The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was given a bloody nose in the local elections at the end of last year. President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) resigned as chairperson, accusations were made within the party and it looked to itself for answers.
However, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) said that the DPP had not reflected enough, that it had fallen short of the radical transformation the circumstances called for.
In the US, the Republican Party lost the 2020 presidential election and its majority in the US Congress. It also essentially lost the mid-term elections last year. Nonetheless, on Friday, Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel was elected once more to lead the party — her fourth successive victory. The Democrats offered no comment.
DIVERGENT VIEWS
When former vice president Chen Chien-jen (陳建仁) was asked to become the new premier and to form a Cabinet, the KMT said that his team was made up of just the same old faces, that it offered nothing new, that it was “an alliance of losers.”
However, there were government heads within the party who did wish the new Cabinet well, saying that they look forward to working with the central government. They did not whistle the old tune of calling for a radical transformation.
Democratic politics is not about revolution. Governance operates within the system of rules set by the law, ethics and politics. There is no radical transformation, there is just steady reform and development.
Former US president Franklin Roosevelt curbed the excesses of laissez-faire US capitalism and introduced socialist welfare policies in a drive termed the New Deal. It was a major new direction for US politics.
The DPP was born of idealism and intellectuals, and transitional justice is written into its genes; it does have local factions and nepotistic leanings, and yet these do not run anywhere near as deeply as they do within the KMT, which has traditionally enjoyed more power at the local level and in the legislature.
In 2006, when then-premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) was first asked to form a Cabinet, the opposition had a legislative majority, and his government could not get anything done. Things were different when he became premier the second time in 2019, and he was able to get things done, realizing many of the ideals that the DPP held.
Chen is an academic and a devout Catholic. He said he wants to continue the good work of Su and Su’s team. For him, it is important to put to use the talent he has before him, to work for the nation and do his best for the citizens of this country. He has said that he recognizes the contribution Su made, and he understands that his job is to maintain steady progress.
‘OLD FACES’
The KMT’s accusations that Chen is nothing but a caretaker, placed there to execute Tsai’s policies betrays a lack of understanding of how democratic politics works. The electorate entrusts the president to carry out campaign promises and, of course, the Cabinet should have similar ideas and aspirations, not mavericks that fly off in their own direction.
The criticism that the Cabinet is full of “old faces” makes little sense. In the US, when there is a change of party in government, the government is either made up of former government officials of the same party or individuals who have demonstrated their merit in Congress, academia or business. Corporate bosses do not hire their own children to be managers, let alone members of the Cabinet responsible for national affairs.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
The Comedy Club on Fuxing N Road in Taipei was vandalized with paint bombs mixed with feces on May 29, allegedly because one of its performers had satirized Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The incident has triggered concerns about the growing threat from China’s cross-border repression within Taiwan. On the day of the attack, a comedian surnamed Huang (黃), who is known for mocking Xi, was the headline performer. The Comedy Club founder said the assault was obviously politically motivated. China, which Freedom House said “conducts the most sophisticated, extensive and far-reaching campaign of transnational repression in the world,” has
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Zhu Fenglian (朱鳳蓮) at a press conference last week repeated the same, tired line, claiming that Taiwan’s future should be “decided jointly by the more than 1.4 billion Chinese people, including Taiwan compatriots.” The statement is absurd. Virtually every word is incorrect, with some parts mistaken to an astonishing degree. First, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never included Taiwan. When the Republic of China’s (ROC) original five-colored flag was established in 1912, Taiwan was still under Japanese rule. When the PRC was founded in 1949, Taiwan was under the control of president Chiang
Following the outbreak of conflict in Iran, TikTok was flooded with videos targeting Taiwanese users. Many featured artificial intelligence (AI)-generated anchors posing as Taiwanese broadcasters with localized traditional Chinese subtitles. The videos warned of imminent social collapse due to liquefied natural gas shortages, blamed the Democratic Progressive Party and its alleged failed energy policies for a fabricated crisis, and used recycled footage from unrelated events to create the impression Taiwan stood on the edge of systemic breakdown. By saturating the information environment with falsehoods or selectively edited material designed to trigger emotional responses, malign actors can exploit cognitive vulnerabilities and
Taiwan’s leading position in the global semiconductor industry is not, as some claim, based on misconceptions, a result of “stealing.” It was built upon formal, transparent and costly technology transfer agreements between the Taiwanese government and US enterprises half a century ago. According to the oral history of Hu Ding-hua (胡定華), a pioneer in Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, the origin of Taiwan’s integrated circuit (IC) technology dates back to the “IC pilot factory” in the 1970s. The implementation of this project fully complied with international commercial standards and legal procedures. First, the project completed formal contract signing and payment. In 1975,
RSS