Democracy does not fall from the sky, nor does it mature overnight. In the last seven years, Taiwan's road to democracy has been filled with chaos stemming from a lack of values and reckless political opposition. "Democratic civil war" aptly describes the process.
Our democracy is in a state of conflict that highlights the immaturity of our system. This is inevitable during the transition from an authoritarian to a democratic system.
But Taiwan's situation is unique: Other than the reactionary forces of the deposed Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), there is also political intervention by the media -- themselves a relic of the party-state system -- that further intensifies the infighting.
Two major causes of this democratic civil war are the pro-unification media and the KMT's attempts to regain power. In a mature democracy, the media is a political watchdog that prevents corruption and asserts social justice. But Taiwan's fourth estate has no public credibility. Just as it was once the mouthpiece of the party-state, it now makes up the front-line troops in the attempt to restore the party-state.
The bloody deeds of the KMT during its 40 years of rule include the 228 Incident, the White Terror era, the overseas blacklist, the Kaohsiung Incident, the death of Chen Wen-chen (陳文成) and the murder of Lin I-hsiung's (林義雄) family members.
These atrocities have not been fully addressed legally or historically and the KMT still does not dare confront them. The media are also afraid to confront the past.
The pro-unification media outlets escape responsibility with specious arguments, brainwashing the younger generation so that the KMT can wash it hands of its past as though nothing happened.
The pro-unification media conceals the KMT's historical responsibility while highlighting clashes between parties over minor issues and misleading the public.
But their political intervention is unsurprising given the background of high-level media executives.
The majority of executives in the electronic media and the United Daily News as well as the China Times were "media elite youths" specially fostered by the KMT. Many of them, especially those at TTV, CTS and CTV, as well as the two papers, received KMT scholarships while studying abroad. Upon their return, these individuals repaid the party-state through their work. Most of them are high-level executives or famed commentators on television and in the two papers. How can these individuals be expected to show any goodwill to the Democratic Progressive Party?
Then there are the KMT's party assets. No other country in the world would allow a political party to keep such a large amount of wealth and use it to compete unfairly against its rivals. If it were not for the fact that the media help to obstruct any disadvantageous legislation, the reclaiming of the KMT's ill-gotten assets would not be so difficult. The media cannot be overlooked in the party's ability to retain and utilize its wealth -- their "cooperation" is the greatest obstacle to the deepening of Taiwanese democracy.
If the KMT is not thoroughly dismantled, it will be near impossible for Taiwan and Taiwanese media to normalize.
Taiwan is in the midst of a painful democratic civil war. Next year's elections hold the key to whether Taiwan can divest itself of the KMT and continue to promote democracy. Without the advantage of strong media backing or wealth from ill-gotten assets, those of us with firm democratic ideals must have the courage to fight to the finish.
Michelle Wang is the deputy secretary-general of the Northern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Angela Hong
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers