When the Presidential Office announced that President William Lai (賴清德) was going to embark on a series of 10 talks under the umbrella theme of “unity,” Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers immediately ridiculed the idea, saying that Lai himself was the main source of division within the country. This was a sentiment that at least their opposition party colleagues could unite around.
Lai gave the first talk on June 22, followed by a second two days later, in which he focused on the idea of unity and offered olive branches to the opposition KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP): He invoked the achievements of the KMT after its arrival in Taiwan and the political DNA of the TPP’s inspiration, the original Taiwan People’s Party founded by democracy activist Chiang Wei-shui (蔣渭水) a century ago. However, the olive branches were tinged with barbs: The president’s calls for unity were not offered unconditionally.
In his third talk, delivered on Sunday, Lai removed the gloves: His discussion on the nature of the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution and of constitutional government included more explicit criticisms of the opposition parties’ conduct in the Legislative Yuan.
Lai spoke of the conflict in the legislature over certain amendments proposed by the KMT and the TPP that were eventually ruled unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, and asked his audience to consider whether those amendments were in the interests of the nation, or whether they were politically driven: Did the opposition’s proposals meet the needs of the Taiwanese, or the expectations of society?
From here, he warmed to the theme, saying that the “only solution” was “more democracy,” which would start with reinforcing the constitutional system, and which would ultimately serve to let the legislative majority — the opposition — understand the place of the Legislative Yuan within that system.
Expressing his faith in the power of civil movements, he evoked the 1990 Wild Lily student movement, the 2008 Wild Strawberry movement, the 2014 Sunflower movement, the Bluebird movement of last year and this year’s mass recall drive. The first three occurred during KMT administrations, the latter two were driven by public anger over the KMT’s and the TPP’s actions in the legislature.
If the recall movement had been hidden in the background in previous talks, it was thrust front and center in this one. Sunday’s talk was the first time Lai appeared to be willing to be seen as taking a central role in the movement, or at least an overtly supportive one, at the same time taking an adversarial stance against the opposition.
The position Lai that would take on the issue of “unity” over the arc of these 10 talks is now becoming clear: Having laid out his vision of Taiwanese history and identity, the nature of the enemy, the importance of national defense, the value of order within constitutional government and the power of grass-roots movements, he is seeking unity within the country against the opposition parties.
The KMT and the TPP have accused Lai, without evidence, of initiating the recall movement; with this third talk, there have been criticisms from other corners of what some feel are his attempts to appropriate it for his own political ends. Some commentators sympathetic to his agenda have expressed concern that the latter perception would impede his objectives and jeopardize the success of the recalls.
Despite criticisms that Lai appears deaf to the everyday concerns of Taiwanese while he is laser-focused on historical, legal, ideological and abstract concepts, these criticisms depend on what the critics believe is driving the anger behind the recall drive.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
Cosmetics have long been one of the “golden pillars” of revenue for department stores in Taiwan. With rows of beauty counters and a full lineup of brands, they once served as a powerful draw for customers. However, since last year, the halo surrounding the sector has begun to fade. It is not an isolated issue affecting one retailer — it is a widespread phenomenon across department stores in Taiwan. Department store executives admit that business is tough, but they also stress that the root cause is not a drop in Taiwan’s spending power or a surge in outbound travel. Instead, a
RSS