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
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