Twenty young politicians who came of age during the student movements of the 1980s and 90s are going to run in the year-end legislative elections. Will they become a "generational politics" phenomenon in Taiwan? It is an issue worth discussing.
These ex-student activists, plus the other young legislative candidates who don't share a background in student movements, together comprise the generation that grew up during the transition period in which the martial law regime gradually disintegrated. Imagine if the majority of these young politicians were able to get the nominations of their respective parties and coast to victory. For the first time, they would hold more than 15 percent of seats in the Legislative Yuan. Apart from seats in the legislature, the "transition-period generation" has already begun to take positions as political appointees, government aides, and civil servants since the transition of political power.
The "transition-period generation" is distinct from the previous two generations that experienced the process of democratization in Taiwan. Because there have been three important historical stages in Taiwan's process of democratization, the heroes of reform have been classified as belonging to three political generations. The first political generation was the "228 Generation," with representative figures that included Peng Ming-min (
The second political generation is the "Formosa Generation." The DPP's current leadership should be classified in this generation. Of course there are some differences in seniority and experience among them, but of the Kaohsiung Incident (美麗島事件) prisoners, defense lawyers, and even "tangwai" (黨外, non-KMT) activists that comprise this generation, all had already formed their political views by the 1970s and early 1980s. Historically speaking, they can be classified as belonging to the same generation. They were the main force behind democratization in Taiwan.
The "transition-period generation" refers to Taiwanese who either participated in political movements or formulated their political views between the mid-1980s and the early 1990s, around the time that martial law was lifted, the authoritarian power structure was being loosened and social power was beginning to burst forth. After this generation," an even younger political generation took shape, though no formal name exists for it, as yet.
The "transition-period generation" occupies a unique position in Taiwan's political and social transition. Coming of age during the lifting of martial law, this generation shares the previous generations' experience of autocracy and isolation and understands the difficulties of the democratization process. Their views are miles apart from the newest, youngest political generation -- a group which takes democracy for granted.
The "transition-period generation" has, however, shared the youngest generation's experience of growing up in "post-scarcity" society. Thus, in terms of cultural tastes, this generation is more able to strike a responsive chord with the diverse younger generation. And in this sense the "transition-period generation" differs from the two previous generations, who matured during the "scarcity" of the 1960s.
This is perhaps a "bridge" generation. Because of the requirements of the democratization process and political transition, it has scurried to fill the gap between the older and younger generations. If, however, the "transition-period generation" satisfies itself with nimble positioning, and doesn't seek to foster communication and build leadership, it will eventually just fade away. In the eyes of its predecessors, this generation has always been seen as "little gofers," while the younger generation regards its members as "stick-in-the-muds."
The transition-period generation should indeed serve as a "bridge" generation. To put it bluntly, it must inherit the legacy of Taiwan's history and democratization and lead Taiwan to tackle the new political challenges brought by global trade and economics, the international framework built by the major powers and the widening gap between rich and poor.
In order to assume the role of "bridge," the transition-period generation must prepare to lead. Apart from running as legislators, this generation should also work hard to become leaders of public political opinion and offer its own reform agenda. Current efforts in this area are insufficient. Legislative candidates from the transition-period generation must have personal aspirations higher than just getting elected.
Jou Yi-cheng was formerly director of the DPP's Youth Department and is currently enrolled in the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
Translated by Scudder Smith
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means