In last month’s elections, the traditional Taiwanese independence camp campaigned actively against the re-election of Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) and threw its support behind a pro-independence mayoral candidate in the south. Both candidates lost. The pro-independence camp has lost its momentum and is worsening with time.
Overseas Taiwanese who think that support for independence remains strong are wrong. In their eyes, anyone who identifies as Taiwanese rather than Chinese supports formal independence, but in reality, such people only agree that Taiwan is a country and pay no attention to the political climate.
The traditional independence camp was formed under the dictatorship of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). At that time, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime had colonized Taiwan and ruled it through the Republic of China (ROC) government. The independence movement wanted to overturn the ROC.
While overseas Taiwanese advocated independence, the domestic independence movement remained part of the democracy movement, as the Chiang family’s approach to independence supporters and communists was that it would rather kill 100 than let one get away.
Following democratization, Taiwanese joined the ROC establishment and participated in the government, but Chinese forces opposed this participation, which is how anti-communism developed into a pro-China stance and an alliance with the enemy to deal with the Taiwanese.
Many people in the independence movement have changed from working to overturn the ROC to opposing annexation by China, and although many overseas Taiwanese also oppose annexation, their focus remains on overturning the ROC.
During the dangwai (黨外, “outside the party”) years and the early years after the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was formed, politicians were respectful of members of the independence movement, because the public treated them as heroes and they were quite influential during elections.
However, their influence has waned, and by last month’s elections, Taipei Ko had decimated any remaining influence. That is because the public no longer thinks of independence advocates as heroes.
In the past, anyone who dared criticize the KMT government became a hero. Taiwanese at the time were being persecuted. While most were furious, they were afraid to speak up, and so they admired the independence advocates who did. Even though criticizing the KMT could result in a prison sentence, independence advocates still spoke up.
Following democratization, Taiwanese were no longer persecuted. If they had the right to criticize the president, then there was nothing special about criticizing the KMT. Independence advocates were no longer revered and any influence during elections evaporated.
These days, the public does not view someone willing to go to prison as a hero, but simply as a criminal, which is much lower than being considered a political prisoner.
During the former KMT regime, one could become a hero by castigating the authorities, but these days, people quickly tire of anyone scolding or yelling at others. Independence advocates sometimes even denounce each other, which looks even worse in the public’s eyes.
Times have changed, and those in the independence camp no longer understand how to behave to gain public support. They continue to live in the past, when denouncing and castigating opponents was the thing to do. It was unavoidable that their influence would wane and disappear.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a retired professor of National Sun Yat-sen University and chairman of the Society for the Promotion of Taiwanese Security.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this