Will Intraparty Dissent Fall on Deaf Ears?

Will Intraparty Dissent Fall on Deaf Ears?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 26, 2011

Summary: The Blues and Greens are now meeting on the battlefield. On the KMT side, Ma Ying-jeou is waging a one man war. He comes across as frail and weak. Meanwhile, the DPP is wracked by dissent, which the party leadership completely ignores. President Ma appears exhausted. He appears to be running scared. But the DPP is totally ignoring internal dissent. From the perspective of partisan politics, that is the more chilling proposition.

Full Text Below:

The Blues and Greens are now meeting on the battlefield. On the KMT side, Ma Ying-jeou is waging a one man war. He comes across as frail and weak. Meanwhile, the DPP is wracked by dissent, which the party leadership completely ignores. President Ma appears exhausted. He appears to be running scared. But the DPP is totally ignoring internal dissent. From the perspective of partisan politics, that is the more chilling proposition.

The Green Camp has been wracked by dissent. It began with the controversy over nominations for legislators without portfolio, and continued over recent increases in elderly farmers' subsidies, The party leadership has given dissenters the cold shoulder. This is baffling. Wang Hsing-nan, Ker Chien-ming, and Trong Chai, have ripped away each others' scabs. Are their grudges and differences merely personal? Wang Jung-chang and former political commissar Lin Wan-yi are members of the "fair tax reform alliance." On increased subsidies for elderly farmers, they held one position yesterday, and another position today. They spoke of "safeguarding Taiwan's democracy." They criticized the nominees for legislator without portfolio, saying they reflected "a failure of democratic imagination." Tsai Yu-chuang accused nominees for legislator without portfolio of "questionable personal morals." These are important matters of political ethics and political ideals. Why is the party leadership silent? Is the DPP unable to look at itself in the mirror? Does it lack the courage to accept different opinions?

The DPP is wracked by dissent, The reason is clear. One. the DPP leadership has lost its sense of direction. It has become preoccupied with short term advantage. Two. Tsai Ing-wen's leadership remains in doubt. Three. Personal and factional scores remain unresolved. Four. DPP leaders are torn between idealism and opportunism. Among these reasons, the fourth is the most critical. Alas, for the party leadership, opportunism has clearly already won out.

In terms of political evolution, this is hardly a welcome development. The DPP boasts of its dedication to democracy and reform. The myth of Chen Shui-bian as the "Son of Taiwan" has been shattered. Now however, Tsai Ing-wen is attempting to reconstruct this myth. The constant stream of internal dissent merely exposes the hollowness of this myth. Needless to say, the DPP cannot face the truth. The DPP is a political party that flip-flops endlessly, that says one thing but does another, that pursues short term advantage over long term principles, and that cannot remember what it stands for. How can voters possible trust such a party?

Tsai Ing-wen has repeatedly been forced to eat crow. She has flip-flopped on the Kuo Kuang Petrochemical Plant project, on nuclear power generation, on the 18% preferential interest rate, on ECFA, and on subsidies for elderly farmers. What are her principles for governing the nation? Does she even have hard and fast principles? Just how shrewd is Tsai Ing-wen? Voters have yet to see. But if she ignores the views of her own comrades today, can we really expect her to listen to the people following the election? Isn't that a pipe dream?

These problems are not confined to Tsai Ing-wen alone. They reflect the DPP's lack of openness and lack of self-introspection. When Chen Shui-bian and his family busied themselves with rampant corruption, the DPP mobilized its forces, crushing anyone in the party who dared to oppose corruption. It portrayed them as "brigands," and subjected them to "struggle sessions." Today Tsai Ing-wen and her retinue of supporters know they lack legitimacy. Therefore they turn a deaf ear to dissent. They think if they can suppress dissent, they can convey the illusion of intraparty harmony. But an illusion it all it is. The DPP has foolishly sacrificed its fundamental values, merely to gain an advantage over its enemies in the short term.

The DPP's fickle behavior reveals its lack of consistent principles. Even worse, it reveals its utter selfishness. The DPP is willing to sacrifice the nation, but unwilling to sacrifice the party. Take subsidies for farmers. Concern for the nation's fiscal health, for the systematization of annuities, for the fairness of the welfare system, and for larger scale agricultural problems, mean now is not the time to talk about increases. But the DPP is unwilling to let go of the pork in its mouth, It knows if it takes even one bite, it will revert to form. Nevertheless it cannot resist its own impulses. In fact, four years ago many Pan Greens opposed subsidies for elderly farmers, not just Wang Jung-chang and Lin Wan-yi. But Tsai Ing-wen is surrounded by people preoccupied with seizing power. They do not give a damn how they look.

What's the difference between this election and other elections over the past decade? This election lacks boasting about "reform" and "progress." This is not because political reforms on Taiwan are complete, This is because so many promises of reform and progress turned out to be empty. Reminding voters about them today would merely antagonize them. Hence the appeals to innocent first time voters, begging them to "Save Taiwan!" But no matter how eloquent politicians are, they cannot erase the footprints on the road they have traveled. No matter what rosy promises they might make about the future, they cannot escape the verdict of history. President Ma has been subjected to three years of political inquisition. The DPP's eight years in office was a total wash, marked by endless waffling on issues too numerous to mention. No matter how inexperienced voters may be, they should have no trouble learning the truth. They need only listen to the voices of dissent emerging from the Green Camp.

如果黨內異見全變成狗吠火車
【聯合報╱社論】 2011.07.26

藍綠大選交鋒，國民黨只見馬英九唱獨角戲，形象顯得單薄；相對的，民進黨內部則異聲連連，黨中央卻一概不予理會。從政黨政治的觀點看，民進黨的「狗吠火車」現象，比起馬總統的疲於奔命，景象恐怕更加荒涼。

從不分區提名的爭議，到最近老農津貼的加碼，綠營內部一再傳出不同的聲音；黨中央卻一律以「冷處理」對付，令人費解。其中，王幸男、蔡同榮和柯建銘的互揭瘡疤，若只看作是個人恩怨或路線差異；那麼「公平稅改聯盟」王榮璋及前政委林萬億歷數老農津貼加碼的「昨是今非」，和「守護台灣民主平台」批評不分區立委名單「失去民主想像力」，乃至蔡有全檢舉不分區被提名人「私德不檢」，都是事關政治倫理與從政理想的大是大非，為何黨中央也均不作聲？是民進黨無法面對真實的自己？還是沒有接受不同意見的勇氣？

民進黨內部雜音頻傳，原因不難想像：其一，黨中央決策因利害算計過甚而失去準頭；其二，蔡英文的領導威信仍未能全面建立；其三，個人或派系恩怨無法擺平；其四，「理想路線」與「投機路線」的拉鋸和角力。其中第四點尤為關鍵因素，但從黨中央的作法看，投機路線明顯占了上風。

從台灣政治的發展看，這當然不是一個樂觀的訊息。民進黨一直以民主改革政黨自居，在陳水扁的「台灣之子」傳說破滅後，蔡英文仍企圖重構這個神話；此時內部不斷傳出雜音，難免暴露了綠色神話的虛假，民進黨當然無法面對。而一個反覆善變、言行不一、追逐近利的政黨，連自己的出發點都不記得，又怎值得選民託付？

從國光石化及核電政策的反覆、十八趴的明反暗取、到ＥＣＦＡ的搖擺不定、到老農津貼從「抗稅」到「加碼」的變臉，蔡英文一次又一次吞掉自己過去的大話，她的治國原則是什麼？她有什麼一貫的理念？蔡英文究竟有多英明，選民還未真正見識；但她今天若連同志的不同意見都置之不理，大家要期待她當選後聆聽人民的聲音，豈非癡人說夢？

問題其實不只在蔡英文，而在整個民進黨的開放性及自省能力。當年陳水扁家族傳出貪腐弊案時，民進黨是動員全黨力量來圍剿主張「反貪腐」的人，把他們當成「寇」痛打；今天蔡英文和圍繞在她四周的擁戴者，自知正當性不足，因此以「裝聾」來對付雜音。以為摀住異議，就能塑造黨內和諧美好形象，其實只是幻想。而為了短期的制敵戰略，卻把自己立足的道德大本營拿去抵押，才是愚不可及。

民進黨的善變，除顯示其缺乏一貫原則，更嚴重的是暴露了它「可以輸國家、不能輸政黨」的自私本質。以老農津貼為例，不論從國家財政、年金制度化、福利公平性、乃至解決農業問題等「大我」的角度看，都不應在此刻伺機談加碼。但民進黨就是不甘放棄嘴邊的肥肉，即使明明知道咬一口會讓自己現出原形，還是壓抑不住貪吃的衝動。事實上，四年前反對過老農津貼的綠營人士何止王榮璋、林萬億，但那些一心只想著簇擁蔡英文奪取執政大權的人，已根本不在乎自己的吃相了。

要說這次大選和過去十年有什麼不同，那就是少了「改革」和「向上提升」之類的政治大話。這並非台灣的改革已經完成，而是許多改革口號均已宣告落空，再提只會讓選民反感，所以只能轉向天真的首投族訴求未來的台灣。然而，政治人物再怎麼善辯，終抹不掉自己行過道路的足印；再怎麼訴求未來，也不能擺脫歷史的檢驗。要說馬總統深受三年多的政績糾纏，民進黨空虛及反覆的八年更是罄竹難書；就算再沒有經驗的選民，從綠營內那些此起彼落的異音中，也能捕捉到足夠的真相了。