In a perfect world, we would judge politicians by the yardsticks of honesty and whether they promote good policies and can deliver on them. Every other consideration — whether he or she is charismatic, dresses well or can run marathons — would be secondary.
In the real world, however, we often tend to turn things on their heads and prioritize image over substance. Hence the buzz over Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) before the presidential election — especially among women — not only in Taiwan but also in Hong Kong, where support for him has a long history, and overseas. Rare were reports that did not include “charismatic” or “good-looking,” descriptions that often preceded, if there were any, discussions on whether he had any good ideas.
Endorsing the Canon “Rebel” camera in the 1990s, former professional tennis player Andre Agassi had a point about the forces that influence our judgment: “Image is everything.”
As the main opposition party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should be aware of this reality as it seeks to reconstitute itself and regenerate its appeal after crushing back-to-back defeats in the legislative and presidential elections. Without a proper image, it makes little difference whether its more “socialist” platform appeals to the masses or not, or whether its pro-independence motto has traction with a large swath of the population.
The contrast with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could not be more striking. Like them or not, agree or disagree with their policies, the KMT’s politicians know how to play the image game and look professional, even when that image is skin deep. For their part, DPP members often cannot be bothered to dress for the occasion, holding press conferences or hosting major events in jeans and T-shirts.
Sad to say, for politicians to be taken seriously, they need to dress the part, suit and tie and all. This does not mean that their policies will be any better, but it’s part of the game, just as a valet at a five-star hotel must wear the proper attire. Failing to do this, the DPP gives credence to those who dismiss it as a band of ruffians, troublemakers or the Taiwanese equivalent of “rednecks,” which the image-conscious KMT can exploit to its advantage.
Image transcends Taiwan, especially nowadays as the world begins to pay attention to developments involving human rights violations and cross-strait talks. If the DPP and other opposition parties want to be taken seriously by foreign media and audiences — who know even less about the idiosyncrasies of Taiwanese politics and are therefore bound to let first impressions cloud judgment — they will need to dress for the occasion.
With cross-strait rapprochement, Beijing’s policy has been to de-internationalize the Taiwan question by internalizing debate. In its struggle to protect the sovereignty of Taiwan, the opposition must do everything it can to keep the matter internationalized and use whatever means it can to tell Taiwan’s story to the world. The fact that DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) speaks excellent English is already an improvement on the past — one that will help the party reach out to its friends abroad. But if the party and its ideas are to be taken seriously, they will need to dress up.
It shouldn’t have to be this way. But in this world, the cowl does make the monk.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has created a dilemma that could soon cause him to be hoisted with his own petard, bringing his leadership of China to an end. His threatening rhetoric over the unification of Taiwan with China, in which he has said, “we are willing to draw blood if necessary,” has placed Xi in a corner. Xi is portrayed as a strong world leader, yet he has created a scenario for himself that most likely would have an unfavorable outcome. With the 20th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) scheduled to convene this month, Xi cannot
I was privileged to meet with many of Taiwan’s leaders and leading thinkers during a study tour visit in August. One theme I heard several times during that trip was that bad relations between the United States and China benefit Taiwan. At first thought, I empathize with the argument. After all, there is a troubling record of America’s leaders negotiating with Beijing over the heads of Taiwan’s leaders. For example, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt returned Taiwan to China after World War II. President Richard Nixon surprised Taiwan leaders with his 1972 trip to China. President Jimmy Carter unilaterally chose to normalize
Washington’s “one China” policy has not changed and the US does not take a position on Taiwan’s sovereignty issue, a US Department of State spokesperson has said. He said that this has been the principle of US policy toward Taiwan since 1979, and the policy has remained in effect. He also said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has privately made this clear to Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅). The US’ “one China” policy and China’s “one China” principle recognize China as the “representative of China.” The two diverge on the issue of Taiwan: Beijing asserts sovereignty
I live in Taiwan because, like many foreigners, I fell in love with and chose to align my life with a Taiwanese. In an era where personal freedoms are mandatorily ceded to government decree, I am thankful to the Taiwanese government for the spousal visa, as well as the lack of demeaning bureaucratic hoops and hurdles needed to get a work permit, residency permit and healthcare. However, if I then choose to attempt citizenship, this enlightened attitude spasms to seizure, culminating in what appears to be blatant xenophobia. In contrast to Western countries, the path to citizenship mandates a protracted period