Lancing Abscesses: Wang Sing-nan and Ker Chien-ming

Lancing Abscesses: Wang Sing-nan and Ker Chien-ming
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 5, 2011

Tsai Ing-wen has pubished her wishlist of the "best" nominees for DPP legislators without portfolio. But it has provoked a string of confrontations within the party. The harshest confronation flared when Wang Sing-nan repeatedly criticized Ker Chien-ming's listing in the number two spot, despite his record of misconduct. Wang demanded that the Party Central Committee withdraw Ker's nomination. Ker Chien-ming meanwhile, accused Wang Sing-nan of selling his soul in a quest for power,

Wang Sing-nan's revolt, of course, represents growing discontent among pro-independence forces within the party. Wang listed Ker Chien-ming's many moral failings. They included his gambling, his ordering of government heads to intervene in public works projects, and his dealings with organized crime. Wang stressed that if the party failed to lance the "abscess" and drain out the "pus," the DPP would suffer "sepsis" and die. Ker Chien-ming meanwhile, argued that Trong Chai and Wang Sing-nan were at the bottom of the list for DPP legislators without portfolio, and that their combined age was 150. Ker was implying that the two men were too attached to the power of their offices, and were refusing to step down. Wang Sing-nan compared Ker Chien-ming to a pus filled abscess. Ker Chien-ming did the same with Wang Sing-nan. Tsai Ing-wen is now confronted with two abscesses. Which one will she lance?

On the surface Wang Sing-nan's attack was directed at Ker Chien-ming. But the real object of his attack was Tsai Ing-wen. Ker Chien-ming's image problem has been around for sometime. But he has always occupied a key position in the party, No one has had the courage to rock the boat. This reflects the two-faced character of the DPP. Tsai Ying-wen trumpets the party's clean image. Yet she designates Ker Chien-ming acting president. She also places him at the top of the list of male candidates for DPP legislators without portfolio. This reveals the two-faced character of the party. These under the table quid pro quos include inequities in the nomination process that lead to dissatisfaction among party members. They also lead inevitably to negative impressions in the public awareness.

In the nomination of legislators without portfolio, Tsai Ing-wen chose not to nominate Taiwan independence hardliners Trong Chai and Wang Sing-nan. She may be trying to underscore the party's youthification and move towards the middle. But Cheng Shu-hua, Ker Chien-ming, and other questionable individuals have appeared on the list of nominees. Add to this a powerful odor of factional quid pro pro deal-making, and one sees little evidence of her alleged commitment to reform and renewal. On the one hand, she refused to nominate Trong Chai and Wang Sing-nan, in order to lighten the party's Taiwan independence coloration. On the other hand, she showed deference for Lee Teng-hui and defended Chen Shui-bian. She clung tightly to the two Taiwan independence leaders. Such contradictory practices reveal just how overextended she is.

Wang Sing-nan pointed the finger at one particular abscess. But that is not the sole abscess Tsai Ing-wen must lance. Eight years under Chen Shui-bian left Taiwan with a particularly large abscess, Has the DPP lanced that one yet? Social divisions, economic stagnation, and an ideology above all atmosphere have left one abscess after another. Has the DPP lanced any of them yet? No it has not. Instead the DPP has covered them up. It thinks that if Tsai Ing-wen applies a little blemish covering over them, the abscesses will be "out of sight, out of mind." Lancing the abscess is too painful. It is better merely to cover it.

Can the party strike a balance between high ideals and reality? Political parties must constantly make adjustments in the pursuit of their goals. From worries the public is whether this ostensibly "democratic and progressive" party can be honest with itself. Wang Sing-nan cast himself as a DPP reformer, determined to "clean house." In fact, he merely underscored the fact that "the Emperor is naked." Even more surprisingly, the DPP leadership turned a deaf ear to him. DPP leaders who have long trumpeted their commitment to "fighting for Taiwan's democracy" uniformly fell silent. Perhaps they all agreed with Wang Sing-nan's suggestion about "selling one's soul?"

Can one discern the emergence of a new spirit from the list of nominees for DPP legislators without portoflio? Not likely. Party factions continue divvying the spoils. Party regulations continue to be trampled underfoot. Questionable politicians continue to occupy center stage. Unqualified middle aged district representatives continue to expect something for nothing. They squeezed out Wang Sing-nan, but kept Ker Chien-ming. They squeezed out Trong Chai, but kept Chen Shui-bian. They lanced this abscess, but not that. They lanced small ones, but not big ones. Shen Fu-hsiung lost a bet and had to sweep the floor in Yu Tien's home. This may have been amusing. But just exactly who is blind?

The confrontation between Ker Chien-ming and Wang Sing-nan was merely a hiccup in the nomination process for legislature without portfolio. But it exposed the most terrifying skeleton in the DPP's closet: the fact that the DPP cannot look itself in the mirror. As an opposition party, the DPP was remarkable in its ability to zero in on the KMT's weaknesses. It was eloquent. It was unstoppable. Armed a magnifying glass, microscope, and funhouse mirrors, it pursued the KMT relentlessly. . But now, having seen its own pus filled abscesses, it desperately hurries to cover them up. It rushes to its own defense. It knows it is sick, but it is afraid to swallow the bitter pills. From 2006, when the Chen family corruption scandals erupted, until now, no one has ever heard of the DPP utter a single word of remorse. How will it deal with problems such as Ker Chien-ming? Consider how it dealt with Taiwan independence. It eliminated spots for Wang Sing-nan and Trong Chai. Yet it reserved spots for Chen Shui-bian and Lee Teng-hui, two giant abscesses who advocate "one nation on each side." They are curing a cold, even as they ignore an abscess in the lungs.

What is this, if not political color blindness? A master at lancing other's abscesses, pretends not to see his own abscesses.

擠膿瘡：王幸男與柯建銘之爭
【聯合報╱社論】 2011.07.05

蔡英文自認提出了民進黨不分區立委「最好的名單」，黨內卻接連爆出爭議。最尖銳的一役，是王幸男遍數柯建銘無行失德卻排名第二，要求黨中央撤銷其提名；柯建銘則稱王幸男為了權位，泯滅人性齷齪至此。

王幸男的發難，自是代表了黨內獨派勢力的不滿。他列舉柯建銘的種種敗德，包括豪賭、指使首長、干預公共工程、和黑道交往等；強調黨若不把「瘡」劃破，把「膿」擠出來，民進黨將得「敗血症」而亡。相對地，柯建銘則稱在不分區名單殿後及落榜的蔡同榮和王幸男合計已近一百五十歲，言下之意，兩人豈可再戀棧不去？兩相對照，王幸男把柯建銘當膿瘡，柯建銘也將王幸男當膿瘡；蔡英文面對這些膿瘡，該擠哪一個？

表面上，王幸男的攻擊矛頭雖是指向柯建銘，但在他的矛尖下現形的，卻是蔡英文。柯建銘的形象爭議存在已久，卻始終在黨內位居要津，無人敢戳破，這是民進黨的兩面性格；而蔡英文標榜形象清新，卻指定柯建銘代理主席職務，又以他為不分區立委名單男性第一名，正是這種雙面性格的流露。這樣的私相授受，擴及至提名不公，遂在內招致同志不滿，在外受到輿論訾議，應屬無可避免。

在不分區提名上，蔡英文棄提獨派的蔡同榮和王幸男，或在顯示「年輕化」及「走向中間」；然而鄭素華、柯建銘等爭議人物的出線，加上派系分贓色彩濃厚，卻讓人看不到她有去腐生新的意志。尤其，她一方面拒提蔡同榮、王幸男以淡化獨派色彩，但另一方面又尊李挺扁，緊抱兩大台獨教主，這種矛盾手法，只是愈發暴露她的捉襟見肘。

蔡英文該擠的，何止是王幸男所指的那顆膿瘡。陳水扁執政八年留給台灣的那一大顆膿瘡，民進黨擠掉了嗎？包括社會撕裂、經濟停滯、意識形態膨脹的那一顆一顆的膿瘡，民進黨又擠掉了嗎？沒有！民進黨一直遮住這些膿瘡，以為只要塗上蔡英文這一劑蓋斑膏，膿瘡就能從國人眼下消失。擠膿太痛，蓋住就好。

如何在高張的理想和現實的腳步之間求取平衡和一致，是一個政黨必須不斷自我調整和追求的目標。從民眾的立場，人們關切的是：這個自詡「民主進步」的政黨，到底還能不能誠實面對自己？王幸男自詡要當民進黨的「清道夫」，其實也只是說出了「國王的新衣」的真相而已。比較令人驚訝的是，黨中央對此充耳不聞，民進黨內那些口口聲聲「為台灣民主打拚」的人卻也全都噤聲不語；他們難道都贊同王幸男「泯滅人性」的說法嗎？

要從民進黨這次立委不分區名單讀出什麼新精神，恐怕已不可能。除了派系的分贓外，既有黨規被踐踏，爭議人物位居前茅，具區域戰力的中生代又廁身其間而欲不勞而獲。擠掉王幸男，留下柯建銘；擠掉蔡同榮，緊抱陳水扁。這顆不擠，擠那一顆；大顆不擠，擠小顆。包括沈富雄因「賭輸」到余天家中掃地，也讓人發噱：眼力有問題的究竟是誰？

王幸男和柯建銘之爭，雖只是不分區提名的一場插曲，卻暴露了民進黨最深的隱疾：它不敢面對的自己。作為一個犀利的在野黨，民進黨多麼擅於揭國民黨的瘡疤；它雄辯滔滔、銳不可當，用放大鏡、顯微鏡、哈哈鏡檢視，窮追猛打。然而，對於自己內部的膿瘡，它卻極力掩蓋，全力辯護，諱疾忌醫。從二○○六年扁家貪瀆案爆發至今，人們何曾聽過民進黨一聲反省；如今，又如何期待它去處理柯建銘之類的問題？即以處理台獨而言，即使擦掉了王幸男及蔡同榮兩塊黑斑，卻留下陳水扁、李登輝及「一邊一國」這幾顆大膿瘡，豈不是只治傷風、不治肺膿瘍？

這是否一種政治色盲：一個擠別人膿瘡的高手，卻裝作看不見自己的膿瘡。