In its third term of occupying the Executive Yuan, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has grown dull and lost the power to shape public discourse. The groups that initiated the mass recall movement appeared to be on track to a sweeping victory after getting 32 candidates on recall ballots. By the end of last week, all of the targeted candidates had survived.
By contrast, about 100 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) staff members have been detained or indicted for the forgery of signatures on recall petitions. None of the civil society groups have been accused of such behavior.
Meanwhile, the KMT exhausted funds meant for the next major election to combat the recalls, further draining its strength. What comes next remains uncertain.
The total loss in the mass recall’s final stage was likely a result of issues in language and messaging. The defeat came because the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party camps were backed by professional “united front” units, while the DPP side expected to gain support from volunteers — an inferior plan.
What is more is that there has been no ban on Xiaohongshu (also known as RedNote) or Douyin (the Chinese version of TikTok), nor did the DPP deploy any core force to counter the “united front” work. The entirety of society is seemingly defenseless against disinformation, and young people have been completely brainwashed. Given the circumstances, it would have been strange if the recall movement had not failed.
The DPP still does not understand the new media culture war, nor how to deal with it. It is time for the party to wake up and take a look at the online discourse surrounding elections, which has overwhelmingly become a platform for the CCP’s “united front” efforts.
From the smearing of then-minister of health and welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) during the COVID-19 pandemic to now, nothing has changed. If the DPP does not change course, it would continue to face defeats.
Throughout the recall movement, the outstanding performance of civil society groups and volunteers far surpassed that of the DPP. Unyielding, they moved from the streets to the Internet, bringing the recall initiative to the online battlefield. Citizens used short voice clips, Facebook and YouTube comment sections, to counter the smears, insults and curses of Chinese actors, online trolls and bots, attempting to reclaim their voice and restore balance to the online ecosystem. The public’s spirit is still alive and well — what is concerning is that the ruling party could cause it to die.
Mike Chang is an accountant.
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