Cutthroat Island

Cutthroat Island
United Daily News editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
June 26, 2007


Cutthroat Island (1995, directed by Renny Harlin, written by Michael Frost Beckner and James Gorman)

The Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) "Cutthroat Election Campaign" has begun. The DPP's cutthroat strategy divides the party's election platform into different planks. When it comes time to cut the throats of political rivals, each is cut using a different technique.

Campaigns for major elections such as legislative elections and presidential elections require political platforms that can rally the people, that reflect their aspirations and goals. The DPP has been unable to offer such a political platform. Therefore it has transformed elections into cutthroat wars. Elections are no longer mechanisms for comparing political perspectives and reaching consensus. They are national catastrophes that tear the nation apart.

The DPP uses the "rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution" to cut the throats of Deep Green political rivals. The DPP uses "development of rural communities" to go cut the throats of political rivals dependent upon farmers. But even assuming the DPP wins these elections, does that really mean Taiwan independence has scored a victory? By the same token, is the "development of rural communities," a policy intended to phase out agriculture altogether, truly advantageous to Taiwan independence?

One need only examine two recent campaigns launched by the DPP to realize that Lee Teng-hui was right. The DPP's brand of Taiwan independence is a fraud. Let's examine the DPP's platform for the "reduction of military service to one year" and its platform for the "development of rural communities." If one truly intends to promote Taiwan independence, one must make preparations for war. If one nullifies one's ability to wage war while engaging in wild talk about Taiwan independence, that is phony Taiwan independence. If one reduces military service to one year, so that even corporals are a thing of the past, how can one possibly fight a war? To phase out agriculture in order to develop rural communities, is to open a Pandora's Box. It is nothing less than a declaration of surrender, nothing less than giving up on Taiwan independence.

This is the real consequence of the DPP's cutthroat campaigns. The DPP's "rectification of names and authoring of a new constitution" plank has cut the throats of Deep Green political rivals. The "reduction of military service to one year" plank has cut the throats of political rivals dependent upon military servicemen. The "development of rural communities" plank has cut the throats of political rivals dependent upon farmers. Three throats cut using three different techniques, all are critical to the election results, but none have a common denominator, and some even conflict. The Taiwan independence movement has been rendered toothless, its ability to fight a war for independence neutralized. An agricultural policy that endured for 60 years has been repudiated. Even assuming the DPP wins the election, the nation will pay a heavy price, and everyone will be the loser.

For eight years, the DPP has been squatting in the halls of power, abusing its authority to satisfy its power lust, indulging in corruption to line its pockets. Now, relying on its authority as the ruling regime, it has launched its insane "Three Middles Policy," targeting the central and middle regions of Taiwan, small and middle enterprises, and middle and lower income voters. Previous cutthroat wars promoting the DPP's "welfare subsidies for the elderly" plank and "welfare subsidies for elderly farmers" plank were small potatoes. At most they consumed some public funds. Today's "reduction of military service to one year" plank and "development of rural communities" plank will weaken the island's military capabilities and destroy the island's agricultural base. How can such pork barrel politics not shake the foundations of the nation?

The DPP's Taiwan independence agenda boasts constantly evolving cutthroat techniques. One minute it announces its "Five Noes." The next minute it announces its "Four Imperatives and One Non-Issue." The current "rectification of names and authoring a new constitution" plank, having cut the throats of the Deep Greens and consolidated Chen Shui-bian's hold on power, is complete. As we approach election season, the Taiwan independence plank has faded out. Now it is time to cut the throats of swing voters. Oddly enough when the DPP engages in deception to cut the throats of the Deep Greens, they passively acquiesce. Conversely, when the DPP cuts the throats of swing voters, they voluntarily extend their necks as well.

Deceptive Taiwan independence appeals to Deep Greens, in addition to "Three Middles Policy" political patronage, cannot establish a coherent political and economic agenda for the nation, or indicate the direction it ought to go. If the DPP wins the election, would that amount to a victory for Taiwan independence? Or would it amount to a victory for political patronage? Furthermore, once they win the election, do they intend to use "Three Middles Policy" political patronage to promote Taiwan independence and the "rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution?"

But at least the DPP has a strategy. At the strategic level, it has its Taiwan independence election rhetoric. At the tactical level, it has its pork barrel election techniques. Its cutting techniques may be different, but the throats cut are the same. By contrast, Ma Ying-jeou's Kuomintang (KMT) has neither fresh concepts, nor effective countermeasures. All it can do is watch passively as the DPP's "Three Middles Policy" cuts one KMT throat after another. When we look at the two camps side by by side, the winners and losers are obvious.

As each segment of society's throat is cut, so Taiwan's throat is cut.


Cutthroat Island

Original Chinese below:

割喉戰：利刃劃向役男及農夫的咽喉！
【聯合報╱社論】
2007.06.26 02:56 am

民進黨的「大選割喉戰」已經全面發動。所謂「割喉戰」，就是將原本被視為「整體」的選舉，分割成一塊一塊的「區塊」來看待，亦即區分為一個一個不同的「喉嚨」來處理。割喉時，對於每一個「喉嚨」，皆有不一樣的「割」法，刀工亦自不同。

照理說，在國會改選或總統大選這類最高層次的選舉中，應當有一套足以號召全民的綱領性訴求，以反映全民的總體利益與期待，為國家指出全民共同的追求與歸趨。但是，民進黨由於未能建立一個足以號召全民的綱領性訴求，竟將選舉變成了「割喉戰」；用不同的「刀工」，來切斷不同的「喉嚨」。選舉非但不再是政見評比與整合的機制，反而成了撕裂國家的災禍。

例如：一方面用「正名制憲」來「割」深綠的「喉嚨」，這是一種「刀工」；另一方面又用「開發田園社區」去「割」農民的喉嚨，這又是另一種「刀工」。然而，如果民進黨未來贏了選舉，這能證明是台獨贏得了勝利嗎？相對而言，「開發田園社區」這類「廢農政策」，又難道有利於台獨嗎？

其實，只要細究民進黨最近發動的兩種「割喉戰」，即知民進黨的「台獨」根本如李登輝所說是一個「假議題」。一、兵役減為一年；二、開發田園社區。若要台獨，即須有戰爭的準備；但若自廢作戰的準備卻妄言台獨，就是假台獨。然而，兵役減為一年，連「上等兵」亦因役期縮短而可能成為歷史名詞，豈能作戰？開發田園社區，打開了「廢農政策」的潘朵拉魔盒，更不啻是宣示放棄戰爭，亦即放棄了台獨。

這就是「割喉戰」的真實效應：民進黨用「正名制憲」割了深綠的喉嚨，再用「兵役減為一年」割了役男的喉嚨，另用「開發田園社區」割了農民的喉嚨。三個喉嚨分別以三種不同的刀工割斷，而三個被割斷的喉嚨皆變成關鍵的選票；但是，三個斷喉之間並無一致的政策邏輯，且可能相互矛盾；台獨破滅了，國防虛弱了，維護了六十年的國家農業部門也解構了。民進黨即使贏了選舉，國家卻將付出全盤皆輸的代價！

八年來，民進黨盤踞政府之內，濫權縱欲，貪腐自肥；如今又憑藉其執政權力，瘋狂發動以「三中政策」（中南部、中小企業、中下階層）為目標的「割喉戰」。如今回顧，過去老年津貼及老農津貼的「割喉戰」，其實只是小兒科，頂多消耗一些公帑；現今搞到兵役減為一年、開發田園社區的地步，竟是要以弱化國防及停廢農業為代價了！這樣的「政策賄選」，豈不是要「動搖國本」？

尤有甚者，民進黨之台獨訴求也有變化不定的「割喉刀工」。一下子說「四不一沒有」，這是一種「割」法；一下子又說「四要一沒有」，則是另一種「割」法。如今看來，這一波「正名制憲」的亂刀狂割，似已完成了「階段性任務」，割斷了深綠的喉嚨，亦即穩住了陳水扁的權位；現在隨著漸漸進入大選的情勢，台獨論述已不無淡出的可能性，這是為了割「中間選民」的喉嚨。奇怪的是，民進黨以「自欺欺人」的手法割深綠的喉嚨時，深綠甘心被割；回過頭來割「中間選民」的喉嚨時，「中間選民」也一樣伸長脖子被它割！

對深綠「自欺欺人」的台獨號召，加上對「三中階層」的政策賄選，這樣的選舉不能塑造國家政經總路線，亦不能指出國家未來的方向與目標。民進黨若贏得選舉，究竟是「台獨」的勝利？或是政策賄選「割喉」刀工的勝利？再者，一旦勝選以後，難道要以賄選所獲的「三中階層」的支持，來繼續推動正名制憲的台獨路線？

不過，無論如何，民進黨總算有一套大選戰略。就高層次言，以台獨論述為基調；就低層次言，以政策賄選為手段。刀工不同，割喉則一。相對而言，國民黨馬英九方面，在高層次上始終未能建立鮮明的主體論述，就低層次言，亦只能坐視「三中階層」等等一個一個喉嚨被人割斷。兩相對照，消長立見。

當一個一個「區塊」的咽喉被一一割斷，台灣的咽喉也被割斷了！