PFP Vice Chairman Chang Chao-hsiung's (
The KMT and the PFP have been talking about cooperation for more than two years, but after three elections -- the 2000 presidential election, last December's legislative and city and county chief elections, and the recent local elections -- the cooperation has scored more failures than successes. Why? Because each side has frequently hinged its hopes on the other side's reciprocation of its goodwill gestures.
The leadership of the two parties has invariably failed to understand the fact that PFP Chairman James Soong (
After the National Development Conference in 1996, a split between the "pan blue" and "pan green" camps emerged in the upper levels of the political structure. However, the lower levels became completely detached from the top layers as everyone saw the true colors of self-interested politicians and no longer wanted to trust political parties. This has weakened the grassroots branch organizations of political parties, while strengthening the "caucus" model with legislators and government officials at its core.
From Soong winning 4.66 million votes as an independent candidate in the presidential race, to the rising proportion of independent candidates winning township, village and warden chief elections, we can see a growing trend toward people voting for candidates, not parties. The DPP, the PFP and the KMT (which has even run a membership re-registration drive) -- none of them have seen their membership increase. In fact, the number of votes they've won in various elections has been on the decline.
Party leaders have invariably failed to see that their choice of candidates is key to the success of bipartisan cooperation. In fact, success is becoming more and more dependent on the choice of people, not on the parties themselves. Only a candidate different from the current crop of politicians -- one who is more professional and carries less political baggage and conceit -- can inspire the popular imagination and get them to bet on their hopes like they buy Lotto tickets.
The wrong candidate, even if the two parties agree on him, cannot get PFP supporters to come out and vote; nor can he stop the KMT people from playing tricks in the dark. However, the right candidate will cause any mischief to backfire and harm only the mischief-maker.
To this day, the KMT still wants to be Big Brother. KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
If KMT-PFP cooperation means simply that the PFP won't nominate candidates -- even sacrificing candidates who have adequate power to attract votes -- can the KMT win? On the other hand, even if the leaders say they will support a certain person's candidacy, can the KMT's disorganized grassroots get voters to support their leadership?
True, President Chen Shui-bian (
Politics is about prowess.
Politicians without prowess and seeking to depend on goodwill are not only opportunists, but fools. Meanwhile, politicians who only care about manipulating the power they currently have and lack the magnanimity to make friends with talented people are self-interested little men. Can people still motivate themselves to vote if they only see these two kinds of politicians? The people want to see politicians who can take care of both ideals and reality.
Chang's mayoral bid is testing the sincerity of KMT-PFP cooperation. If the KMT backs out now, people should be able to see who the lascivious wolf is that says "I love you" just to trick you to his bed, and who the foolish beauty is who lost her pants in her quest for love.
No one can depend merely on friends to win a war. One must have soldiers and commanders who can fight. Of the KMT and the PFP, one lacks good soldiers and the other lacks good commanders. They stand to benefit from unity, while discord will cause them harm. Party leaders and party workers from both the KMT and the PFP should wake up now.
You think everyone else is a fool, but you don't even see what calculations you have been mak-ing. Do you think another Lien-Soong ticket will be the solution for a hundred million years? If people can't see your determination and fighting spirit this time around, who will believe you can do better than Chen? Who will entrust the country to you?
Wu Kun-yu is a legislative assistant.
Translated by Francis Huang
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Eating at a breakfast shop the other day, I turned to an old man sitting at the table next to mine. “Hey, did you hear that the Legislative Yuan passed a bill to give everyone NT$10,000 [US$340]?” I said, pointing to a newspaper headline. The old man cursed, then said: “Yeah, the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] canceled the NT$100 billion subsidy for Taiwan Power Co and announced they would give everyone NT$10,000 instead. “Nice. Now they are saying that if electricity prices go up, we can just use that cash to pay for it,” he said. “I have no time for drivel like
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) reportedly told the EU’s top diplomat that China does not want Russia to lose in Ukraine, because the US could shift its focus to countering Beijing. Wang made the comment while meeting with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas on July 2 at the 13th China-EU High-Level Strategic Dialogue in Brussels, the South China Morning Post and CNN reported. Although contrary to China’s claim of neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, such a frank remark suggests Beijing might prefer a protracted war to keep the US from focusing on
RSS