After settling internal referendum disputes to ease the possible negative impact on Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the KMT faces controversy again over "two-step voting," finding it difficult to counter criticism of hustling support for the party while in effect boycotting the referendum.
The true motivation behind the so-called "two-stage voting" can only be to hinder Taiwanese independence. The problem is, independence is already a mainstream idea. Is it wise to hinder independence by opposing a referendum with the election looming?
Prominent pan-blue commentators and academics insist that if the referendum is not opposed, pan-blue supporters could assume that the KMT has lost its ideals and stay away from the ballot box.
But do these academics believe their own theory? These pundits must understand that radicalism is not a brilliant strategy for gaining votes in a single area election, as countless mayoral elections have shown.
The decision to promote a losing strategy may stem from the KMT tradition of despising internal traitors more than enemies.
Ex-prisoners of Green Island often point out that KMT special agents were more cruel to Chinese communists than Taiwanese separatists, since the separatists were considered enemies and the communists traitors.
The KMT believes that supporting a referendum to join the UN under the name "Taiwan" and the DPP's independence proposal are essentially the same thing, and the possible outcome of either hardly matters. Even if the enemies were victorious, there remains a chance to strike back if the pan-blue front remained united. The real danger would be to allow traitors to gloat over their success.
More realistic pan-blue politicians may already be aware that radicalism creates a disadvantage. But even though the fundamentalist faction in the party is small, they are also the most enthusiastic supporters -- people the party cannot afford to offend.
Radical pan-blue supporters are most likely of the "one country, two systems" persuasion, though there are some who seek immediate reunification. The latter is only estimated at one percent of the general population, whereas the former -- according to surveys conducted by the Mainland Affairs Council -- rose to 16 percent following President Chen Shui-bian's (
Though 10 percent of the general population is insubstantial, it represents a hefty 20 percent of the pan-blue front. The majority of this group, while unlikely to want to remove traitors more than gain political power, is inclined to blindly trust their traditionally respected academic proposals than oppose a referendum that could win the election.
Under pressure from these individuals, the KMT is forced to insist upon "two-step voting," effectively undoing the benefits of a referendum in the first place.
The "two-stage voting" system is thus a strategy to boycott the referendum and a point of contention. While Wu Nai-teh (
The realization that "two-step voting" easily reveals the partisanship of voters is illustrated by anti-independent radicals gathering to threaten others at voting stations.
If radicals from both camps follow suit in the coming election, they could not only disrupt the public's freedom of choice but also possibly create violent conflict. Therefore it is better to follow the example of the US and adopt "one-stage voting."
Lin Cho-shui helped draft the Democratic Progressive Party's Taiwan Independence Clause.
Translated by Angela Hong
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this