On Saturday last week, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) criticized Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Deputy Secretary-General Lin Fei-fan (林飛帆), saying that Lin, once a role model for youth, is now “throwing himself into the lap of somebody.” Ko then referred to the “Han vilification industry,” a term Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) coined to suggest there was a DPP-run cyberarmy criticizing Han online. Does Ko not reflect on his own actions?
Reports indicate that Ko keeps his own cyberarmy, and that people at the city government direct opinion on Facebook and in channels on the nation’s most popular online bulletin board, Professional Technology Temple (PTT).
When faced with questions about his own efforts, Ko typically responds with jokes or nonsensical answers, such as “‘netizens’ are different from ‘cyberarmy,’” “these PTT users are volunteer online soldiers” and “we have researched the online world — no one can direct opinion, nobody is that smart.”
When Ko said Lin was “throwing himself into the lap of the DPP,” he seems to have implied that joining the DPP gave a negative impression of Lin and shattered his former image as a “role model for young people.”
What is wrong with joining the DPP? Does Ko think the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), whose name was lifted from another party, is the only way for Lin to remain a role model?
It is clear that the TPP is Ko’s one-man party. What he says and does represent the TPP’s standards, and the way he behaves is off-putting.
Recently, Ko was criticized for calling Presidential Office Secretary-General Chen Chu (陳菊) “a fatter version of Han.” Not only did he refuse to apologize, he even defended the comment, saying that “fat” and “thin” are only adjectives.
Whether “fat” and “thin” are adjectives or not is beside the point. Ko’s comment violates the Sexual Harassment Prevention Act (性騷擾防治法). Breaching the law publicly and then trying to wiggle out of it — is that the standard Ko’s TPP aspires to?
Another issue is the scrapped extradition bill in Hong Kong. Not only is Ko unwilling to publicly support the protest movement there, he has said that “when the enemy has made a mistake, there is no need to continue kicking them.” He even made an absurd remark, saying that “it all happened because too many Hong Kongers travel to Taiwan and have become contaminated by Taiwanese.”
Ko keeps finding excuses for the Hong Kong government. After the police fired at protesters at close range, he said: “If these clashes continue, it will be hard to avoid an accidental shooting.”
He also said that “self-immolation is trending among Tibetan lamas, and it has caused the Chinese government a great deal of trouble.”
The TPP seems to stand together with a totalitarian government, mocking and ridiculing Hong Kongers and Tibetans pursuing freedom and democracy. However, this is not surprising. Ko’s proposal for cross-strait relations is that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family,” and that embracing China is the most rational position.
Today, as China continues its verbal attacks and military intimidation against Taiwan, the DPP is clearly the only political party capable of safeguarding the nation.
Lin, one of the leaders of the Sunflower movement, has long held a consistent stance on defending Taiwan’s democracy and sovereignty, respecting diversity, and embracing liberty. What is wrong with him joining the DPP?
Is the only way for Lin to be a role model for young Taiwanese to join the “fake” TPP, which supports the idea that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family,” discriminates against women and stands with authoritarian China?
Someone said that “Ko is a liar, and the TPP is a fraudulent organization comprised of liars.” When Ko laments a former student movement leader that stands with the ruling party instead of joining the TPP, he should probably look closer at the values of his own party, as well its politicians.
Chamberlain Lee is a think tank researcher and a political worker.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS