Even compared with the five other special municipalities under direct Executive Yuan governance, the advantages enjoyed by Taipei are exceptional. Unlike New Taipei City — which was created by elevating the former Taipei County to special municipality level — and Taoyuan, Taichung, Tainan and Kaohsiung, which were all created by combining the cities with the counties, Taipei is all urban, without rural areas.
New Taipei City envelops both Taipei and provincial-level Keelung, making it something of an administrative wonder.
The population of Taipei is not the biggest of the Cabinet-governed cities, nor is it the largest in terms of area, but it is still the nation’s capital, with the largest budget and the best infrastructure.
While Taipei is more like one of Tokyo’s districts, such as well-known Ginza, Shinjuku and the other 21 districts. New Taipei City is like the cities within Tokyo, such as Hachioji, Narita and Tama, and the other 23 cities.
Taipei and New Taipei City were made into two Cabinet-governed cities as a result of political infighting and competition.
Tokyo’s districts and cities have local autonomy, unlike the townships that used to exist in what is now Taiwan’s special municipalities that have been converted to districts: They have no autonomy and district administrators are appointed by the government.
The populations of some of the districts in New Taipei City are bigger than some counties or provincial-level cities, so there seems to be a certain level of political backsliding or even disorder.
It is also a bit odd that there would still be such a thing as a provincial-level city, as the provincial government has been abolished.
The elevation to special municipality was mainly the result of a grab for funds allocated by the central government. If local government leaders are a bit like old feudal lords, then this is even more true of special municipality mayors.
Narrow departmentalism overrides concerns for regional balance, and counties and cities with large populations made a grab for money without any concern for the other counties and cities that were unable to get an administrative upgrade.
However, what has happened to the remote areas of these counties after their elevation and after they got their hands on all that money and power? Does any other nation have cities with such large remote areas?
Disputes over national identity have become even more obvious within parties at the national and local levels, as was made abundantly clear in November’s nine-in-one elections.
Taipei has been called the “Kingdom of the Heavenly Dragon” — because of its long-standing image as a Chinese city — and “Chinese Taipei,” and because its status as the nation’s capital has meant that its infrastructure is prioritized — the MRT system is a good example — its mayors have looked down on the rest of Taiwan, although its development has not much to do with their contributions.
Other special municipalities do not build MRT systems or other facilities because they have to borrow money and will end up losing money. It is not strange that there is a backlash against the central government.
Balanced regional development is good for all Taiwanese, but politicians ruled by narrow departmentalism often seem to prey on local and class divisions.
There are too many people who think too highly of themselves and lack any concept of national unity and community. When the local government heads that reigned victorious in the elections took up their positions late last month, one of the new mayors put on quite a show. Before even knowing what it means to run a big city, these new government heads were already competing with each other.
A small nation should be more intent on community and shared development than other nations, but the six special municipalities rule a large majority of the nation’s population, and the lopsided development of Taipei is making Taiwan top-heavy.
Self-conceited Taipei thinks of itself as thriving, magnificent, wealthy and noble, and the other five special municipalities are not far behind.
However, what about all the other cities and counties? Are their residents lower, second-class citizens?
Rebuilding a nation and reshaping society requires a new vision. It is only by destroying the myth of the special municipality that Taiwanese will be able to bring a new vision to local governments.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Perry Svensson
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS