According to the Mandarin Chinese version of Wikipedia, a political party is “an organized group of people formed with the goal of implementing, advancing or protecting specific political ideas or interests... Political parties usually have specific political goals and ideologies, and an agenda on a range of national and societal issues.”
Since political parties are organized groups, they cannot exist with just one member. A so-called “one-man band” party does not mean a party made up of only one person, nor does it mean a “ghost party.”
As a bare minimum, it must include a chairperson, deputy chairperson, secretary and deputy secretary, but often also includes a small army of spokespeople responsible for each policy area, and a central or executive committee.
During elections, political parties extol the virtues of their selected candidates, and occasionally, a handful are thanked for their troubles by the electorate and are voted into office.
The unique quality of a one-man band party is that, at some point in the party’s life — perhaps from its very inception — its chairperson assumes the role for life and the party is molded in their image.
The chairperson is synonymous with the party. Whenever a person mentions the party, one immediately thinks of its chairperson and whenever a person mentions the name of its chairperson, one instantly thinks of the party.
As for the party’s annual conference, almost nobody outside the party knows or is in the least bit interested in when it is held or how many members are to attend. Even the chairperson might be sketchy on the details.
Over a nine-year-and-10-month period, the New Party’s National Executive Committee had 12 people who served as conveners during a total of 10 sessions. During that time, nobody called it a one-man band.
However, when Yok Mu-ming (郁慕明) became its 10th convener, he seamlessly pirouetted to the role of party chairman. This turned into a second term as chairman and a third, until on Feb. 21, he became the party’s “honorary chairman” and the chairmanship passed on to former Kinmen County deputy commissioner Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典).
There is another “new party” that has had one person ensconced in the position of party chairman for 18 straight years: The People’s First Party (PFP) and its chairman, James Soong (宋楚瑜).
Yok’s and Soong’s parties are both classic one-man band parties. Both started out aggressively, but turned out to be a flash in the pan, unable to alter the political climate in Taiwan.
The New Party hit its peak in the December 1995 legislative elections, but declined thereafter as its constituency began to shrink. It was soon marginalized.
The PFP began to lose momentum after 2001, and it has gone from bad to worse over the years. Its most talented individuals have been poached and it has had no energy to fight back.
One-person parties lack marketability.
Last year, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) formed the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP): a quasi-one-man band party.
There are two possible outcomes for the TPP: It will either become trapped in the bubble of a one-man party, or will grow into a pivotal new force in Taiwanese politics.
It all depends on whether the party is able to avoid being led down the blind alley of a one-leader, perpetual chairmanship under Ko.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor of National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Edward Jones
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
Numerous expert analyses characterize today’s US presidential election as a risk for Taiwan, given that the two major candidates, US Vice President Kamala Harris and former US president Donald Trump, are perceived to possess divergent foreign policy perspectives. If Harris is elected, many presume that the US would maintain its existing relationship with Taiwan, as established through the American Institute in Taiwan, and would continue to sell Taiwan weapons and equipment to help it defend itself against China. Under the administration of US President Joe Biden, whose political views Harris shares, the US on Oct. 25 authorized arms transfers to Taiwan, another
Navy Commander Admiral Tang Hua (唐華) said in an interview with The Economist that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been implementing an “anaconda strategy” to subdue Taiwan since President William Lai (賴清德) assumed office. The Chinese military is “slowly, but surely” increasing its presence around Taiwan proper, it quoted Tang as saying. “They are ready to blockade Taiwan at any time they want,” he said. “They give you extreme pressure, pressure, pressure. They’re trying to exhaust you.” Beijing’s goal is to “force Taiwan to make mistakes,” Tang said, adding that they could be “excuses” for a blockade. The interview reminds me