Lu betrays her factionalism
In a press conference on Tuesday, former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮), said that pursuit of a “generational change” within the leadership had caused the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to lose by 800,000 votes in last month’s presidential election. To rectify the error, she proposed a “lineage perpetuation” (薪火相傳) approach instead.
“Lineage perpetuation” is a traditional biological “seeding” expression that is also associated in Taiwan with the continuation of a family clan. In the context of Lu’s statement it has a double meaning. It suggests, on the one hand, that the old revolutionaries, herself being one of them, had been sidestepped.
On the other hand, it suggests that DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is an upstart, who was expediently grafted onto the party not too long ago, and is short on legitimacy to represent the DPP. Hence the loss.
We lament the fact that the DPP lost its presidential bid, because we had hoped that it would win. However, to blame the loss on the generational shift within the party is an insidious oversimplification. If we are to find the causes, we can find a million of them, from ballot fixing to high-stakes underground betting, from vote buying to the intervention of the US and China, or even the will of heaven. The range is as wide and as mind-boggling as the great variety of idols housed in the countless temples throughout the country.
At her press conference, Lu also stressed that what the DPP needs is a leader with a strong personality, capable of dealing with problems courageously and decisively.
The underlying message was to challenge and to discredit the outgoing chairperson’s leadership.
Lu acknowledged the problem of factionalism within the DPP. Unfortunately, her very own words betray the factional spirit she hopes to address.
Yang Chun-hui
Utah
Do not play by KMT rules
Recently, former DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) suggested that the party should review its China policy and move toward the center to reduce the unease of swing voters and woo their votes. Hearing this from someone of Hsieh’s caliber, one can only shake one’s head.
What makes the DPP different from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is the DPP’s insistence on Taiwan’s sovereignty, dignity, freedom and democracy when it comes to dealing with China. These differences are quintessential DPP values.
Yes, China is a rising power in terms of its economy, military strength and diplomacy. As the nation is so close to China geographically, Taiwan should take the chance to be a strategic partner of China.
However, it should not put all its eggs in one basket. After all, China is ruled by a single-party authoritarian system and has explicit territorial ambitions toward Taiwan. Relying too much and too deeply on China, the country will fall into China’s trap and the results will write off all of the nation’s achievements.
In addition, the so-called centrists in Taiwan are people who have no strong political ideology. Like most people, they want prosperity and to live with security and stability, but they don’t care who is their master, or if they live in a one-China cage or if they possess other noble, intangible values. No — most of them are ignorant of Taiwanese history and politics. These ignorant people are people the DPP should try to educate and convert, not the other way around.
So much unfairness and injustice occurred during the recent elections. The KMT resorted to many undemocratic and underhand methods to win. Still, the cold fact is that the country’s voters are not mature or wise enough to make an independent and intelligent choice. They are easily moved by coercion by China and bought off by money, and brainwashed 24 hours a day, seven days a week by subliminal information from the pro-China media. That’s why many Hakkas, Aborigines, military personnel, government employees and teachers have negative feelings toward the DPP and will never vote DPP until something is done to change their perceptions.
In light of the current tactics and strategies used by the KMT, the future of the nation’s democracy is bleak and the DPP will probably continue to lose in future elections if it sticks to the KMT’s game rules.
Yang Ji-charng
Columbus, Ohio
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS