The Name-Callers' Comeuppance

The Name-Callers' ComeuppanceChina Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 16, 2010

Many things in life cannot be understood until one has personally experienced them. Many people are accustomed to cavalierly smearing others. But only when they are the targets of such campaigns can they truly appreciate how vicious they are.
Kaohsiung County Chief Yang Chiu-hsing recently declared himself a candidate for Kaohsiung City Mayor, and voiced his support for ECFA. He was immediately accused of "selling out Taiwan" and "pandering to [Mainland] China." He conceded he had smeared others the same way in the past, and therefore these smears left a deep impression upon him. As we look back today, perhaps we should ask ourselves whether other victims of such smear campaigns really were guilty of "selling out Taiwan?"

Yang Chiu-hsing was probably speaking from the heart. This five-star rated county chief merely announced his candidacy and called for a pragmatic review of the pros and cons of ECFA. But that was all the DPP nomenklatura needed to denounce him as "selling out Taiwan" and "pandering to [Mainland] China." That was enough to leave him speechless and unable to defend himself. Many rival party leaders know exactly how he feels. So do many DPP politicians. Unfortunately they usually engage in earnest soul-searching only after they have been sidelined and pushed out of the party's mainstream.

Cavalierly accusing others of "selling out Taiwan" is an expedient and anti-intellectual political tactic. It is expedient because it requires no proof and is impossible to defend against. It is anti-intellectual because it incites irrational passions. It reduces political and policy debate to name-calling and dogmatism. Even more frightening, it is a weapon to crush dissent, not just from rival parties, but even from rivals within one's own party. It leads to a party with a single voice. It permits only the rote repetition of dogma. It makes progressive thought impossible. Its most vicious after-effect is the manufacture of public hatred. It mires society in inextricable chaos, and retards the nation's progress.

Just how much truth there is to charges of "selling out Taiwan?" The Taiwan Region of the Republic of China has undergone democraticization. Therefore it belongs to all its citizens. It is not something that can belongs to any one individual. Therefore how can it possibly be sold out by any one individual? The President is merely a person elected by the people to administer for four years. Taiwan is not his personal property. As Yang Chiu-hsing noted, even assuming Ma Ying-jeou wanted to sell out Taiwan, he would have to call for a public referendum and a constitutional amendment. Selling out Taiwan is easier said than done. Since no one individual has the power to sell out Taiwan, the charge is essentially empty one, a lie.

Taiwan was once ceded, occupied, and subjected to martial law. The people truly did not determine their own destinies. Their sense of powerlessness and insecurity left a dark shadow. This makes it easy to revive old fears. This may be understandable, but it does not reflect reality. The people are now the masters of the nation. Whether to reunify or to become independent, can be decided only by legal procedures, not by any particular individual or inviduals. Attempting to apply old thinking in a new era can only leave one lost and directionless. Perpetually looking over one's shoulder can neither solve current problems nor enable one to plan for the future.

Yang Chiu-hsing feels that if Taiwan and the Mainland can coexist in peace, if they can treat each other with respect, both their economies will benefit. If the opportunity arises, he will emulate Yunlin County Chief Su Chih-fen and Tainan County Chief Su Huan-chih. He will visit the Mainland to promote the economic interests of businesses on Taiwan. Such voices of pragmatism have gradually begun to emerge within the DPP. They have begun to challenge the Deep Green party line. As they see it, the DPP cannot allow itself to fall behind the KMT in seeking business opportunities for its constituents. Cross-Strait exchanges are increasingly at a breakneck pace. If the DPP insists on treading water, the public on Taiwan will leave it behind. Therefore it must face reality and attempt to keep pace.

The DPP has long been the hostage of Deep Green ideology. So much so that when faced with major changes such as the rise of Mainland China and cross-Strait reconciliation, it was left dumbfounded and unable to cope. Why? Because the DPP is accustomed to exploiting the provincial origins issue. It has benefitted politically from cross-Strait hostility and "ethnic" (communal) tensions on Taiwan. Actually, even assuming one advocates Taiwan independence, as long as one is willing to shelve disputes, one can still promote cross-Strait exchanges. Attempting to help the Mainland understand and respect Taiwan is also a viable option. But the DPP has always defined residents of the Province of Taiwan and the island of Taiwan as victims of oppression, and itself as its loving guardian. Needless to say the role of villain has been assigned to [Mainland] China. Because unless the villain is sufficiently evil, the the value of the DPP will come into question.

Beijing has allowed Mainland tourists to visit Taiwan and made major concessions to Taiwan regarding ECFA. Local leaders have visited the Mainland in order to promote local agricultural products. Democratic Progressive Party and Deep Green forces have lashed back, insisting that Taiwan will eventually suffer dire consequences. After all, if the two sides reconcile, the Democratic Progressive Party will lose its raison d'etre. Alas, the DPP's logic has become less and less convincing. Not because people are naive, but because Mainland China's existence and rise to power is an unavoidable reality. To survive, they must face this reality and attempt to seize any opportunities for their own benefit.

Pragmatism has gradually emerged within the DPP. A political platform for the coming decade is in the works. The Democratic Progressive Party is about to engage in a struggle over its political future. This is more than a change in election strategy. The DPP must rethink its party constitution and its political niche. It must rethink its vision of cross-Strait relations and Taiwan's economic future. Cross-Strait relations are an unavoidable issue for Taiwan and the DPP. Chronic resort to smear tactics will only leave the DPP blinkered and blind. DPP leaders must have the courage to open their hearts and minds. Only then will the DPP become a party able to offer new hope for Taiwan.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2010.08.16
社論－當扣帽子的人被扣上帽子時
本報訊

很多事，不是親身經歷過，無法感受其滋味。當習慣動不動就扣別人帽子的人，有朝一日自己也被扣上帽子時，才能真正理解這種抹黑行徑有多麼粗暴惡毒。

高雄縣長楊秋興宣布參選並表達有條件認同ＥＣＦＡ後，立即被扣上賣台、傾中帽子，他感慨坦承，自己過去也曾犯同樣毛病，如今感受特別深。現在回想起來，似乎應該想一下，別人是不是真的會賣台？

楊秋興說的應該是真心話，這位五星級縣長只不過宣布參選並主張務實看待ＥＣＦＡ，就從民進黨菁英變成賣台傾中的叛徒，一個大帽子扣下來，讓人百口莫辯。這樣的滋味，民進黨的對手都嘗過，包括不少黨內同志，可惜通常要等到被排擠出主流之後才開始反省。

動輒扣人「賣台」帽子，是一種既廉價又反智的行為。廉價，是因為它不須舉證不容申辯；反智，是因為它訴諸感性煽動情緒，讓政治議題與公共政策的討論退化成簡單的標籤化與教條化。更可怕的是，它成為整肅異己的武器，不只對付其他黨派，更用於黨內鬥爭，使得黨內只剩下一種聲音，除了覆誦教條難以再進步。而它最惡毒的後遺症，是在挑撥人民對立製造仇恨，讓社會陷入撕裂紛亂難以自拔，束縛了國家前進的腳步。

而「賣台」這頂帽子到底有多少真實度，也頗值得懷疑。一個已民主化的台灣，主權屬全體國民，不在哪個人手中，又豈是任何人可出賣的？總統不過是被人民選出來施政四年的人，並不擁有國家主權。誠如楊秋興所說，即使馬英九要出賣台灣，也須經過公投、修憲程序，要賣台那是那麼容易。既然沒有誰有權賣台，那麼這樣的指控只是虛偽的謊言。

過去的台灣，曾經被割讓、被占領、被戒嚴統治，人民的確無法決定自己的命運。那時的無力感與不安全感，至今仍然留下陰影，很容易被喚起恐懼，這是可以理解的，但這已不是事實了。人民現在是國家的主人，要統要獨，大家可以經由法定程序來決定，沒有誰說了算。用舊思維活在新時代，是找不到方向的，因為一直往後看，既解決不了當前的問題，更無力規畫未來。

楊秋興認為，台灣與大陸若能和平相處、禮尚往來，經濟發展才能互蒙其利。有機會的話，他也會學雲林縣長蘇治芬、台南縣長蘇煥智前往大陸促銷。這種務實的聲音，近來在民進黨內部逐漸浮現，開始挑戰僵化的深綠路線。一方面是為選區爭取商機不能落於國民黨之後，一方面也是在兩岸關係大步往前時，民進黨如果堅持留在原地，就會被整個台灣社會拋下，因此必須正視現實努力跟上。

長期以來，民進黨被深綠意識形態捆綁，以至於面對中國崛起及兩岸和解的重大變局時，幾乎瞠目結舌不知如何應對。究其原因，和習慣操縱省籍情結，從兩岸敵對及台灣的族群緊張中獲取政治利益有關。其實即使是主張台獨，如果願意擱置爭議，也未必不能推動兩岸交往；而努力讓大陸理解及尊重台灣，也可以是一種路線選項。但民進黨向來把本省族群和台灣定位為受欺壓的被害者，而民進黨是愛台灣的捍衛者，那麼就很難解除中國的惡棍角色，因為惡棍如果沒那麼惡，民進黨的存在價值也會動搖。

因此可以看到，當對岸在開放陸客來台及ＥＣＦＡ中大幅對台讓利，當地方首長紛赴大陸促銷農產品時，民進黨及深綠陣營仍不斷宣稱台灣終會嘗到苦果，因為兩岸如果真的和解，民進黨也會失去定義自己的戰線。但這種邏輯愈來愈難說服民眾，不是因為老百姓天真，而是大陸的存在與崛起是不可迴避的現實，要生存就要面對，並且抓住或創造對自己有利的契機。

隨著黨內逐漸出現務實主張，以及十年政綱的研擬，民進黨終究要進行一場路線之爭。不只是選舉策略的改變，更必須重新思考政黨體質與定位，以及兩岸關係遠景與台灣發展方向。兩岸是台灣無可迴避的問題，對民進黨也是，老是施展「帽子戰法」，最後只會遮住自己的眼睛。民進黨必須勇敢放開心胸，尋找一個能夠為台灣帶來新希望的新民進黨。