Mon, Apr 16, 2001 page8

• The potential for political decay

  • By Liu Kuan-teh 劉冠德
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Taiwan used to be credited for the economic miracle it created and was considered a role model for its "silent revolution" of democratic reform along "the third wave of democratization." After experiencing the first-ever transition of political parties, however, do people in this country really enjoy the democratic outcomes that have been established?

  It seems that what Taiwan achieved in the last two decades was more of a "procedural democracy," rather than a "substantive democracy.

  Embedded in this "hollow democracy" is the potential danger for political decay, which might undermine the efforts that the country has made over the past years.

  Taiwan was lucky enough to survive the Asian financial crisis of 1997. The then-ruling KMT attributed a lot of the country's success to its own crisis management skills.

  Nevertheless, what was revealed from the crisis was not just how the government would react to such a huge economic shock, but also inherent institutional problems.

  The experiences of countries such as South Korea and Indonesia showed it was mainly "cronyism" -- the connection between government and business, be it conglomerates or organized crime -- that constituted the Achilles heel of countries that suffered during the economic disaster.

  The bad news is that Taiwan will continue to move toward taking a similar path to the one that those countries were on, if the administration of Chen Shiu-bian (陳水扁) fails to initiate timely reforms.

  In Taiwan, the degree of social mobilization and the expansion of political participation has been high, especially since the lifting of martial law and the debut of open competition between political parties. However, the rates of political organization and institutionalization are relatively low. The result is a potential for political instability and disorder.

  Even though the reform-minded Chen has taken over the presidency, "black gold" politics and government inefficiency have remained major concerns of the public. Reports released by some international risk-assessment companies all point to the fact that corruption and government inefficiency constitute the most important concerns of foreign investors in Taiwan.

  The primary problem of politics and economics in Taiwan, therefore, is the lag in the development of institutions and the rule of law following rapid social and economic change.

  Why has democratization in Taiwan bred corruption? First, democratization has created new sources of wealth and power whose relation to politics is undefined by the dominant traditional norms of society and who are not yet accepted as modern norms by the dominant groups within society.

  Second, corruption in Taiwan's democratic transition is also related to the KMT's incorporation of these newly powerful groups and the efforts of these groups to make themselves effective within the political sphere.

  What was responsible for this potential for crisis and instability? The answer is rapid social change and the rapid mobilization of new groups into politics, coupled with the slow development of political institutions.

  The KMT's belief was that economic development would promote social stability while social development would promote political stability. And these two ideas constituted the base for the KMT's long rule.

  Nevertheless, economic development and political stability are two independent goals, and progress toward one is not necessarily connected with progress toward the other. In some instances, economic development programs may promote political stability; in other instances they may seriously undermine it.

  This potential political decay, in most cases, is sidelined by other elements, such as independence-unification debates and ethnic disputes, and has become a real threat to Taiwan's political and economic system.

  Political democratization involves the process of rationalizing authority -- replacing a large number of traditional, religious and ethnic political authorities by a single secular, national political authority. It also includes differentiating new political functions and developing specialized structures to perform those functions. It entails increased participation in politics by social groups throughout society, too. But instead of this, there has frequently been a decay of the administrative organizations inherited from the authoritarian or totalitarian era and a weakening and disruption of the political organizations developed during the struggle for democracy.

  Social mobilization increases aspirations. Economic development increases the capacity of a society to satisfy those aspirations and therefore tends to reduce social frustrations and consequent political instability.

  Social mobilization is much more destabilizing than economic development. The gap between these two forms of change

  illustrates the need for opportunities for social and economic mobility and adaptable political institutions.

  Political participation becomes the road for advancement of the socially mobilized individual. Social frustration leads to demands on the government and the expansion of political participation to enforce those demands.

  The political backwardness of the country in terms of political institutionalization, however, makes it difficult, if not impossible, for the demands upon the government to be expressed through legitimate channels. Hence the sharp increase in political participation has given rise to political instability.

  Although Taiwan has undergone a peaceful transition of power, in the absence of strong and adaptable political institutions, such increases in participation also mean the accumulation of instability and underground business, such as corruption and bribery. The direct product is the rise of black gold politics and members of organized crime taking political office. Legislators with criminal records and backgrounds in organized crime are clear examples.

  In conclusion, political democratization and social mobilization tend to produce political decay unless steps are taken to moderate or to restrict the impact on political consciousness and political involvement.

  While the government continues to talk about how to continue further reforms or build up an "advanced democracy" in Taiwan, what they should bear in mind instead is how to keep Taiwan from moving toward political decay.

  Liu Kuan-teh is a political commentator based in Taipei.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Kevin de Bruyne bids Manchester City farewell

  • 2

    Napoli bag 2nd Serie A title in 3 years

  • 3

    Taiwanese duo knocked out of Malaysia Masters

  • 4

    Cannes Critics’ Week honors ‘Left-Handed Girl’

  • 5

    Taiwan in Time: Adjusting internal borders during the Qing Dynasty