Refusal to Apologize is Heartless, Shameless, and Inept

Refusal to Apologize is Heartless, Shameless, and Inept
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
December 1, 2011

Summary: Voter amnesia in a democratic society is a dangerous phenomenon. But collective amnesia in a political party is even more dangerous. The DPP is currently in a bind. It has forgotten that only three years ago it reached rock bottom, that it was mired in corruption and impotence. It has forgotten that it must regain the voters trust through appeals to reason. It has forgotten how to admit wrongdoing. It has even forgotten how to apologize.

Full Text Below:

Voter amnesia in a democratic society is a dangerous phenomenon. But collective amnesia in a political party is even more dangerous. The DPP is currently in a bind. It has forgotten that only three years ago it reached rock bottom, that it was mired in corruption and impotence. It has forgotten that it must regain the voters trust through appeals to reason. It has forgotten how to admit wrongdoing. It has even forgotten how to apologize.
An old addage says that knowing shame is the beginning of courage. A political party or political leader may blunder. But a refusal to admit wrongdoing and apologize merely digs one in deeper. It merely encourages one to repeat the same mistake, over and over again. Refusal to admit wrongdoing and apologize is not merely shameless. It is also evidence of ineptitude.

The "little pigs" fever may have left the DPP feeling a bit too smug. The DPP was encouraged to make false allegations against Ma Ying-jeou, to claim that he secretly met with a triad boss. The allegations made the headlines, and led to the miraculous transformation of a black gold politician into a moral paragon. It led to an even more intense persimmons controversy. The DPP's malicious propaganda campaign undermined the fruit market. It seriously hurt fruit growers, both economically and emotionally. Yet the DPP refuses to admit wrongdoing. It persists in making excuses. It makes excuses about the photographs, the varieties of fruit, and even about the initital point of sale. It is digging in its heels and refusing to admit wrongdoing. If the goal is to champion justice, isn't this plain shamelessness? If the goal is to crisis management, isn't this plain incompetence?

The DPP has long adopted a "take no prisoners" stance. When it is in the right, it does not forgive. But suppose it is in the wrong, yet adopts an air of self-righteousness? Suppose it knows its arguments do not hold water, yet persists in pretending it is in the right? Does such a political party have any maturity or dignity to speak of? A political party that behaves this way cares only about selfish advantage. How can a party devoid of moral scruples advance democracy on Taiwan?

The DPP leveled wild allegations about a secret meeting with a triad boss. It attempted to whitewash Chen Ying-chu, then scurry for cover. It correctly predicted that the KMT would not pursue the matter, and that the Green Camp could avoid making an apology. But the persimmons controvery and the triad boss allegations took them by surprise. The direct victims of the triad boss allegations were Ma Ying-jeou and the Blue Camp. But the persimmons controversy widened, and impacted fruit growers. False allegations destroyed the market for persimmons. It hurt fruit growers, financially and emotionally. Yet the DPP feels no responsibility whatsoever. Perhaps it is unwilling to show weakness in front of the KMT. But does it have the courage to apologize to the farmers it purports to champion?

Admitting one's mistakes and offering apologies is hardly heroism. It is the least any citizen should do, let alone an elected official. If elected officials are not even willing to do this, how can they assume responsibility for their actions in office? Once such a political party is in office, can it be trusted to honor the public's wishes? Will such a party have the courage to assume political responsibility? Will such a party be willing to clean up its own mess? The DPP has long counted on the farm vote in its war against Chinese reunification. Now however, farmers find themselves in a life or death struggle. Yet all the DPP does is turn a deaf ear to their cries of outrage. Such heartlessness. Such shamelessness. Such ineptitude.

The DPP obstinately refuses to admit wrongdoing. It inverts right and wrong. But this is its basic nature. This is the result of complicity by voters who tolerate its behavior. This is why the Chen family got away with rampant corruption for eight years. This is the result of complicity in the abuse of state power by the DPP and its supporters. Three years have elapsed. But the DPP has yet to engage in self-introspection. It has yet to express the slightest regret over its eight years of misrule. All it did was install a new party chairman. Yet that enabled it to make a comeback. If the voters' moral standards for political parties are this lax, no wonder the DPP can get away with smears, fabrications, and refusal to admit guilt. No wonder it feels no shame.

Take the recent uproar over the Su Jia-chyuan "farmhouse" scandal. The Su family built a string of illegal luxury mansion cum "farmhouses." It operated illegal night markets. It exploited agricultural land under the pretense of being farmers. It knowingly violated the law, abused public authority, and allowed family members to enrich themselves at public expense. The DPP turned a blind eye to its crimes, and pretended not to see. It has neither searched its soul, nor acknowledged guilt. When a political party with such irresponsible attitudes rises to power, how can its conduct not become the norm in the presidential palace? How can its conduct not become the norm for the entire government?

In recent years, the DPP has advanced a perverse argument. It argues that only the ruling party requires oversight. It argues that an opposition party has no power, therefore requires no oversight. Using this as an excuse, it has exempted itself from scrutiny for the sins it committed during its eight years in office. Using this as an excuse, it has obstructed, attacked, and smeared others while evading responsibility for its behavior. But the DPP is a major player in Taiwan's political arena. Can it really engage in empty sophistry yet assume no responsibility? Take the persimmons controversy. The answer is no. If the DPP refuses to apologize to farmers, if it refuses to convey the correct market information to the public, it probably will not squeak by. Just wait till fruit growers begin camping out in front of Tsai Ying-wen's campaign headquarters.

The DPP must consult its own dictionary. Is the word "mistake" still there? How about the word "apology?" If not, it is time to restore them. Look upon the faces of those angry peasants. The damage has been done. It is too late for an apology. You want to once again become the ruling party. But if you are unwilling or are afraid to offer an apology, your heartlessness, shamelessness, and ineptitude will only drive voters away.

不敢道歉 是無情無恥無能
【聯合報╱社論】 2011.12.01

民主社會，選民失憶是一件危險的事；但更危險的，則是政黨的集體失憶。現在民進黨正陷於這樣的情境，它似乎忘了自己三年多來是如何逐步走出貪腐、無能的低迷幽谷，忘了政治需要以理服人，乃至連如何認錯、及如何道歉都忘記了。

所謂「知恥近乎勇」，一個政黨或一位政治領袖，若犯了大錯，竟不肯認錯，不敢道歉，以致愈陷愈深、一錯再錯；這非但是無恥，且是最大的無能！

先前的一波「小豬風潮」，或許讓民進黨太過自我感覺良好，於是在「馬英九密會組頭」事件中，遂有「黑金變好人」的荒腔走板演出。最近的「甜柿風波」則更變本加厲，分明是選戰文宣惡意扭曲水果行情，嚴重損害了農民的利益和感情，民進黨卻堅不認錯，繼續在照片、品種上硬拗，甚至在地方大打「收購戰」以對抗中央。把無理的事堅持到底，死不認錯，就伸張公義言，這不是無恥是什麼？就危機處理言，這不是無能是什麼？

民進黨問政風格一向強悍，得理不饒人。問題是，如果是「無理還不饒人」，明知自己立論站不住腳，卻還作出咄咄逼人之勢，這樣不講是非的政黨有何民主素養和風度可言？而一個唯政治利益是圖、拒絕和民眾分享共同道德價值的政黨，又如何將台灣民主帶上理性之路？

在「密會組頭」事件，民進黨是以「美化陳盈助」的障眼法，匆匆棄甲而逃；料定國民黨不會發兵再追，綠營也就省下了一次道歉。但「甜柿風波」與「組頭事件」性質截然不同：組頭事件的直接受害者只是馬英九和藍營，但甜柿風波卻使廣大果農受到株連，因不實文宣之誤導而使得甜柿敗市滯銷，農民不僅利益受損，情感也受到傷害。在這種情況下，民進黨的責任已無所遁逃，就算它不甘向國民黨示弱，但它能堅不向自己宣稱要保護的農民致歉嗎？

認錯、道歉談不上是什麼偉大的情操，這只是公民的基本道德。尤其，對政治人物而言，若連自己做的事都不肯或不敢面對，要如何談政治責任？這樣的政黨一旦執政，人民如何相信它會尊重民意，會勇於負責，會誠懇收拾自己不當決策所造成的後果？何況，民進黨一向在統獨的虛擬戰場上挾農民以自重，但如今遇上農民現實生計的生死之爭，卻置他們的怒吼如罔聞，這何其無情、無恥與無能！

民進黨如此虛矯硬拗、顛倒黑白，一則是政黨性格使然，二則與選民的縱容不無關係。陳水扁家族之所以能橫行貪腐八年，是整個民進黨共犯結構濫權使然；但三年多過去，民進黨從未有過任何反省，甚至未對執政八年的失德失能表示絲毫歉意，只是換上了一張清湯掛麵的新面孔當了黨主席，居然也能風雲再起。如果選民對政黨的道德門檻要求這麼低，民進黨當然以抹黑、造假、硬拗為能事，而無需有任何愧色。

再看先前沸沸揚揚的蘇嘉全農舍風波，其家族一次次假農民之名建豪宅、開夜市、剝削農地，在在涉及知法玩法濫用公權力包庇自肥；但民進黨內對此卻裝作視若無睹，遑論自我反省或公開認錯。這種態度，一旦取得政權，誰能保證它不會把種種惡習帶入總統府，乃至把整個政府帶回上下交征利的深淵？

這幾年，民進黨創造了一個堂皇的詭辯邏輯：執政黨才需要接受監督，在野黨沒有權力，因此不需要受到監督。運用這個藉口，它不僅自行豁免了執政八年的罪愆，更肆無忌憚地杯葛、攻擊、抹黑而不必負責。但作為台灣政治的主要參與者，民進黨真的可以靠狡辯揮霍自由自在，不負任何責任嗎？從甜柿風波看，答案只怕不然。民進黨如果不公開向果農致歉，並設法把正確行情訊息還諸社會公眾，這次它恐怕過不了這一關。那麼，就等著果農到競選總部門口埋鍋造飯吧！

民進黨該回去翻翻自己的字典，還有沒有「認錯」、「道歉」這兩個詞。如果沒有的話，現在還來得及趕快補回去。看看那一張張氣憤的、無奈的農民的臉，傷害已經造成了，道歉其實已無補於事；但作為一個企圖重返執政的政黨，若連道歉都不會、都不敢，此種無情、無恥、無能，真讓人心寒。