In a perfect world, we would judge politicians by the yardsticks of honesty and whether they promote good policies and can deliver on them. Every other consideration — whether he or she is charismatic, dresses well or can run marathons — would be secondary.
In the real world, however, we often tend to turn things on their heads and prioritize image over substance. Hence the buzz over Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) before the presidential election — especially among women — not only in Taiwan but also in Hong Kong, where support for him has a long history, and overseas. Rare were reports that did not include “charismatic” or “good-looking,” descriptions that often preceded, if there were any, discussions on whether he had any good ideas.
Endorsing the Canon “Rebel” camera in the 1990s, former professional tennis player Andre Agassi had a point about the forces that influence our judgment: “Image is everything.”
As the main opposition party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should be aware of this reality as it seeks to reconstitute itself and regenerate its appeal after crushing back-to-back defeats in the legislative and presidential elections. Without a proper image, it makes little difference whether its more “socialist” platform appeals to the masses or not, or whether its pro-independence motto has traction with a large swath of the population.
The contrast with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could not be more striking. Like them or not, agree or disagree with their policies, the KMT’s politicians know how to play the image game and look professional, even when that image is skin deep. For their part, DPP members often cannot be bothered to dress for the occasion, holding press conferences or hosting major events in jeans and T-shirts.
Sad to say, for politicians to be taken seriously, they need to dress the part, suit and tie and all. This does not mean that their policies will be any better, but it’s part of the game, just as a valet at a five-star hotel must wear the proper attire. Failing to do this, the DPP gives credence to those who dismiss it as a band of ruffians, troublemakers or the Taiwanese equivalent of “rednecks,” which the image-conscious KMT can exploit to its advantage.
Image transcends Taiwan, especially nowadays as the world begins to pay attention to developments involving human rights violations and cross-strait talks. If the DPP and other opposition parties want to be taken seriously by foreign media and audiences — who know even less about the idiosyncrasies of Taiwanese politics and are therefore bound to let first impressions cloud judgment — they will need to dress for the occasion.
With cross-strait rapprochement, Beijing’s policy has been to de-internationalize the Taiwan question by internalizing debate. In its struggle to protect the sovereignty of Taiwan, the opposition must do everything it can to keep the matter internationalized and use whatever means it can to tell Taiwan’s story to the world. The fact that DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) speaks excellent English is already an improvement on the past — one that will help the party reach out to its friends abroad. But if the party and its ideas are to be taken seriously, they will need to dress up.
It shouldn’t have to be this way. But in this world, the cowl does make the monk.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS