The results of the recent nine-in-one elections came as something of a shock to everyone in Taiwan.
Much of the ensuing debate has centered upon the new Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) phenomenon, following Ko’s victory and the subsequent whirlwind he has created. After all, what we have here is a person with no political experience, no people behind him, no resources to speak of and no political party supporting him behind the scenes, in a very brief period of time whisking away the powerful Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Lien (連) family dynastic political juggernaut and turning Taiwanese politics on its head.
And it was not only in Taipei that this phenomenon was felt: It also spilled out into other cities and counties around the country. True, the issue has already been much discussed, and many have put in their two cents’ worth. Still, there are a few points that bear further emphasizing.
First, the concepts of open government and transparency of information, and how the two are to be practiced, are worth remarking on. This is because government wields power in the public sphere, which it dominates and has a monopoly over, and the inefficiency of monopoly and minimum contribution to social well-being are well-documented in economic theory. Even more so, asymmetry of information is detrimental not just to consumers, but also to the public in the political sphere.
A more open government and transparency of information should allow for joint participation in the political process by the public, so that everyone can do their bit as part of the group for the greatest benefit of society as a whole. After all, the residents of a city should understand that it is the collective possession of everyone who lives in it, and that they should all play an active role in how it is run. People have become accustomed to the idea of “big government,” and became dependent. The “One City, One Family” motto offers the possibility of changing this.
Of course, habits were not formed overnight, and once they have taken root, changing them will be no easy thing. In the way that Ko formulated and ran his campaign, and in the way he made important information public, we can see a real “can-do” approach. That is certainly not to say that overturning the current situation would be simple, but where there is a will, there is a way.
Second, an open and transparent government means truth and honesty, while the trajectory of our society is, unfortunately, very much in the other direction. Besides the “blue-green” divisions, we also face serious ethnic, class, gender and inter-generational tensions, and insincerity, mendacity, selfishness, self-interest and greed are all pervasive and present. It has got to the point where you have to look over your shoulder at every pass. Things need to get better, not worse, but the majority of people have already lost faith.
Ko won the favor of the electorate by basing his campaign on goodwill and in changing the culture and values of society, and by not making empty promises. He held to these principles throughout, and worked hard, winning himself recognition among voters in the process.
Third, Ko is well aware that few people are perfect, and people will always get things wrong. He also knows that you cannot make an omelet without breaking a few eggs: It is by making mistakes that you know what needs to be improved. He is quite happy, then, to make suggestions and to proffer opinions, and to invite others to be critical and indicate their preferred path. After all, public service is all about people, and you cannot please everyone all of the time.
This is where communication and finding agreement come in, and why harmony is so important. The role of government is to referee, to create a harmonious environment in which communication is possible. It cannot be referee and a player at the same time. It also has to ensure that all parties to the discussion are sincere.
As far as the conventional wisdom that says the mayor ought to be cautious in what he says and not go shooting off his mouth is concerned, does it really matter if everyone is invited to discuss a policy before it is fully formulated? Should not everyone take an active interest in public matters? Surely, the more people that participate in the process, the better. Why does this have to be a matter of concern?
There is no reason, then, for Ko to be anybody other than himself now that he is mayor. He does not need to suppress his nature. Why should he have to mold himself to the style of traditional bureaucrats? However, while statistics can be used in decisions involving pathologies in individuals, they should not be used for those concerning public affairs. In such cases, prudence is certainly advisable.
Finally, it is worth pointing out that in last month’s elections, four doctors were elected as city or county heads. The US Republican Party also has a doctor as a rising star, and he is a strong candidate for the White House. Is this generation witnessing a sea change in politics?
Wu Hui-lin is a researcher at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS