Let us imagine that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) election for chairperson on May 18 will not result in a revolving door post, as it has been for much of the recent past.
A generational transition, which many party elders have called for in the wake of the presidential election defeat, would truly take place. There would a popular perception that this would be a window of opportunity for the new leader to reform the DPP.
However, there are blind spots in any argument that a fresh, young face in the leadership would necessarily restore the younger generation’s enthusiasm and support for the party.
For many years, the DPP’s failure to serve grassroots members has caused the party’s power base to rot away. There has also been gross neglect by party officials, whose impediments to party development in securing their posts included the use of nominal party members.
The DPP has always trumpeted the need to get young people involved in politics, but because of these two problems the party’s ability to do so has been quite limited. When the entire party starts to see its survival hinging upon a new generation assuming leadership posts, then it ignores the seriousness of impediments such as the use of nominal members.
As a senior party member of the younger generation, I have a message of caution for those wishing to run for the chairmanship, as well as for the eventual winner who will have accomplished the mission of generational transfer. You may be young enough and, accordingly, will probably not have the support of any faction. However, you will be leading a group of party representatives that have been chosen by local factions of which young people only make up a small part.
Moreover, it is these representatives who will choose the 30 Central Executive Committee and 10 Central Standing Committee members that will oversee the functioning of the party. To avoid public criticism, some party elders will keep a low profile. However, based on my own experience and what I have heard, if by May 18 we are unable to solve the problem of grassroots disenchantment, the old system of collective voting for nominal members will continue and the same old faces will run the party.
Therefore, even if there is a generational transfer for the chairperson’s post, reform will amount to mere words.
With the party anxious for reform, the DPP has the ability to thoroughly cleanse itself of the poison of nominal party membership. Chairman Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) should immediately convene the National Congress and propose a freeze on its upcoming election, as well as declare that party members must re-register their membership in person.
During this period, the party’s core ideals can be reaffirmed and a call for youth to join the party’s ranks made according to these ideals. The next National Congress must be chosen by those who have gone through this process, otherwise it will be unable to undertake the mission of party reform alongside the new chairperson.
Wu Chin-tai is a member of the Democratic Progressive Party’s first Youth Committee.
Translated by James Chen
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS