In his book Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries, published in 1999, US political scientist Arend Lijphart analyzes the forms of government of 36 democracies and divides democratic systems into two main categories — majoritarian and consensus democracies.
The principal difference between the two, according to Lijphart, is that “the majoritarian model of democracy is exclusive, competitive and adversarial, whereas the consensus model is characterized by inclusiveness, bargaining, and compromise.” More importantly, consensus democracy emphasizes the process by which consensus is formed, whereas majoritarian democracy stresses the conclusion drawn by the majority, and then forces everyone to accept it.
Following Democratic Progressive Party Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) proposal to establish a “Taiwan consensus,” the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has repeatedly attacked the idea as being void of content. If one understands the spirit of consensus democracy, one can see why Tsai has not responded to the KMT’s criticisms by making more specific proposals.
That is because the spirit and content of a “Taiwan consensus” are not to be formed according to the pattern of majoritarian democracy, whereby Tsai would propose them and then, once everyone had accepted them, they would decide by voting. Rather, they must be the product of a certain procedure whereby the Taiwanese public would first discuss the issue and make compromises among themselves. Only such a Taiwan consensus — one tempered by public opinion and discussion — can form a stable and durable basis for interaction with China.
In the movie Warriors of the Rainbow: Seediq Bale, which describes conflict between the Sediq and the Japanese colonial authorities, Dakis Nomin, a Sediq who worked as a policeman and teacher for the Japanese, advised the rebellious Mona Rudao to put up with the situation for another 20 years, but Mona Rudao’s reply was that in 20 years there would be no Sediq anymore.
From 1992, when Taiwan held its first-ever election for all legislative seats, to 1996, when the nation held its first direct presidential election, Taiwan completed its first wave of democratization under the temporary structure of the Additional Articles of the Republic of China Constitution. Next year’s presidential and legislative elections will mark 20 years after the start of this democratization process.
There would be no point in denying the contribution that this temporary structure has made to Taiwan’s democratization and peace, but two decades have passed and we are now faced with a rising China and international realities that have greatly restricted Taiwan’s foreign relations. President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) continued groveling to China has whittled away Taiwan’s sovereignty and dignity. Faced with an environment that is likely to get even worse, we can’t ask Taiwan to wait any longer.
We cannot think of going back to the way things used to be, like Ma does, and instead of arguing about whether there ever was such a thing as a “1992 consensus,” we should go forward in accordance with the spirit and structure of a Taiwan consensus.
Only a thorough review of the ways in which Taiwan interacts with China, including the Constitution, can ensure that Taiwan keeps developing vigorously.
Lee Ying-yuan is a former Cabinet secretary-general.
Translated by Julian Clegg
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
When a recall campaign targeting the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators was launched, something rather disturbing happened. According to reports, Hualien County Government officials visited several people to verify their signatures. Local authorities allegedly used routine or harmless reasons as an excuse to enter people’s house for investigation. The KMT launched its own recall campaigns, targeting Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers, and began to collect signatures. It has been found that some of the KMT-headed counties and cities have allegedly been mobilizing municipal machinery. In Keelung, the director of the Department of Civil Affairs used the household registration system