The Democratic Progressive Party was not the only loser on Saturday, as voters also dealt a heavy blow to the LGBTQ community, as well as human rights and equality in Taiwan.
All three referendums proposed by groups opposed to marriage equality were passed, while two others put forward by LGBTQ rights advocates did not even breach the minimum threshold.
The government should closely review how the referendum process works, as the Central Election Commission (CEC) was clearly not prepared to handle 10 referendums simultaneously, after handling only six in 2004 and 2008.
Not only were the referendums a logistics nightmare, which caused long lines and an extra burden for election staff, the wording of the questions was problematic and potentially misleading: Five questions were about essentially the same issue, with three coming from a single organization that sought to overturn rulings that had already been deemed constitutional.
Holding the referendums cost taxpayers an additional NT$1.3 billion (US$42.1 million), which is not a small amount, not even for a state: The Central News Agency has reported that the government had to dip into the Executive Yuan’s secondary reserve fund to finance the referendums, as it had no extra budget for them.
Referendums are a crucial part of democratic governance, but if Saturday’s debacle was any indicator, every election from now on will become a nightmare for the CEC and the public.
A mechanism must be put in place to regulate referendums.
The CEC was already under fire for rejecting many proposals earlier this year.
However, it allowed three proposals that, regardless of their wording, were clearly discriminatory against LGBTQ people who are just as much a part of society as everyone else.
Human rights cannot be put to a vote. If so, where does the government draw the line? What happens if a group proposes a referendum discriminating against migrant workers, albeit in a way that is technically legal? Will that be approved as well?
People should be voting on issues that affect the entire nation, not on those that target a certain group.
A perfect example is referendum #16, as it relates to the Electricity Act (電業法) and the fate of nuclear energy in Taiwan, which affects everyone and is crucial to the nation’s future.
People need to ask whether the referendum system and the burden it creates are really helping the nation and its people find a way to move forward together. Or is it further dividing an already fractured society and complicating policymaking?
For example, the government had already scrapped the Shenao power plant project in October, but people still voted on it on Saturday — a complete waste of money and effort.
Referendums should be a mainstay of Taiwan’s shining democracy, but they should not be allowed to continue in this form.
This was the first time that proposed referendums were passed, raising many questions as to what will happen next.
Only referendum #16 would have a direct effect on the law; the rest are opinion questions and are open to interpretation.
The elections showed that the public is extremely unhappy with the government, which should tread carefully from now on, as it cannot afford to make any more empty promises.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
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
RSS