06.28.06
Desperate to find a sliver lining
Anyone who’s read my previous comments on the recall process over the last two weeks will know I think it was a ridiculous parody of a properly functioning democracy … hence the ‘carnival of idiots’ tag. So I was interested to read an article by Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) (via ESWN) which tried to put a positive spin on it all.
I have a lot of respect for Lung - she’s a very articulate commentator who manages to be remarkably uncynical and pretty non-partisan (albeit blue-tinted) when writing about Taiwan and its politics. Her articles are almost always worth reading and thinking about. Unfortunately, in this article she seems desperate to spin the recall movement as a ‘victory for the Taiwanese people’:
A glorious day is today. Today is a glorious day. Future history will record that on June 27, 2006, the people of Taiwan exercised to their right to urge a president to resign.
Unfortunately, she’s lost it in the first paragraph:’the people of Taiwan’ have not exercised anything. From the beginning, the recall process has been purely of the politicians, by the politicians, and for the politicians - and it has perished from the earth. She then continues about the average Taiwanese voter:
He has thrown off the chains of power, he has tried elections and he has tried referenda. Now, he has taken another step to attempt an ouster vote. The ouster may not succeed, but the people have issued a clear warning to political figures: I can elect you, and I can also recall you.
Again, she’s wrong. Let me rewrite it for her:
The KMT has lost the reigns of power, it has tried elections and it has tried to block referenda. Now, it has taken another step to attempt an ouster vote. The ouster has not succeeded, but the KMT have been issued a clear warning: It couldn’t beat Chen in elections, and it also can’t recall him.
Not quite such a positive thing now. The sad thing is, she follows up with something I agree with completely:
Nobody in the world can deny this: Taiwan has a group of citizens who have the highest political sensitivity, maturity and autonomy in the entire Chinese-language world.
The Taiwanese voters are an admirable bunch. Unfortunately they regularly elect a group of politicians who have the lowest political sensitivity, maturity and autonomy in the entire democratic world (Update: Sun Bin points out in the comments that there are worse democratic politicians that the Taiwanese. It’s easy to forget that when watching Taiwan Politics!). This apparant disconnect can be explained by the simple question: “How on earth did Chen Shui-bian get elected in the first place?”, to which the answer is “Didn’t you see who he was running against?”.
The article does make a couple of very valid points:
- It is at least a good thing that corruption scandals can be alleged and examined against the president. This touches on something I have been meaning to write about for a while: You can expect corruption in Taiwan to be seen to get worse before it get better. The endemic corruption that has plagued Taiwan for decades is not going to go away overnight - but the increased exposure of individual cases will help reduce it (while increasing its profile)
- Chen Shui-bian (and ALL other Taiwanese politicians) are products of their society. In particular, people go into politics to make money, not to serve the people (of course there are exceptions, but you won’t go far wrong if you use it as a guiding principle).
Midway through the piece, Lung identifies one of the major problems of politics today:
As for an ideal that we can look forward to — who can say what the ideal of Taiwan is? In this society, it has been years since anyone talked about ideals. The entire efforts of the country are invested in the debate over one person. A critical key to solving problems became the source of problems instead.
She is absolutely right - and I would agree with her if she were to say that Taiwan would be better off without Chen as president for precisely that reason. So, if the incessant debate about Chen’s rule is one of the fundamental problems in Taiwan today, then how can a recall process that (from the beginning) had absolutely no chance of success be anything other than a complete disaster? Given her statement above, it’s a pity that Lung doesn’t think to criticize the people who are driving this pointless debate about Chen.
sun bin said,
June 28, 2006 at 12:11 pm
i agree with most of your critics on Lung.
i actually do not think that high of lung.
but i do disagree with your last sentence. well, ‘disagree’ may be too strong a word, i would am just not sure, and would like to dispute it.
you said “[she should] criticize the people who are driving this pointless debate about Chen.”
my question is, is it entirely ‘pointless’? (given that we all know it is going to fail, and i agree it does not achieve much) doesn’t this set a precedence for deterrance on corruption? (regardless of whether the corruption charge is established or not) even on the most powerful person? that even the president needs to be extremely careful?
you may say that the media exposure and an opposition party will ensure this already, but didnt the recall case exerted some pressure on CSB (and future presidents and future ruling parties)?
it is debatable whether the downside overshadows the upsides, and i might agree with you that the downside is larger. but i think one cannot say it is totally ‘pointless’.
on a separate note. i do not understand why political struggles, played within rules and constitution, are always labelled as ‘bad’. (DPP was accused of such bickering pre-2000 and I thought it was unfair to DPP). isn’t this what democracy is about? that we resort to word fights within a set of rule and appeal to the voters, so that we do not have to go for a civil war to sort out the problems.
(fist fights in parliament are violent, they are bad. i think we can agree on it)
many politicians in taiwan have low “political sensitivity, maturity and autonomy”. (i wouldnt say the lowest, they are worse democracies in this world). they often abuse the rules and laws. that does not mean the actions should be generally condemned. i think people in taiwan are now so put off by the bickering that they begin to automatically reject some legitimate means in politics, which may not be healthy in the long term.
ps. i do not think the recall is a smart move for KMT or for MJY.
sun bin said,
June 28, 2006 at 12:14 pm
typo — should be ” theRE are democracies in this world which are worse than Taiwan”
David said,
June 28, 2006 at 2:02 pm
Sun Bin, you ask if the recall entirely pointless. I would argue yes. What did it acheive? It reconfimed to CSB (and prospective future presidents) that no matter how unpopular you become, no matter what you’re accused of, no matter how unpopular you are with your own legislators, you can still rely on your party protecting you. I don’t see CSB being any more careful from now on …
Also (and more damaging) I agree with your final sentence: “i think people in taiwan are now so put off by the bickering that they begin to automatically reject some legitimate means in politics, which may not be healthy in the long term.” THAT is the major result of the recall.
Finally, I agree that the whole recall was done 100% within the rules - the politicians do deserve some credit for that. However, I still think it was stupid
sun bin said,
June 28, 2006 at 2:16 pm
speaking of that, didn’t this cost Bian some political capital/favour when he strived to rally support within DPP and the public?
if so, can this be viewed as some damage (though we can argue if that is sufficient to deter).
David said,
June 29, 2006 at 10:58 am
Yeah - I think it’s a fair argument that the whole thing has hurt CSB … but it’s also hurt Ma & Soong too if you believe recent polling info. I’d also argue that weakening Chen’s grip in the DPP is a good thing - for everyone except the pan-Blues!
I do understand your point of view - but i still feel that any good points out of this whole mess are pretty minimal, and probably could have been achieved without the recall (e.g. you can investigate corruption without the recall).
Michael Turton said,
June 29, 2006 at 12:07 pm
Lung’s article is awful. I’ll focus on its many badnesses later today when I have time. It’s (yet another) example of the pompous, abstract, fact-free horseshit so common among Chinese writers.
She is absolutely right - and I would agree with her if she were to say that Taiwan would be better off without Chen as president for precisely that reason.
She’s absolutely wrong, David. There wouldn’t be any debate over Chen, except that the pro-China parties created it because it hates him for beating them twice. Chen himself has done nothing wrong. Normal democratic processes have caught out his aides — which administration has never had a major aide arrested for abusing his position? — and have put his son in law in jail on charges. Those are actually firsts in Taiwan. The reason we are focused on Chen is because the Blues are totally obsessed with him for beat them.
my question is, is it entirely ‘pointless’? (given that we all know it is going to fail, and i agree it does not achieve much) doesn’t this set a precedence for deterrance on corruption? (regardless of whether the corruption charge is established or not) even on the most powerful person? that even the president needs to be extremely careful?
Be serious. Soong has stolen millions — he was the bagman for the $400 million US payoff in the Lafayette case — and Ma continues to hobnob with local gangsters and corrupt politicians. Why should they or anyone be deterred? The lesson here is that only those who argue that the rules mean something, like the DPP, are vulnerable. Do you think that when the fantastically corrupt Blues are in power the pro-Blue media is going to be all over them? Don’t make me laugh.
Michael
David said,
June 29, 2006 at 12:56 pm
She’s absolutely wrong, David. There wouldn’t be any debate over Chen, except that the pro-China parties created it because it hates him for beating them twice.
Michael, you’re just saying that she’s wrong about the *reason* for the debate (which is also what I was saying). She’s right that polarization and debate over CSB is a big problem which is harming Taiwan. I also don’t think you can absolve CSB of any blame over it either: he does incite this rivalry himself for his own reasons (esp. around election times). I suspect just about any other DPP leader would do a better job of working with the blues (not saying that’s easy though!) - which as president he does have to try to do.
Do you think that when the fantastically corrupt Blues are in power the pro-Blue media is going to be all over them?
Call be a wide-eyed optimist, but I suspect it’ll be a damn sight better (i.e. harder to get away with corruption) than the last time they were in power. I think investigation into corruption is slowly improving (and Chen’s in-law is just one example), but it’s a damn slow process.
sun bin said,
June 30, 2006 at 3:34 am
” I suspect it’ll be a damn sight better (i.e. harder to get away with corruption) than the last time they were in power”
this is where i think lung has a point. this is a double edged sword, it cuts both green and blue. therefore, it is good.
sun bin said,
July 2, 2006 at 11:37 pm
lee tenghui seems to like Lung’s essay a lot. and it was reported he sent it over to CSB!
http://tw.news.yahoo.com/060702/195/3b43x.html
Taiwan Echo said,
July 3, 2006 at 1:59 pm
sun bin said, June 28, 2006 at 2:16 pm, speaking of that, didn’t this cost Bian some political capital/favour when he strived to rally support within DPP and the public? if so, can this be viewed as some damage (though we can argue if that is sufficient to deter).
In several pan-green forums that I visited often, there have always been debates between “criticizing-chen” and “pro-chen-no-matter-what”. Some pan-greens suggest that Chen has to be criticized on a regular basis by his supporters in order for him to stay on the right track. These people even suggested (about a year ago) “giving Chen a lesson” by pushing a recall.
But, when pan-blue started pushing recall this time, all the “criticizing chen” voices from those forums stopped. Those people who suggest criticizing Chen stand behind him 100% now and stand firm against the recall.
So, in terms of didn’t this cost Bian some political capital, it actually looks more like a huge gain of support for Bian (at least in those pan-green forums).