What about Lee’s time in office, then? Why has the DPP developed a “Lee Teng-hui complex” over the past 12 years? How is it that the ruling and opposition parties, despite their different positions, could cooperate on so many issues during the transition to democracy? This raises the question of how well Ma, who clearly should be in a better position than Lee, has done when it comes to building a domestic consensus and resolving clashing points of view over the past few years. Ma clearly sees the opposition as an enemy, so what would be a better way to describe him?
Although the prosecutorial system’s abuse of power and its wiretapping of citizens have resulted in human rights violations, the man in power has made unscrupulous use of the information. Which era was more frightening, Lee’s or Ma’s?
The final question that we must find an answer to is why Ma’s rule has created a situation that everyone is unhappy with, and why it seems improbable that the situation will improve. Is it because KMT members and supporters are spoiled or because KMT legislators are too conniving? Has the election and recall system created a situation conducive to creating tyrants?
If this is the result of the KMT’s internal structure, then the younger members who are now obeying the party-state system will never be able to distance themselves from the party in the future. If this is a remnant of the past authoritarian legal system, and if this system is further consolidated by legal amendments, then our citizens must settle its scores directly with the legislature.
Many opinion polls have shown a clear and strong public dissatisfaction with the “status quo,” and that the issue that must be solved is what action should be taken, and how to make that action effective. It is the opposition’s responsibility to answer these questions.
Translated by Perry Svensson