Since the 1990s, southern Taiwan has become a pan-green political stronghold. As a result, people often believe that support for Taiwanese independence is far more prevalent in the south. However, this conception is merely a stereotype.
According to polls conducted by Focus Survey Research, in Yunlin, Chiayi, Nantou, Kaohsiung and Pingtung counties, 77.6 percent of the population believe that Taiwanese sovereignty belongs to Taiwan's 23 million people. However, even more than that -- 80.4 percent -- in Taipei believe the same thing.
Pan-blue support in northern Taiwan is not a matter of anti-independence. According to cross analysis, the higher the education level and the lower the age group, the more one is likely to support Taiwanese independence. Therefore, although the Taipei region has the highest concentration of Mainlanders, it also has the highest concentration of youngsters from every ethnic group receiving a higher education. Therefore, the reasons behind southern Taiwan's pan-green and northern Taiwan's pan-blue predilections must be sought outside of the independence issue.
There are two explanations for this.
First, the backlash from the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) long-term support of the north over the south. Before 2000, KMT election results in the south maintained a 60 percent advantage. After President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) come to power in 2000, his subsequent policy for equal development in north and south created a strong response in the south resulting in a major change in voting patterns.
Second, there are the effects of globalization on Taiwan -- the gap between winners and losers is increasing, with the north winning and the agricultural south losing. Taiwan's economy was already integrating with the global economy when China joined the world production line in the 1990s, resulting in the export of industry and the rise of unemployment in Taiwan. Like other regions on the losing side, many in southern Taiwan reject further globalization, with the added implication that support is sliding for the KMT's continual encouragement of China-bound investment.
Figures provided by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics show Taipei City ranked highest in annual disposable income in 2002 at around NT$38,000 followed in descending order by Hsinchu City, Kaohsiung City, Taipei County, Taichung City and Taoyuan County at above NT$26,000. Of these areas, four are northern, with only one from central and one from southern Taiwan. Moreover, in Yunlin, Chiayi, Kaohsiung and Pingtung counties, annual disposable income came in at below NT$23,000 -- only about 60 percent of the annual disposable income in Hsinchu.
Not only does the south have lower disposable income levels, but its income growth is also slower. Along Taiwan's west coast, the highest rate of growth in income is in Hsinchu City, with a NT$7,200 rise between 1988 and 2006. After Hsinchu, the highest areas of growth are in Taipei County, Kaohsiung City, Taipei City, and Miaoli County. The real winner is of course Taipei City, which remained stable even during the 2001 economic slump.
These figures imply that the KMT would be gravely miscalculating the situation if it thought it could oppose Taiwan independence while focusing on the support of the educated population of the north. Now that the pan-blue camp is following DPP initiatives such as the bid to enter the UN, the gap on sovereignty between the two camps has been reduced.
Economic growth and disposable income are likely to become stronger determining factors of public support.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Angela Hong
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
When I visited Taiwan last summer, I called on the nation to use its status as a technology superpower to build superweapons. It is obvious to me as I return a year later that Taiwan is now answering that call. By 2030, Taiwan envisions a domestic drone hub, capable of producing large quantities of drones per year. The nation continues to tighten cooperation across the private sector, scientific researchers and the elected government, on creating new and innovative production avenues for defense, while efforts to become central to the “democratic supply chain” are only increasing. Anduril is seeing all of these positive
Singaporean former Prime Minister and current senior minister Lee Hsien- Loong(李顯龍) last month stood on Chinese soil and told Beijing that Singapore cooperates because of “shared interests”, not because of common “ethnic descent,” a significant statement that has upended China’s cognitive warfare tactics of “ethnic nationalism.” Along with using its military buildup and economic growth to expand its international dominance, China has long deployed ethnic politics to promote the idea that all ethnic Chinese around the world, regardless of citizenship, share a tight bond with the Chinese motherland, by which it means the regime of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
President William Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) May 20 second-anniversary address was not just a routine policy review; it was damage control. US President Donald Trump’s remarks — that he did not want to see anyone move toward independence and that the delivery of a major Taiwan arms package could depend on the progress of US-China relations — unsettled Taiwan’s public and created an opening for opposition parties to question whether Taiwan was being treated as a bargaining chip in Washington’s dealings with Beijing. Lai’s speech was designed to close that opening. The address covered the expected ground: sovereignty, cross-strait relations, defense spending,
RSS