in 2008.
Many people are sick of partisan wrangling at election time. The fierce political races often lead candidates to use whatever means possible to secure their goals, thus revealing the dark, greedy and dangerous elements of human nature.
In addition to vicious competition, the media revels in sensationalism and scandals, presenting the political situation like a soap opera.
This causes people to become disillusioned and disinterested in the political situation, in the belief that it is little more than a nasty power struggle devoid of any traces of the positive side of human nature.
People may wonder whether politics is really so indecent. If so, isn't democracy's release of the spirit of competition akin to opening a Pandora's box, unleashing destructive forces? Is an authoritarian society, in which restraints are imposed on competition, more in line with human nature?
If we take a look at other democratic nations, vigorous political competition and the process of elimination that establishes an ultimate victor does not necessarily have to create an arena for vicious, corrupt and lying politicians to seize power.
Often, the human virtues of trust and justice triumph, and the competition brings forth a good leader.
The history of elections in Taiwan has shown this to be true in many instances. In other words, we can say that the people have a "standard" which allows them to often select the candidate who conforms to the positive side of human nature, which makes such candidates more likely to win.
We should therefore conclude that "politics ultimately reflects human nature."
This is because politics is not merely a calculation of expediency, but also includes projections of affection, identity and trust. Elected political leaders must carry out their political platform in keeping with human nature. Only in this way will they be truly affirmed by society.
I want to propose a slogan to all Taiwanese politicians: "Politics from beginning to end comes from human nature; therefore it should in the end return to human nature." This could serve as a reminder to them to make an effort to be more "human nature-oriented" in governing Taiwan.
Ku Chung-hwa is a professor of sociology at National Chengchi University and chairman of the Taipei Society.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
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
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
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS