The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has boasted recently about the steady stream of members joining its ranks thanks to a proposal to attract younger participants by party Chairman Frank Hsieh (謝長廷). But even as the party hailed its efforts, it seemed doubtful whether the DPP was ready to embrace new voices.
The decision to let younger members vote in next month’s chairmanship election — regardless of how long they have held membership — helped reel in more than 1,000 new members aged between 18 and 35 in just two weeks. The party aims to double that figure by the registration deadline this Friday.
This offered a needed boost of confidence for the DPP, as nothing could be more vital to a democratic party’s future than the ability to incorporate new talent, passion and vision.
The registration for candidacy in the race for the DPP chairmanship closed last Friday. Within a day, there was immediate talk that the party leadership should “coordinate” among the three contestants — former vice premier Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), Legislator Chai Trong-rong (蔡同榮) and former presidential adviser Koo Kwang-ming (辜寬敏).
Suddenly, the party’s serenade to youth seems less than sincere.
Some 1,200 new members enticed by the opportunity to help put the party back on its feet and select its next chief have every right to feel cheated if there is negotiation for a single candidate for the job. If that happens, the party’s leadership should not be surprised when many of its newfound torchbearers shake their heads in disgust and quickly lose interest in playing a “guiding role” in the party.
Not that it should come as a surprise if the DPP tries to “resolve” the chairmanship before the election on May 18. The party has cowered in the face of internal debate and competition before. The attempt at negotiations among the four candidates who vied for the presidential nomination is an example, as was the treatment of the party’s “11 bandits.” This group of outspoken DPP members, including former legislators Lee Wen-chung (李文忠) and Lin Cho-shui (林濁水), were blacklisted by a grassroots movement for their public criticism of the party.
Yet, the DPP has repeatedly prided itself on the ability to embrace differing opinions, encourage lively and heated debate within its ranks and come out stronger. As the party stands at a nadir, now is certainly the time to draw on such strengths.
The DPP’s series of eight introspective meetings drew to a close on Saturday — conferences that brought together party members, media and academics to pick at the party’s sores and offer candid diagnoses. Those meetings seem to have produced little in the way of a breakthrough. The key to cementing democratic progress — one of the party’s oft-touted goals — is intertwined with party culture and the DPP would do well to focus its reflections on this.
The party’s desire to maintain internal harmony to the point of pre-empting its own democratic mechanisms is disappointing. The DPP must find the confidence to believe that its ideals are not so fragile that a chairmanship election could break those bonds. Without this first step, it is unlikely to pull off the transformation and renewal it seeks.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
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,
RSS