Print

Mail

wiki links

The DPP is needlessly making its life difficult

Former premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) and former members of the New Tide faction lost in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) primary elections. Complaining that the circumstances were unfavorable or that the other candidates acted unfairly is a waste of time. If they really want to blame someone, they should blame themselves for not being able to change the circumstances or survive them. It is now time to go home, reflect, gather new strength and try again. There is no cause, therefore, to be overly worried about the future of Su and the New Tide.

My worries are the worries of a DPP member and a supporter of democracy in Taiwan.

Since last year's special state affairs fund scandal, DPP members have continuously been assaulted by exaggerated and biased media reports. After being hurt this way, the pan-blue camp rubbed salt into the party's wounds with irrational boycotts. The pain forced DPP members to turn away to protect themselves and heal their wounds.

With such a strategy, an anxious atmosphere spread among party members. This was a dark time for the DPP, but also a time for introspection and improvement. As a fellow politician, it was my responsibility to face the problems, show the public that we were determined to reform and give DPP members confidence and make them feel proud.

Unfortunately, some fellow party members did not live up to this responsibility and instead used this mood to attack their colleagues. They went straight for what was ostensibly an "investigation of loyalty" and used it to beat their party opponents in the primaries. They did a lot of things that were good for them but might very well have harmed the party.

For example, the opinion polls for the legislator-at-large primaries excluded pan-blue camp supporters, leaving an effective sample of only 15 percent. Does this mean that only 15 percent of the public support the DPP? Remember that in the 2004 presidential election, the DPP only remained in office because it obtained the support of more than half of the voters.

This kind of poll does not only exclude the pan-blue camp, but also 70 percent of pan-green camp supporters. The legislators-at-large chosen by those 15 percent deep-green supporters are not representative of the hopes of the majority of DPP supporters.

What did choosing legislators-at-large using exclusionary opinion polls bring us? It made it easier for those buying votes or nurturing large numbers of nominal party members to make the cut. They will not necessarily be able to live up to civic expectations and they are unlikely to contribute to the DPP's presidential election campaign.

Another example was the district primaries. Many electoral districts reacted against the exclusionary approach to the elections. A great number of party members had taken great pains to spread unfounded rumors prior to the primaries in order to beat their opponents, claiming that their adversaries were not "loyal" to the nation.

Some fellow party members wanted to create a little "loyalty" circle, but this has destroyed unity and the party's strong Taiwanese consciousness. More alarming, it also makes the perpetuation of a localized government more difficult to achieve.

The trend of party members calling reformists "traitors" in the media and through public announcements is troubling. This is witnessed and examined by the public and light-green voters who voted for President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and who now have been excluded from the polls. This name-calling has deflated the hopes and expectations of many moderate DPP voters.

If the first localized government loses the trust of the public, how would history judge us?

Lee Wen-chung is a former DPP legislator.

Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
This story has been viewed 1656 times.