According to a poll released by the Taiwan Brain Trust on Wednesday last week, 45 percent of the public intend to support so-called “third force” political parties in next year’s legislative elections.
The rise of a third force is not simply a reflection of the public’s dissatisfaction with the two main political parties. There is a wider expectation within society to shape and inspire a populist transformation of politics, one that moves away from a system where the country revolves around two political parties, toward a form of governance that places citizens at its center.
For many years, Taiwan’s political environment has revolved around the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Both parties previously possessed the advantages of being politically stable and accountable, but these merits have since been eradicated in the bitterly fought battles between the two sides.
Ideas on social progress and national governance put forward by the KMT are mostly founded on improving the economy, yet the party has never been able to clearly describe what the future prospects are for the economy, nor has it been able to guarantee the principle of social justice in a society where the fruits of economic growth should be shared by all.
Since the KMT lacks a convincing argument in terms of ideas and common will — in addition to the endless stream of corruption cases — the party will have difficulty gaining the trust of voters.
The DPP started out as a party that fought for democracy and morality, yet in the past few years the party has had problems dealing with moral convictions and conflicts between social classes.
MORAL QUAGMIRE
It was previously able to enlist the support of workers and farmers in its attacks on the benefits enjoyed by military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers. However, aside from amassing political resources for themselves, the DPP has not brought any tangible benefits to workers or farmers — instead it has revealed a snobbish, narrow-minded tendency.
The DPP displays the same hypocrisy when it comes to news exposure: It supports commentators questioning the origin of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) political donations, yet when former DPP spokesperson Hsu Chia-ching (徐佳青) alleged that former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) had pocketed several billion New Taiwan dollars while in office, the party moved swiftly to punish her. This use of “collective immorality” to stifle an individual’s morality has caused the DPP to fall into the kind of moral quagmire that the US theologian and intellectual Reinhold Niebuhr termed “collective egoism.”
The scales have fallen from the eyes of Taiwanese, who are now awake to the truth. Therefore, the DPP will not necessarily continue to enjoy a monopoly on political discourse, particularly since the party lacks a long-term vision for Taiwan, which has in turn left the public without a party that posits a positive vision for the future.
The DPP’s successes in last year’s nine-in-one elections, rather than being a positive show of force for the party, were in fact a reaction to the failures of the KMT.
PINCER MOVEMENT
In recent years, non-traditional parties’ political discussion groups have, through street protests and online discussion forums, appealed to the public to become actively involved. This debate has formed into a latent political force, which is a reflection of the public’s sense of crisis regarding their participation in public affairs.
Many Taiwanese worry that the entrenched positions of the DPP and the KMT mean that the two parties are no longer able to manage the nation in a way that can benefit Taiwanese or fulfill their hopes and dreams. The new political forces hope to transcend conventional party politics and traditional vested interests and rally the public to challenge the existing political system.
For a long time, Taiwan has been unable to break free from a politics centered around big business, patronage, elitism and family dynasties. In Taiwan, whoever has money can get elected, whoever has an influential father can obtain a seat in the legislature and whoever serves his master gets ahead.
Conversely, those without financial support, a patron or party backing, no matter how enthusiastic and sincere, slide into oblivion.
Caught in a pincer movement between the two main parties, the likelihood of success for third force candidates in next year’s legislative elections is difficult to predict.
However, whatever the result, the new force in politics should further stimulate Taiwan’s civic consciousness and help turn Taiwanese politics on its head. This is what many people hope for.
Chiou Tian-juh is a professor of social psychology at Shih Hsin University.
Translated by Edward Jones
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US