The fact that the tacit dichotomy of “local” and “nonlocal” continues to dominate the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) internal election campaign, despite the efforts of some to rise above it, shows that the party is far from done with the issue.
Former KMT vice chairman Steve Chan (詹啟賢) on Tuesday said that pitting chairmanship candidates against each other on the basis of their “local versus nonlocal” backgrounds would ruin the party.
He further claimed that “local” is a vague term with no clear definition and that the KMT has been “diverse and inclusive” throughout its more than 60 years of history in Taiwan.
Only when “some” deliberately drove a wedge between local and waishengren — people and their descendents who fled to Taiwan after the KMT’s defeat in the Chinese Civil War in 1949 — camps did the issue become politically salient and divisive, he said.
Chan’s comments could be answered in two ways: That idea is a nonstarter for the new generation of voters and the historical context for the KMT being a seemingly “inclusive” party in Taiwan was omitted, as it has always been, in this canonical recital of the KMT being a tolerant regime.
If Chan were to take a good look at recent elections, especially those after the 2014 Sunflower movement — which galvanized young Taiwanese to pay close attention to and participate in social and political activities — he would see that the local-waishengren divide has long faded from the political rhetoric outside of the KMT.
What the KMT should debate — which is also newer voters’ political concern — is how the party defines Taiwan’s relationship with China. Taiwan-China is the new binary opposition that needs to be addressed, and while it did emerge in the last KMT chairperson election, it unfortunately quickly waned afterward.
Chan was at least right about one thing, which is that “local” should now be used to describe everyone who lives in and cares about Taiwan. This idea would resonate with the young, but for millennials it is what has already been embedded and embodied in their lives, rather than some ideal approach. In other words, talk about overcoming a division is evidence that the division — which has already been left behind by young voters — still bothers the KMT, demonstrating that it is out of sync with society.
The difference in attitudes is actually more intergenerational than along party lines. However, the KMT, more than any other major party, has continued to be plagued by the dichotomy, to the extent that it could shake the party to its core. However, is it true that the division was not a matter of concern until some maliciously incited it for their own political ends?
Saying the KMT has been diverse and inclusive is probably as true as Beijing claiming that all ethnic groups in China coexist peacefully and happily under Chinese Communist Party (CCP) rule and identify with zhonghua minzu (中華民族, Chinese ethnic group). Saying that the division only became salient after “certain people” incited it in Taiwan is similar to Beijing claiming that minority groups divided China by promoting their own cultures.
The CCP has plenty of cadres and officials with minority backgrounds, just as the KMT incorporated local officials after it arrived in Taiwan. The 228 Massacre in 1947 and the KMT’s defeat in the Chinese Civil War and retreat to Taiwan made it realize that its own survival would be at risk if it were to be overthrown in Taiwan. As some academics have said, the KMT regime was a “colonial regime without a mother country.”
Aligning with and encouraging opposing local factions — a practice that has continued to bedevil Taiwanese politics to this day — was a way for the KMT regime to keep a tight rein on the nation and it only has itself to blame for today’s infighting.
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