Former vice-president Lien Chan (連戰) relied on his father, Lien Chen-tung (連震東), as Lien Chen-tung did his father before him. With Lien Chan’s son Sean (連勝文) now relying on his father as he takes up the family flag in Taiwanese politics, there are three generations, from grandfather to father to son. Lien Chen-tung and Lien Chan are both former government officials with an astonishing amount of wealth to their names. Sean is more pedestrian, but he has inherited the prodigious wealth, and his debut foray into the world of politics is a stab at mayor of the country’s capital, no less. It is not entirely surprising that he is being rebuffed by voters and that he is trailing in the polls.
In the face of this rather uncomfortable truth, the Lien clan has chosen to spout nonsense and vulgarities, driven to desperation as they are. Last week, Lien Chan showed his true colors behind his mask of “a man of culture” when he slandered their main rival, independent Taipei mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) by saying that Ko’s grandfather served in the Japanese colonial government and that as a third-generation descendant of such a man, Ko had received an “imperial” Japanese education and therefore dismisses everything pertaining to Chinese culture.
The Lien camp says that having wealth and power is not a sin. They have a point. Sean Lien says that being born into a rich family was not of his choosing. That is totally correct. However, whether you rely on your father, that is your own choice.
The Lien political dynasty is lent some credence by the precedents of the Kennedy and Bush dynasties in the US. Closer to home, there is the Republic of China’s founding father Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙), who also relied on his father, and former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), of course, who was in his position by virtue of who his father was, too.
The Bush dynasty has spawned two presidents and two state governors. The Kennedy clan have produced one president, three senators and several members of the US Congress over two generations. The difference is, they did not rely on their fathers and got to where they were on their own steam, being elected within a system that is fair and just.
Lien Chen-tung got to where he was through his father Lien Heng’s (連橫) connections, rising through the ranks and amassing his fortune. His son was able to get a position in the governments of former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo, the former’s son and successor, and rose steadily through the ranks, before finally becoming former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) vice president. His own legacy, his own personal achievement, has continuously frustrated his efforts to be elected president. Sean Lien is even worse, relying entirely on others for money and public position.
Former US president George W. Bush did not bring in his father to campaign on his behalf when he ran for the office of president. Sean Lien, on the other hand, has roped in his parents to back him up, rolling out references to “the Chinese people” and anti-Japanese slogans that slander people who grew up in Taiwan during the period of Japanese rule.
The objective of suggesting Ko’s ancestor served the Japanese colonial government was to appeal to the older generation who still harbor ill-feelings toward their former Japanese colonial masters. However, if a person targeted by slander then turns around and says their accusers’ ancestors served the Manchu Qing Dynasty for 200 years, it is nobody’s fault but the accusers’.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS