The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) was born of discontent. Many young voters, exhausted by the endless blue-green gridlock, turned to this so-called “third force” in hopes of pragmatic politics, clean governance and a focus on everyday struggles — such as housing, wages and affordability. In 2020 and again last year, they placed their trust in the TPP out of a desperate belief that something different had to be better.
However, since early last year, what once seemed like fresh air has been revealed to be a staleness that is all too familiar.
The TPP has found itself holding the balance of power in the Legislative Yuan. However, rather than using that leverage to mediate between parties or advance practical reforms, the TPP aligned itself entirely with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — a party widely regarded as Beijing’s favored proxy. Together, the TPP and KMT have rammed through controversial legislative reforms, expanded legislative oversight powers to undermine the executive branch and blocked the Democratic Progressive Party government on critical national issues ranging from defense to energy.
This is not principled centrism. It is sabotage wrapped in technocratic packaging, leaving many young voters who once identified with the TPP disillusioned and betrayed.
Democracy requires negotiation and compromise. No party deserves a blank check. What has unfolded since February last year is not power-sharing — it is power-hijacking: A coordinated effort by the KMT and the TPP to paralyze the elected government, erode institutional checks and balances, and impose unpopular legislation without public consent.
That is not just cynical. It is corrosive.
What makes it worse is the nature of the TPP’s power. Of its eight legislators, all are at-large party list appointees. They were not elected by any district. They cannot be recalled. They face no local accountability. They operate without the check of constituency pressure, yet hold the swing votes that now define Taiwan’s legislative outcomes.
Voters who feel betrayed by the TPP’s post-election alliance with the KMT are left powerless.
Former TPP chairman and Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), once the party’s figurehead of reform, is now facing corruption charges tied to his mayorship. However, it is his successor, Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), who is proving to be far more dangerous. Once a leader of the Sunflower movement, Huang has turned into something unrecognizable: a hardliner with little patience for dissent and even less regard for democratic norms.
His role in the recent artificial intelligence tape scandal — where manipulated audio was used to damage political opponents — should have triggered soul-searching. Instead, Huang stonewalled. He provided no real apology or acknowledgment of ethical boundaries crossed. He just delivered more legal threats, media scorn and finger-pointing.
Huang has championed the KMT-TPP “reforms” rammed through the legislature in May last year — which were denounced by legal academics and civic groups as unconstitutional. When citizens poured into Ketagalan Boulevard in protest, Huang dismissed them as misled or manipulated. Civic outrage was treated not as democratic expression, but as political noise.
His tone is increasingly authoritarian — weaponizing “legislative supremacy,” ridiculing journalists, silencing academics and sidelining watchdog groups. It is beginning to mirror the exact autocratic tendencies Taiwan has always stood against.
For those who backed the TPP in the name of party rotation, think again. Yes, alternation of power is a democratic feature — but it is not democracy’s purpose. Elevating party rotation as a virtue in itself is simplistic, even reckless. In any system, blind rotation invites instability. In Taiwan, under the looming threat of China, it can invite disaster. When a shift in domestic politics begins to undermine national security, the pursuit of change for its own sake becomes not just misguided, but dangerous.
The next time a party asks for your vote in the name of being different, ask what that really means, because “different” is not always better. In the TPP’s case, it is turning out to be more cynical, manipulative and aligned with everything Taiwan cannot afford to become.
There is a way for voters — especially those who feel betrayed by the TPP — to make their voice heard. On July 26, Taiwan is to hold recall voting targeting KMT legislators. This is no ordinary election. It is an opportunity for disillusioned TPP supporters to act. You cannot recall TPP legislators directly, but you can recall their enablers.
John Cheng is a retired businessman from Hong Kong now living in Taiwan.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The political order of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) first took shape in 1988. Then-vice president Lee succeeded former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) after he passed, and served out the remainder of his term in office. In 1990, Lee was elected president by the National Assembly, and in 1996, he won Taiwan’s first direct presidential election. Those two, six and four-year terms were an era-defining 12-year presidential tenure. Throughout those years, Lee served as helmsman for Taiwan’s transition from martial law and authoritarianism to democracy. This period came to be known as the “quiet revolution,” leaving a legacy containing light
RSS