Kao's Problem and Lai's Dilemma
By Wu Tien-jung
The Storm Media, January 12, 2023
Vice President William Lai is only one step away from obtaining his ticket to the presidential election after being elected chairman of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) on January 15. His leadership in the DPP will surely affect Taiwan’s future.
The hearts and minds of voters are not always easy to capture, which is why it was difficult to predict the outcome of the local nine-in-one elections a year ago. By observing historical similarities, a pattern reveals that when the DPP suffered a defeat in the local elections, instead of pointing fingers at the core members, it would deal with members who often expressed different opinions, such as Legislator Kao Chia-yu or Taipei City Councilor Wang Shih-chien.
The key to maintaining a pluralistic democracy is its citizens’ ability to tolerate and respect those with different opinions. In 2007, the campaign called “Surgical blade action”, also known as the “11 bandits incident,” was when the DPP was frantic enough to make a separation within the party by alienating 11 party members. When the DPP labeled members who had disagreements within the party as “bandits”, it demonstrated a typical anti-democracy spirit. It makes it impossible for political parties to coexist peacefully and communicate on equal footing.
One may compare the current “rebels" Kao and Wang to the “11 bandits” in the past, but there are major differences between these two groups of people. The most obvious difference being there were eleven party members who had different opinions, now there are only two members. In other words, compared with the past, the DPP is losing its diversity and turning into an echo chamber. Another difference is the ideological stances some of these members now take compared to that in the past. Previously, Wang was a fundamentalist who actively opposed the “eleven bandits”. Now, Wang has become a thorn in the flesh for strong DPP support. In the same way, many of the “eleven bandits” in the past have now become firm believers of the DPP orthodoxy, defending the basic teachings of the party.
Nevertheless, the key difference and change is that almost all the “eleven bandits” were losers in the elections, but now both Kao and Wang are election winners. The comparison between winners and losers is not so much an individual difference, but the actions of the DPP before and after it came to power have indeed changed Taiwan’s political party affiliating sectors and shifted the coordinates of the source of winning votes. The strange thing is that the mentality of the DPP and its supporters seem to have stayed in the past, disregarding the change in the source of support. That is why there is a strange phenomenon in which the party is collectively messing with their election winners. One thing can be sure, the motivation to attack dissidents in politics is usually not superficial belief or ideology, but the struggle for interests and power.
After Tsai Ing-wen was defeated in the 2012 election, she began to form a so-called "progressive alliance" in order to expand her support. The alliances were with third forces, such as social movement groups, and they participated in unity on progressive issues, including environmental protection, labor rights, and gender equality. On top of that, large-scale movements, such as the White Shirt Power Movement and the Sunflower Student Movement, have successfully expanded her range of supporters and gained votes from progressive youngsters. More importantly, Tsai also realized that though the DPP was originally founded as an urban political party, its source of support retreated to the countryside when Chen Shui-ban was in power. Therefore, Tsai purposefully wanted to win back votes from the big cities. Her key move was to not raise up her own people, but instead support the charismatic Ko Wen-je from the Taiwan People’s Party. Her calculation not only won her Taipei City, but it also successfully loosened the DPP and KMT party affiliation based on region. In the two times that Tsai secured electoral victories, she won more votes in Taipei than her KMT opponents. At the same time, DPP candidates who had the right qualifications and were hardworking can finally win a seat in the mixed-member system in Taipei City where there are more KMT supporters. Legislator Kao, who won in Neihu and Nangang districts in Taipei, is the most obvious example.
However, Tsai’s “expedient alliance” in the general election faced its real challenge after she took office. The biggest problem of the Tsai administration is the way it handles dissents. The Tsai administration uses the fact that they hold the majority of seats in the Legislative Yuan to oppress the supervision of the opposition party. As for the third force from the former alliance, those who obey are rewarded with power, and those who insist on their own independence will be attacked by flanks. As for DPP members who do not submit, they are dealt with the strictest party discipline. If any of the current DPP legislators abstain from voting, they will get a penalty point. If it reoccurs, then that DPP legislator’s case will be sent to the Central Evaluation Committee, and in the end, he or she may be suspended and lose eligibility for election. No one dares to disobey when presented with the party discipline that may end one’s political life.
When all the channels of speech are blocked, it hurts the DPP and the Tsai administration the most. A DPP heavyweight who endorsed a candidate said in an interview before the elections that compared to the 2018 defeat, he did not feel the atmosphere of “hate towards the DPP” this time around. His comment proves that a party that excludes dissents is indifferent to public feelings. President Tsai probably had not expected that her “progressive alliance” would change Taiwan’s politics to some extent and unintentionally promote a truly independent third force. As for the DPP, it has not changed according to the times but instead retracted more and more. This way, the DPP is only getting farther and farther away from the public opinion and their return to power.