The era of mass recall campaigns has seen bizarre incidents — among the most startling are “ghost signatures,” or deceased people’s names showing up on recall petitions.
During the first-phase recall petition against Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶), it was revealed that 108 signatures belonged to people who had died before the petitions were filed.
As the proposal’s initiator, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Youth League member Lee Hsiao-liang (李孝亮) found himself under fire for the scandal. His mother came forward, saying senior KMT officials pressured her son into spearheading the campaign. Even KMT city councils believed it was normal for Lee to have access to the party roster.
The person who copies the roster should be held responsible for any issues that arise — not a young person such as Lee, who should not have to shoulder such a burden alone.
Lee joined the KMT recently and was still in the exploratory phase, yet he took on such an important task. It would be a lie to say he did not face any external pressure. It is quite possible that his superiors manipulated or persuaded him, leaving a young, inexperienced and new party member with no room to refuse.
The situation reminds me of my high-school days when my classmates and I were summoned to listen to a speech. We barely understood what was being said, yet somehow, by the end, we had all joined the KMT. It felt like manipulation — or perhaps something more subtle and insidious, like group hypnosis.
I cannot say with certainty that Lee was tricked into joining the KMT. I believe he is a young person with enthusiasm for politics. However, I cannot help but question whether the KMT’s culture is problematic.
I feel for Lee — he was thrust into the front lines, with no clear way to retreat, and bears the burden as a scapegoat for something he might not fully understand. Is it really fair to place that weight on someone so young?
Perhaps that is the main reason why the KMT struggles to recruit young members— the party’s internal culture is opaque and lacks respect for young people. Watching them throw a young person such as Lee directly into the line of fire, only evokes sympathy in me, especially as someone who has experienced similar dynamics in the past.
If that culture is not addressed and reformed, the gap between the KMT and younger generations would only continue to grow.
Li Kuan-long is a university professor.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS