It has been more than six months since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was battered in the elections, saw it lose both the presidency and its legislative majority. While no one expects intra-party reform to happen overnight, pledges by KMT Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) to reinvigorate the beleaguered KMT and help it rise again gave some hope that the party would at least begin to show signs of realigning its values and reform more closely with mainstream opinion and expectations.
Recent rhetoric from the party’s leaders suggests that the message from the public via election results has not been loud and clear enough. The party has not yet engaged in an in-depth review of the reasons for its electoral defeat.
A case in point was the remarks made by the KMT-affiliated Institute on Policy Research and Development director Lin Zhong-shan (林忠山) on Saturday in a speech addressing a group of young party recruits.
“Do you know how many [government] positions there would be for us to take when we grab back power?” he said.
While it might be Lin’s way of trying to pump up party members’ spirits so they do not lose heart, talk of using government positions as a way to forge party unity had many shaking their heads in disbelief.
It is regrettable and disturbing to see a top-ranking KMT official citing state resources for political gain by using them as some sort of reward to entice young people into working for the party.
If government positions are used as incentives to woo KMT members, one can only imagine the lack of respect they would have for their positions if the KMT were to ever regain executive power.
Equally disappointing were Lin’s remarks that well demonstrate that the KMT leadership is not free of its “party state” mindset, but still approaches governance with a feudalistic stance that regards public office as a way to divvy up spoils.
At the same event on Saturday, Hung said Taiwanese have forgotten that the KMT kept the nation safe and helped it to develop and prosper, and that people remember only the 228 Incident and the White Terror era.
“Has the KMT done nothing else?” Hung said.
While Hung might have meant to encourage party members by reminding them of the party’s contributions, her comments sound more like her venting about what she deems the nation’s lack of gratitude.
All KMT members would be well-advised to take a close look Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation and Taiwan Thinktank polls.
A poll conducted by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation showed 30.4 percent of respondents said they supported the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), 16 percent said they backed the KMT and 14.9 percent were in favor of the New Power Party (NPP), followed by the People First Party at 7 percent, the Taiwan Solidarity Union at 1.6 percent and the Green Party at 1.3 percent.
A separate survey by Taiwan Thinktank suggested the NPP also appeared to have gained more support from the public, as it showed 16 percent supporting the NPP, while 29.2 percent of survey respondents back the DPP, followed by 17.5 percent in favor of the KMT.
In view of these results, KMT leaders ought to ask themselves why the NPP, voted into the legislature less than one year after its establishment, has already garnered such widespread public support.
Perhaps a better question is why only 16 percent of people support the KMT?
Maybe the KMT would find the answers if it ever engaged in some hard soul-searching.
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