The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have disregarded procedural justice and disguised their attempt at a power grab as legislative reforms, which has sparked a public outcry.
More than 100,000 people, without being mobilized by any political parties or being led by a specific person, gathered outside the Legislative Yuan on Friday last week in opposition to the controversial reform bills.
The protest has been called the Qingniao movement (bluebird movement, 青鳥運動), named after Qingdao E Road (青島東路) where the protest took place. “Qing” means blue and “dao” contains an element meaning “bird” in Chinese. It is the biggest social movement in Taiwan since the Sunflower movement.
Protestors in the Qingniao movement behaved in a peaceful and rational manner.
The movement was organized by the public and encouraged people from all walks of life to speak up for democracy, with young people making up the biggest percentage of the crowd.
So far, KMT and TPP lawmakers have been determined to ignore the protest and disregard transparency in legislative processes to pass the so-called reform bills, which are actually unconstitutional, to expand legislative power.
Even though it does seem as if protesters’ demands are being ignored, there are still options for the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Votes are the key to solving these problems.
Therefore, those who participated in the Qingniao movement should not be pessimistic.
Taiwan’s next local elections are to be held in one-and-a-half years, which would allow eligible voters to teach these democracy vandals a lesson.
Taiwanese should first use their voting rights to prevent TPP Legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) from ever becoming mayor or county commissioner and remove KMT lawmakers.
Liu Shih-ming is an adjunct associate professor in the Graduate School of Taiwanese Culture at the National Taipei University of Education.
Translated by Hsieh Yi-ching
Taiwan’s domestic political situation is following recognizable political rhythms, while the international environment surrounding Taiwan is undergoing a major transformation. Within Taiwan, there are ongoing battles between the legislative and executive branches over the budget, and between cities and the central government over resources. Tensions between political parties dominate headlines and consume much of the attention of party leaders. Jockeying is underway for local elections this November and national elections in 2028. And the longstanding philosophical debate inside Taiwan over how best to protect Taiwan and promote the good life remains unresolved. Amidst all of this, Taiwan continues to function well. It
In an article published on Tuesday in The Atlantic, titled “Will Taiwan Just Give Up?”, journalist Simon Shuster emphasizes the unpredictability of the US as an ally under US President Donald Trump and cites diminishing faith in the US as a contributor to what he sees as waning determination to resist China. As the title suggests, Shuster views a deal between Taiwan and China as an increasingly inevitable alternative to a costly war — one that Taiwan, lacking reliable allies and military capabilities, would eventually be destined to lose. He focuses on Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) — her
With candidate registration for this year’s local elections closed on Sept. 4 and the elections less than 80 days away, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator and Taipei mayoral candidate Puma Shen’s (沈伯洋) rapidly growing popularity has become the focus of political talk shows and online discussions over the past week, heating up the mayoral election race in Taipei. Local media headlines and political pundits have picked up his supporters’ slogan “ocean current” (洋流) — a play on the last character of Shen’s name, which literally means “ocean” (洋), and the character (流), which can mean “current,” “flow” or “trend” — to
When was the last time you heard a meaningful proposal to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal? There has been nothing on the subject since the June Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran; the promised 60 days of talks to settle questions around Tehran’s uranium-enrichment program never began and have long since expired. When the war was launched, on Feb. 28, a resolution of the nuclear dispute was prominent among the dizzying array of US and Israeli aims to explain the attack. But as should be clear by now, the attempt was entirely reliant on achieving regime change. That
RSS