Sat, Jun 17, 2017 - Page 8 News List

Green-blue divide leads to political idleness

By Lee Min-yung 李敏勇

The political struggle between the pan-blue and pan-green camps started when the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was elected president in 2000. As the DPP did not hold a legislative majority at the time, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) constantly blocked the Chen administration’s policies at the legislature and the media started to portray the incomplete democratic development in terms of “color politics.”

It has been going on for almost two decades and during this time Taiwan has undergone three transitions of government, but the political struggle has turned into a serious and deep-rooted illness that is a disgrace to color politics.

This is a confrontation between two national identities. As far as the KMT is concerned, the Republic of China (ROC) refers to “China,” but for the DPP, the ROC refers to Taiwan. The former refers to a fragmentary remainder of a fictitious China that does not belong to Taiwanese, while the latter refers to an as of yet nonexistent “republic of Taiwan.”

This unresolved confrontation and divergence of identity is hindering Taiwan from moving toward becoming a normalized state.

After World War II, enterprises have had to face the era of globalization, in which “identity,” as well as “identification,” have become a cultural project that is important for their self-realization.

For example, the formation of a Corporate Identity System (CIS) has continued to develop to this day and the brand value of companies such as Apple, Coca-Cola, Nike, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, NHK, Sony, Uniqlo, Samsung and Louis Vuitton and others is representative of their capacity.

Taiwan has been caught in the ROC trap, with the result that the nation has failed in its attempt to reposition itself, write a new constitution, change its name and build a fresh identity system; the national title, flag and anthem are hiding in obscurity.

From the perspective of corporate management, this company — Taiwan — cannot even resolve its corporate tax status and even the question of whether it will stay in business is up in the air, not to mention creating corporate value.

If corporate identity and identification is a matter of CIS, there should also be a national identity system or a state identity system. Ever since the ROC was replaced by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) at the UN in 1971, the PRC, not the ROC, has represented China.

In the face of the chaotic view of national identity, the priority for Taiwan should be to build a new system to clearly identify itself and let the world know what this nation is.

Democratization is an improvement of Taiwan’s domestic problems, but a nation needs to deal with the external world as well as domestic problems. Without a national identity and identification system, the new political situation brought on by direct presidential elections will keep failing to solve the issue of national development.

Thus, politics is suffering from a blind spot that stops it from resolving the confusion surrounding Taiwan’s unclear identity.

More seriously, the blue-green political struggle has led to mutually destructive political idleness.

The ROC is falling apart and fading away, but the nation of Taiwan still has not fully taken shape, so calling Taiwan a nation is a bit too serious and unrealistic.

On the other hand, pan-blue camp politicians have reacted to the severing of diplomatic ties between the ROC and Panama by criticizing the government based on their ideological stance, saying that Taiwan should curry favor with the PRC; this clearly exposes the KMT’s dependency on the PRC.

This story has been viewed 1778 times.

Comments will be moderated. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned.

TOP top