The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) wants the public to vote on its mascot for the nine-in-one elections. Party leaders presumably view this as an indication of its democratic values and ability to engage with young people.
Mascots and emblems are effective ways to represent an entity, such as a nation, city or organization, be it political, public or private.
To be effective, they should be connected to a location in some way; be distinct, so that they are differentiated from other symbols; be consistent, to capitalize on the recognizability of the symbol; and have an easily identifiable connection with a set of values or a vision.
In Japan, Kumamon has proven to be extremely successful as an instantly recognizable mascot for Kumamoto Prefecture. Bears are not exactly plentiful in Kumamoto, but the connection lies in the name: In Japanese, “kuma” means bear.
Bravo the bear, created for the 2017 Summer Universiade in Taipei, has also proven very popular. The Formosan black bear provides the connection with Taiwan. Unfortunately, it is difficult to differentiate Bravo from Kumamon, and the post-Universiade adoption of Bravo as a mascot for Taipei has served to deepen the confusion.
Singapore’s mascot is the mythical Merlion, with a lion’s head and the body of a fish, “mer” from the Latin for sea and “singa” deriving from the Sankrit for lion. As such, the mascot has a strong connection to the sea and the city-state’s name.
In the US, the stylized elephant of the Republican Party and the stylized donkey of the Democratic Party have their origins in Thomas Nast’s 19th-century cartoons for Harper’s Weekly. The elephant embodies strength and dignity; the donkey intelligence, bravery and tenaciousness. They tick the boxes of consistency, instant recognizability and an identifiable connection with a set of values.
The KMT wants to let the public decide on its mascot, but surely it should be deciding for itself what qualities, values, traditions and ideas it wants to espouse and be associated with. It needs a consistent and recognizable symbol that can be used to represent the party in the long-term.
Not to disparage the designs of any one individual, but what does a plucked chicken say about the party, other than that it is vaguely shaped like Taiwan? Should we take from this that the party has stripped the nation of everything that it can, before stamping its party emblem on the poor bird’s rump?
The issue is not the design, it is the KMT’s willingness to have a symbol that it had largely no direct control over.
Then there is the question of the KMT emblem — the white sun on the blue background — that is all too easily confused with the Republic of China (ROC) national flag. Of course, this dates back to the early days of the KMT’s rule, when there was no discernible division between the party and the state.
That emblem is pregnant with meaning and controversy, and a change might be overdue.
The Conservative Party in the UK did it in the late 1980s, transitioning from the red, white and blue of the Union Jack to a solitary blue after the Labour Party adopted the color red — long considered a symbol of anti-authority, the blood of martyrs and socialism — and the rose, the national flower of England.
If the KMT needs inspiration, it could look to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) emblem: the shape of Taiwan, in solid green, set on a white cross on green ground and surrounded by a multicolored circle to represent diversity and inclusion.
Say what you want about the DPP, but its emblem contains its identity and vision, and while it might claim to represent the entire nation, there is no pretension to equating the party with the state.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
A large majority of Taiwanese favor strengthening national defense and oppose unification with China, according to the results of a survey by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). In the poll, 81.8 percent of respondents disagreed with Beijing’s claim that “there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China,” MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) told a news conference on Thursday last week, adding that about 75 percent supported the creation of a “T-Dome” air defense system. President William Lai (賴清德) referred to such a system in his Double Ten National Day address, saying it would integrate air defenses into a
RSS