Middle-Aged DPP Supporters Express Reservations about Tsai Ing-wen

Middle-Aged DPP Supporters Express Reservations about Tsai Ing-wen
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 17, 2011

Summary: Recently, middle-aged DPP members have repeatedly expressed reservations about Tsai Ing-wen. Former legislator Julian Kuo said Tsai Ing-wen's cross-Strait policy is "too abstract." Former MAC Vice Chairman You Ying-long said that an election campaign without Chen Shui-bian is "very boring." You also criticized current party leaders, saying they failed to inspire a "sense of pride" among the people of Taiwan. Former Chen Shui-bian Office Director Chen Song-shan was even more blunt. He said Tsai Ing-wen's "Plaftorm for the Coming Decade" is probably a "hollow political platform."

Full Text below:

Recently, middle-aged DPP members have repeatedly expressed reservations about Tsai Ing-wen. Former legislator Julian Kuo said Tsai Ing-wen's cross-Strait policy is "too abstract." Former MAC Vice Chairman You Ying-long said that an election campaign without Chen Shui-bian is "very boring." You also criticized current party leaders, saying they failed to inspire a "sense of pride" among the people of Taiwan. Former Chen Shui-bian Office Director Chen Song-shan was even more blunt. He said Tsai Ing-wen's "Plaftorm for the Coming Decade" is probably a "hollow political platform."

That middle-aged Green Camp supporters have expressed such doubts about Tsai Ing-wen is not surprising. In fact, those outside the Green Camp have long felt that Tsai Ing-wen is guilty of "policy ambiguity." They voiced many of these same criticisms long ago. Now these same doubts are being voiced within the Green Camp. Now the public sees how anxious and conflicted middle-aged DPP supporters feel. Some middle-aged DPP supporters are even openly expressing "nostalgia" for Chen Shui-bian. They are clearly far more conflicted about the direction Tsai Ing-wen and the DPP are taking than the general population.

Tsai Ing-wen joined the party relatively recently, in 2004. She never participated in the street protests and violent clashes during the DPP's wild days. She has no trouble drawing a line between herself and that period of DPP history. Therefore, in the eyes of the general public, she has a unique appeal. This chairman has been a party member for only seven years. She is about to name a mysterious person with no party affiliation as her vice presidential runnng mate. Suppose the two are lucky enough to win next year? Will the Democratic Progressive Party be hijacked by these two strangers? This is a concern shared by many within the Green Camp. Even Taiwan independence elder Koo Kuan-min objects to Tsai Ing-wen's cross-Strait policy, saying it "lacks content." Clearly the vacuum at the heart of Tsai Ing-wen's political platform has many people worried. The Blue Camp has Blue Camp worries. The Green Camp has Green Camp worries.

Tsai Ing-wen's vagueness and ambiguity is puzzling. What exactly is her problem? Is it that she "does not want to express her position?" Or is it that she simply "cannot express her position?" Is she maintaining a low profile merely to leave as much room as possible for the imagination? Or is she remaining ambiguous merely to avoid criticism and to avoid provoking a backlash inside and outside the party? If so, her lack of specificity is understandable. But perhaps her lack of specificity is merely high-profile posturing. Perhaps her campaign committee cannot think of a reasonable response? If so, her artful dodging deserves the epithet, "kong xin cai," or "hollow at the center Tsai," a pun on the word for water spinach. Real world evidence suggests the latter is more likely.

Over the past few days, a number of middle-aged DPP insiders have attacked Tsai Ing-wen. This phenomenon is worth pondering. Tsai Ing-wen won her party's nomination through fierce competition. She forced the party princes and Taiwan independence elders into silence. But many party insiders were part of the student movement. They consider themselves war veterans. To win votes, the DPP is afraid to say what it stands for. They consider this intolerable. Worst of all, they have been sidelined during the campaign. They cannot hear what plays the coach is shouting. They cannot see the numbers on the green flag. Naturally they are plagued with doubts.

These middle-aged DPP supporters are expressing reservations about Tsai Ing-wen. One point must not be ignored. During their conversations they have expressed nostalgia for Chen Shui-bian. They feel Tsai Ing-wen is less able to rally the troops than Chen Shui-bian. Julian Kuo said that Tsai Ing-wen's "policy is hazy, voters are few, and the mood is indifferent." He said she should study "A-Bian's Art of War," and generate a little excitement. You Ying-long was more blunt. He said "Chen Shui-bian enabled the people of Taiwan to feel proud, very proud." He said those who control the party machinery, but who distance themselves from Ah-Bian, are "definitely lost, confused people. They are people who are holding Taiwan back from its destiny."

We do not know why Tsai Ing-wen has failed to win the hearts of these middle-aged DPP insiders. But You Ying-long's remarks suggest that three years in the political wilderness has taught the DPP nothing. Chen Shui-bian was notorious for his rampant corruption and disastrous policies. How could You Ying-long possibly boast that Chen Shui-bian enabled the people of Taiwan to feel proud? He could only do so by totally blanking out Chen Shui-bian's crimes against the people. Elections in which Chen Shui-bian ran as a candidate may have been "more interesting." But lest we forget, Chen Shui-bian's campaign approach was "winning is everything, therefore win by any means available." He ignored the consequences, and the price paid by society. If DPP insiders are still waxing nostalgic over those days, what does that say about the future of our democracy?

A wave of criticism against Tsai has been followed by a wave of nostalgia for Ah-Bian. This suggests a sense of loss among these middle-aged DPP insiders. They cannot forget the glory days, when they followed Chen Shui-bian into battle. But they have also blanked out the shame and dishonor Chen Shui-bian brought upon their party. They wring their hands. They fear the DPP has lost its direction. But in their desperation they seek answers in the wrong places. In fact, the problem is not limited to middle-aged DPP insiders. This is a problem that plagues the DPP as a whole. Tsai Ing-wen's prevarication and equivocation, also reflect this problem.

Middle-aged Green Camp supporters have reservations about Tsai Ing-wen. In fact, everyone in the DPP seeks answers to this problem. But unless they can be honest about their eight years of corruption and scandal, answers will not be forthcoming.

民進黨中生代對蔡英文的質疑
【聯合報╱社論】
2011.08.17 03:03 am

民進黨中生代最近連續對蔡英文提出質疑。前立委郭正亮認為，蔡英文的兩岸政策「太抽象」；陸委會前副主委游盈隆認為沒有陳水扁的選舉「很無趣」，並批當今黨內領導人無法帶來台灣人的「光榮感」；前扁辦主任陳淞山則直言，蔡英文的十年政綱恐將淪為「空心政見」。

綠營中生代對蔡英文發出這樣的疑問，並不奇怪；事實上，外界對蔡英文一貫保持的「政見模糊」，早提過許多批評。比較有趣的是，從這些來自綠營內部的質疑，人們也看到了民進黨中生代內心的焦慮和矛盾；尤其，當若干中生代竟開始公開「懷念」陳水扁，可見他們對蔡英文乃至民進黨走向的迷惘，比一般民眾深得多。

蔡英文二○○四年才入黨，由於不曾參加過民進黨草莽年代的激烈衝撞或街頭抗爭，她可以輕易切割民進黨的歷史沾染，也因此在一般民眾眼中有一種恍惚的魅力。然而，這位黨齡才七年的主席，又準備選擇一位神祕的無黨籍搭檔代表民進黨出征；就算兩人明年幸運打下了天下，未來民進黨會不會被這對陌生人「金蟬脫殼」，這恐怕是很多綠營人士心中的憂慮。連獨派大老辜寬敏都嫌蔡英文的兩岸政策「沒內容」，可見蔡英文政見之「空洞」確讓各方不安；只是藍營有藍營的不安，綠營有綠營的不安。

更耐人尋味的是，蔡英文的含混模糊，究竟是「不願說」、「無法說」，或者是根本「說不出來」？如果她的低調曖昧，目的是在保持一個比較大的想像空間，避免過度具體的主張反而引發黨內外的批評及反彈，或許還能理解。但如果她裝腔作勢的抽象高調，其實只是因為自己和團隊找不到合理與正當的對策；那麼，她的造作閃躲，恐怕就是名副其實的「空心菜」了。就現實觀察，後者的可能性似乎還高一些。

幾日內，連續多名黨內中生代向蔡英文發難，是值得玩味的現象。蔡英文經激烈的提名爭逐勝出，迫使民進黨「天王」和「大老」的一代喪失了發言資格；但不少學運世代出身、且自認有過戰功的中生代，卻不能忍受民進黨為了選舉竟扭曲到連政策都不敢說清楚。尤其，他們在選戰中被推到邊緣位置，聽不到主帥營帳呼喊的是什麼口令，看不清綠旗上打的是什麼字號，當然有滿腹疑問要發。

在觀察這些中生代質疑蔡英文時，不可忽略的一點是，他們在言談中流露出來的對陳水扁的懷念，包括對蔡英文造勢能力遠不及阿扁的擔心。郭正亮說，蔡英文「政策霧濛濛，選民稀落落，選戰冷颼颼」，應借鏡「阿扁兵法」炒熱選情。游盈隆的說法更露骨，他聲稱「阿扁讓身為台灣人感到很光榮、很驕傲」，還說那些掌握黨機器卻切割阿扁的人，「絕對是迷惘、糊塗的人，是耽誤台灣前途的人」。

我們不知道蔡英文為何抓不住這些黨內中生代的心，但游盈隆的說法，似顯示三年多的政黨輪替對民進黨沒產生任何警惕作用。否則，阿扁的貪腐誤國惡名舉世皆知，游盈隆怎還能說出阿扁讓台灣人感到驕傲的話來？的確，有陳水扁的選舉會比較「有趣」；但別忘了，阿扁的渾身解數，都是建立在「只求勝選、不擇手段」的前提上，也因而不顧後果、不計社會代價。如果今天還在追思緬懷那樣的政治氛圍，台灣的民主如何會有進境？

隨著這股「批蔡」潮而湧至的「懷扁」風，反映的是民進黨一批中生代的嚴重失落感。他們不能忘情自己追隨陳水扁征戰的榮光，卻略過了阿扁給民進黨帶來的可恥和不名譽；他們掛慮著民進黨可能失去了方向，但眼光卻是在錯誤的舊日中尋找答案。這其實不止是綠營中生代的問題，恐怕也是整個民進黨的逃避與徬徨情結；而蔡英文的支吾曖昧，亦是反映了其中的一隅。

綠營中生代對蔡英文的質疑，其實是整個民進黨要共同回答的事。但如果不能誠實面對執政八年的腐敗和醜陋，誰又能幫他們找到答案？