Self-deception and Public Deception

Self-deception and Public Deception: How will the DPP reclaim the Mandate of Heaven?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 14, 2008

The Democratic Progressive Party has lost its status as the largest party in the Republic of China legislature. It is now a small party with only 27 seats. That's hardly the worst of it. The DPP has lost its status as spokesman for "native values," for "democracy," and for "Taiwanese values." That is what dealt the DPP its fatal wound.

The United Daily News noted this in yesterday's editorial. Even during the "dang wai" (party outsider) era, when the political opposition was weak, it had an aura of moral legitimacy and idealism. Today, by contrast, the DPP has not merely become a small party with less than a quarter of the seats in the legislature, it has lost its political idealism and its political legitimacy. For the DPP, that is its real tragedy.

Chen Shui-bian has turned the chairmanship of the party over to Frank Hsieh. But many observers feel that in style and temperament, Chen and Hsieh are Tweedledum and Tweedledee. The two differ only in their packaging. Therefore, whether Frank Hsieh has the ability to lead the DPP down the path toward genuine reform remains a huge question.

The DPP lost the election because it lost the Mandate of Heaven. It lost its idealism and its legitimacy. The DPP's "championing of democracy" was once one of its selling points. But look at how it has undermined the rule of law. Look at how it has become the bane of democracy. So-called "nativism" was once one of the DPP's selling points. But its rampant corruption has made it an detriment to nativism. The DPP's championing of Taiwan independence was once its "jewel in the crown." But its reckless brinksmanship has left Washington and Taipei at loggerheads. The DPP has torn society apart and discredited Taiwan independence as a political movement. The public has repudiated the DPP's boast that it represents the will of the people and the values of the community. Today, Chen is stepping down and Hsieh is stepping up. The Democratic Progressive Party's primary mission should be to reclaim its idealism and political legitimacy. It needs to reclaim its lost mandate.

The DPP's most fundamental character defect is its prediliction for self-deception. The proximate cause of its recent debacle at the polls is Chen Shui-bian's self-deception. The long term cause is Lin I-hsiung. Lin I-hsiung demanded that the legislature be halved in size, and that it adopt a Single Member District, Two Ballot System. It was rumored that one reason Lin wanted this system was that it would prevent "wai sheng ren" (mainlanders) from being elected to the legislature and ensure the future of the "nativist path." Events however have confirmed that such a system won't necessarily exclude "mainlanders." If anything, its adoption has resulted in the wholesale repudiation of the Democratic Progressive Party's so-called "nativist path." And so it is with the DPP's Nuclear Free policy. Opposition to nuclear power may be idealistic. But if one is in the midst of an energy crisis, one can hardly ignore practical concerns. Lin I-hsiung exploited his saintly image within the Green camp to demand a Nuclear Free island. The public was moved. But energy policy after all, is not merely a moral issue. It is also a practical issue.

The DPP has marched itself into a blind alley precisely because it has engaged in self-deception. It is the victim of its own self-induced hypnotic spell. Take Taiwan independence for example. Taiwan independence may involve idealism. but also requires wisdom. Whatever legitimacy Taiwan independence might have accrued in its moral account, has been swiped to the limit by the Democratic Progressive Party. The DPP has ripped apart society and the nation. It has put Washington and Taipei at loggerheads with each other. Yet the DPP still considers itself the voice of Taiwan independence. It still believes it has the right to "champion" Taiwan independence, by any means at its disposal. This is how the Taiwan independence movement is deceiving itself and deceiving others.

Look at the Democratic Progressive Party over the past four years. Look at Chen Shui-bian's rampant corruption. Yet the DPP persists in regarding itself as the standard-bearer for clean government. Look at how the DPP has undermined relations between Washington and Taipei. Look at the people's suffering. Yet the DPP imagines it can shift the focus of public attention by having the CEC package-deal its phony "Join the UN" plebiscite with the presidential election. Society has been ripped apart. Blood flows in the streets. Yet the DPP persists in its rabid anti-Chiang campaign. To top matters off, the DPP sicced its attack dogs on the public: Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng, Government Information Office Chief Hsieh Chi-wei, and General Secretary of the Ministry of Education Chuang Kuo-jung. They carried out the DPP's dirty deeds. So this is what "native values" were all about? So this was the DPP's conception of democracy? So this was what the DPP meant by "Taiwanese values?" This election gave the DPP an answer: You can deceive yourselves, but you cannot deceive the people.

If Frank Hsieh and the DPP are searching for Heaven's Mandate, they must cease attempting to deceive the people. Not deceiving the people means not deceiving yourself. Is the DPP willing to forsake its Quixotic "Resolution for a Normal Nation" and return to its more pragmatic "Resolution on Taiwan's Future?" Is the DPP willing to stop demagoguing the phony "Join the UN Plebiscite" and earnestly confront the real challenges of governance? These are Chen Shui-bian's axes to grind. They ought to disappear along with Chen.

It is said that over the past year Chen Shui-bian took the DPP hostage. In fact the DPP was in a self-induced hypnotic trance. It deceived itself. It allowed itself to be taken hostage. Is the Chen Shui-bian Path the Democratic Progressive Party's elixir of life? Is the DPP the flag bearer of political justice and "Taiwanese values?"

Chen Shui-bian has announced his withdrawal from the DPP chairmanship. Frank Hsieh and the DPP must stop attempting to deceive the people. The DPP must not continue down the Chen Shui-bian path under another name. More importantly, Frank Hsieh must not be allowed to become "Chen Shui-bian the Second."

自欺欺民：民進黨如何尋回失落的天命？
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.14 11:03 am

民進黨從國會最大黨輸成只占二十七席的小黨，這不是最嚴重的事；民進黨經此選舉，輸掉了本土精神、民主意義及台灣價值的代表性，這才是致命傷。

昨日本報社論指出：即使在黨外時代，反對勢力雖小，但有其正當性及理想性；相對而言，民進黨如今不但輸成不及國會四分之一席次的小黨，更已失去了做為政治理想的代表性與正當性，這才是怵目驚心的歷史悲劇。

陳水扁把黨主席交給謝長廷，不少觀察者認為，就二人的根本氣質及權謀風格而論，不啻只是由「第一個陳水扁」，交給了「第二個陳水扁」；謝扁二人的差異，只在口號與手法上的包裝不同而已。因而，謝長廷能否領導民進黨走出精神及路線層次的真正變革，此時在多數國人心中恐怕皆是一個問號。

民進黨的這次慘敗，是「天命」的喪失，也就是理想性及正當性的喪失。民主原是民進黨的招牌，但如此毀憲亂法，卻成了民主的蟊賊；本土原是民進黨的本色，但如此貪腐，已成了本土的罪人；台獨原是民進黨的壓箱之寶，但操作到美台反目、社會撕裂的程度，亦已玷汙糟蹋了台獨。國人透過這次選舉，不承認民進黨再有代表本土精神、民主意義及台灣價值的資格；因而，如今扁下謝上，民進黨的首要使命，即在必須設法回復其理想性及代表性，亦即必須設法尋回喪失的「天命」。

民進黨最根本的病因是「自欺欺人」。此次選舉的近因在於陳水扁的「自欺欺人」，遠因卻或許可推到林義雄。國會減半及單一選區兩票制為林義雄所力倡，當時傳聞的諸種理由之一，是此制將使「外省人」難以進入國會，則本土路線即可確保；然而，如今非但證實此制未必能夠排除「外省人」，且甚至初次採行即全盤否定了民進黨所謂的「本土路線」。異曲同工的是「非核」政策，反核確有理想性；但若置於能源危機的視野來看，卻也不能沒有現實考量。林義雄以「人格者」的形象，力倡非核反核，確實感動人心；但能源政策畢竟不只是一個道德問題，更是一個知識議題。

民進黨走進了今天的死胡同，正因「理想蒙蔽了自己，自己又蒙蔽了理想」的自我催眠所致。以台獨為例：台獨是一個理想的議題，但也是一個知識的問題。台獨有其理想性及正當性，但民進黨將台獨操弄到今日這種社會撕裂、國家分裂、美台反目的地步，卻是玷汙糟蹋了台獨；但民進黨仍認為自己是台獨的代言人，有權力以一切不擇手段的方法去「捍衛」台獨。這正是：「理想」蒙蔽了自己，自己又蒙蔽了「理想」；「台獨」蒙蔽了自己，自己又蒙蔽了「台獨」。這不是「自欺欺人」，是什麼？

看一看四年來的民進黨，陳水扁貪腐猖狂至此，民進黨卻仍視其為旗手；美台關係破壞至此，民進黨亦在所不惜；民生民瘼痛苦至此，民進黨卻轉移視聽至「入聯公投」；「入聯公投」虛假至此，民進黨還要操弄中選會「公投綁大選」；社會撕裂、血流不止，民進黨卻仍要「去蔣拆匾」……。是的，當然有「上杜下謝又連莊」等無數鷹犬，為民進黨執行這些傷天害理、違憲亂法的惡行；但是，這一切的一切，難道是本土精神？難道是民主真諦？難道是台灣價值？這次選舉，給了「自欺欺民」的民進黨一個答案：你可以「自欺」，卻不能「欺民」。

民進黨及謝長廷若欲尋回「天命」，就不能再「欺民」；而「不欺民」的前提，則是在「不自欺」。例如，要不要從《正常國家決議文》，重新回到《台灣前途決議文》？要不要停止操作「入聯公投」的假議題，認真面對國家治理的真挑戰？因為，那些皆是「陳水扁議題」，皆應隨陳水扁退場。

過去一年，民進黨被陳水扁綁架挾持，其實正是陷於一種「自欺欺民」的自我催眠狀態。自欺：陳水扁路線是民進黨的救命還魂丹嗎？欺民：民進黨是政治公義及台灣價值的掌旗人嗎？

如今，陳水扁已然在口頭上宣示退場，民進黨及謝長廷就不能再「自欺欺民」；民進黨不可再走「沒有陳水扁之名的陳水扁路線」，謝長廷更不可再做「陳水扁二世」！