Taipei Times: As far as democratic consolidation is concerned, you've argued that in Taiwan's case, there is still a lot of be desired.Based on your weeklong observation of Saturday's election, would you make the same argument? Why or why not?
Larry Diamond: It's a good question. I would say, yes, there is still a lot of progress to be made before Taiwan can be considered a consolidated democracy.
My point is that democracy is consolidated when there is extremely broad and deep commitment to democracy and principles, and to the rules of the democratic game among all the major political actors.
That includes all the important political leaders and elites, the major political organizations of the country, parties and interest groups, and the mass public at large.
We know from survey data that there is still very considerable mass ambivalence about democracy in Taiwan. In Central and Eastern European democracies that have become consolidated, [including] Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, and [those] in Southern Europe, [including] Spain, Portugal and Greece, we find that 70 to 80 percent of the public consistently supports democracy as the best form of government.
There is very broad public consensus on seeing electoral constitutional democracy being the best way to govern a country.
We know from survey data that the depth and breadth of public support for democracy is not evident here yet. Instead of being 70 to 80 percent, it's about 50 percent, with a lot of people undecided, unsure and ambivalent.
I think there are some trends in terms of public opinion and we have yet to get the latest survey data analyzed. But nevertheless, my impression is that some trends are moving in the wrong direction.
TT: Can you give some examples?
Diamond: We know that there is growing skepticism about politicians and about the legislature, that trust in the legislature was not high to begin with and seems to be further declining.
This is why parties and politicians are almost universally calling now for deep cuts in the size of the legislature.
In terms of the depth of the cuts that have been called for, such as a 50 percent cut, virtually no political scientist I know favors this as it is almost irrational.
You have to have a minimum number of seats in the legislature in order to accomplish certain things in a democracy of this size and complexity.
If you have 10 or 12 parliamentary committees, to have a decently functioning committee, you need about 13 to 15 members at minimum. So already you need 150 members at minimum to have a legislature that would be suitable for a country of this size.
The issue is not so much about cutting the size of the legislature. It's about improving the performance of the legislature and cleaning up the legislature in terms of the kinds of people who sit there.
But the fact that parties and politicians felt compelled, even if their motives weren't sincere, to put forward this proposal speaks of the low esteem people have for the legislature.
In this election we saw a very low turnout relative to previous legislative elections. And that was an unfortunate development particularly when you consider that there was the additional incentive of the city and county commissioner races that ought to have increased turnout. So while the turnout fell below 70 percent, one has to take that as a warning sign of a rising voter alienation and apathy.
RSS