The New Taipei City mayoral race should have been a matter of local politics. Instead, due to political coordination between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), along with maneuvering by TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), it has devolved into an absurd spectacle centered around one individual’s political survival.
Huang has publicly stated that, although the TPP ostensibly maintains the principle of forming the strongest possible team with the KMT, he personally does not rule out throwing in his lot with the campaign of Deputy Taipei Mayor Lee Shu-chuan (李四川), who has already submitted his resignation to prepare for a mayoral run. Such an absurd declaration is more than just strategic maneuvering — it exposes the loosening of party boundaries. Party identity, individual political survival and voter expectations have all become entangled in an unsolvable triangle.
The KMT-TPP political coordination is not merely a strategic arrangement, but a transactional operation conducted under the guise of democracy. In a reality where he has been largely rejected by the public, what Huang seems to care about is how to sustain his personal game of survival within the political arena. Ideals, sincerity and party loyalty have been all but stripped away, leaving only the convertibility of political capital.
What is even more absurd is that, as TPP chairman, Huang’s role should be to uphold the party’s boundaries and ideas, yet the party’s boundaries have become a strategic cushion for Huang and its symbols serve as endorsements of individual maneuvering. Under Huang’s calculations, voters’ ideals, expectations and political loyalty are reduced to mere byproducts — he delivers strategy when you expect sincerity and flexibility when you expect clear boundaries. This kind of manipulation reminds us that democracy can often become decoupled from political substance.
This election highlights a core dilemma in the nation’s local politics — the subtle, intertwined relationship between party boundaries, individual strategy and voters’ expectations. Cooperation between political parties might appear sincere, but it is, in reality, transactional. Individual statements might seem transparent and democratic, but they are merely extensions of a personal game of survival.
Voters do not just cast their ballots, they also become witnesses to and bearers of the flow of political capital. Only by understanding this can one avoid being misled by appearances.
Liu Che-ting is a writer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
On Feb. 7, the New York Times ran a column by Nicholas Kristof (“What if the valedictorians were America’s cool kids?”) that blindly and lavishly praised education in Taiwan and in Asia more broadly. We are used to this kind of Orientalist admiration for what is, at the end of the day, paradoxically very Anglo-centered. They could have praised Europeans for valuing education, too, but one rarely sees an American praising Europe, right? It immediately made me think of something I have observed. If Taiwanese education looks so wonderful through the eyes of the archetypal expat, gazing from an ivory tower, how
China has apparently emerged as one of the clearest and most predictable beneficiaries of US President Donald Trump’s “America First” and “Make America Great Again” approach. Many countries are scrambling to defend their interests and reputation regarding an increasingly unpredictable and self-seeking US. There is a growing consensus among foreign policy pundits that the world has already entered the beginning of the end of Pax Americana, the US-led international order. Consequently, a number of countries are reversing their foreign policy preferences. The result has been an accelerating turn toward China as an alternative economic partner, with Beijing hosting Western leaders, albeit
During the long Lunar New Year’s holiday, Taiwan has shown several positive developments in different aspects of society, hinting at a hopeful outlook for the Year of the Horse, but there are also significant challenges that the country must cautiously navigate with strength, wisdom and resilience. Before the holiday break, Taiwan’s stock market closed at a record 10,080.3 points and the TAIEX wrapped up at a record-high 33,605.71 points, while Taipei and Washington formally signed the Taiwan-US Agreement on Reciprocal Trade that caps US tariffs on Taiwanese goods at 15 percent and secures Taiwan preferential tariff treatment. President William Lai (賴清德) in
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Deputy Chairman Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑) earlier this month led a delegation to Beijing to attend a think tank forum between the KMT and Chinese Communist Party (CCP). After returning to Taiwan, Hsiao spoke at length about “accumulating mutual trust” and letting matters “fall into place,” portraying the forum as a series of discussions focused on cooperation in tourism, renewable energy, disaster prevention, emerging industries, health and medicine, and artificial intelligence (AI). However, when the entire dialogue presupposes the so-called “1992 consensus — the idea that there is only “one China,” with each side of the Taiwan
RSS