DPP Post-Election Review: First Reclaim Your Common Sense

DPP Post-Election Review: First Reclaim Your Common Sense
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
February 23, 2012

Summary: Yesterday the Democratic Progressive Party finally published its official review of the reasons for its defeat at the polls. The review is riddled with holes. Even party leaders are skeptical. Fortunately, the election debacle was also shock therapy. Some party leaders have finally reclaimed the party's erstwhile spirit of self-examination. The DPP wants to become a competitive political party, one able to return to power. But in order to do so, it must first establish an atmosphere of open debate, under which it can discuss the future of the party.

Full Text below:

Yesterday the Democratic Progressive Party finally published its official review of the reasons for its defeat at the polls. The review is riddled with holes. Even party leaders are skeptical. Fortunately, the election debacle was also shock therapy. Some party leaders have finally reclaimed the party's erstwhile spirit of self-examination. The DPP wants to become a competitive political party, one able to return to power. But in order to do so, it must first establish an atmosphere of open debate, under which it can discuss the future of the party.
The DPP's official review has itself been the subject of highly critical reviews. This is where Tsai Ing-wen and the DPP leadership currently stand. Former Vice President Annette Lu used the occasion to announce her own "10,000 Word Manifesto," entitled "A Report to the People." Her every word drew blood. She said what the DPP leadership was afraid to say. For example, she blasted Tsai Ing-wen for dodging questions about the TaiMed corruption scandal. She questioned the propriety of Tsai's conduct. She even questioned Tsai's ability to defend herself. She demanded to know why Tsai Ing-wen failed to change the DPP's reputation for corruption. She demanded to know "why the party refused to discipline corrupt members, and why they were dealt with selectively, or not at all." She said no wonder the KMT's TV spot featuring Russian matryoshka dolls were so devastatingly effective.

Annette Lu's public manifesto could be termed a "common sense" review. For example, she criticized Tsai Ing-wen's "Taiwan consensus," saying it was devoid of content. She criticized the DPP's "Three Little Pigs vs. the Big Bad Wolf" campaign pitch. She criticized the DPP campaign for provoking discontent with the DPP within the business community. Lu's manifesto merely said what everyone already knew. By contrast, the DPP's official review blurs and evades the real issues. It is a living illustration of the Emperor's New Clothes.

The DPP 's reluctance to face reality is nothing new. The DPP has been out of touch with public perception and common sense for quite some time. The DPP's official review of the reasons for its defeat at the polls is merely an indicator. Lu's manifesto may have identified the problems. But blaming the candidates merely makes a mountain out of a molehill. It fails to address the DPP's real problem. In fact the "party princes," including Lu herself, are all part of the problem. Annette Lu criticized the Tsai Ing-wen led Democratic Progressive Party. She blamed a "historical fault line, a leadership succession fault line." But what about before Tsai Ing-wen? Did the party princes even have an "historical legacy" worth mentioning?

When the DPP party princes headed up the Democratic Progressive Party, their ideology was Taiwan independence extremism. Their rhetoric was populist extremism. They not only rejected cross-Strait exchanges. They even incited divisions on Taiwan. Tsai Ing-wen at least presented a rational public face. She softened the party's rhetoric. She moderated Taiwan's political atmosphere. She refrained from inciting "ethnic" (social) divisions and reunification vs. independence controversy. Unfortunately Tsai Ing-wen and the Democratic Progressive Party elites merely whitewashed the DPP edifice. They did not bother to repair its structure. They never addressed their cross-Strait Achilles Heel. They assumed they could squeak by. They assumed these surface gestures would enable the DPP to return to power.

The election results showed that a coat of whitewash or a new leader with a feelgood public image was not enough to instill voter confidence in the DPP. Tsai Ing-wen must have repeated a hundred times that if elected, the DPP would continue exchanges with the Mainland. But actions spoke louder than words. Voters recalled all too clearly DPP legislators fighting tooth and nail against the recognition of Mainland academic credentials, and against the admission of Mainland students to Taiwan. Voters long ago pegged the DPP as a political party filled with unregenerate Sinophobes opposed to cross-Strait reconciliation. Mere lip service to cross-Strait rapprochement at election time was clearly insufficient to change voter perceptions.

After all, cross-Strait or internal trust must be earned, long-term. As middle-aged DPP leader Tuan Yi-kang put it, the DPP habitually views the Mainland with hostility. No elections are scheduled for the next two years. The DPP should use the opportunity to reverse this impression. Such impressions cannot be changed by slogans coined just before election day. Li Ying-yuan was even more blunt. He said that if the DPP fails to rethink its cross-Strait policy, the results will be the same in 2016. No matter how high election fever may run, no matter how loud election slogans are shouted, during the final week the party will once again discover that its situation is hopeless.

Fortunately for the DPP, in the aftermath of its defeat. pragmatists within the party are gaining the upper hand. Tsai Ing-wen's defeat is important because it has given DPP elites a healthy dose of reality. If DPP leaders still refuse to acknowledge the party's cross-Strait policy Achilles Heel, they will never go the final mile to victory. The DPP has finally adopted a policy of "Let a hundred flowers bloom." This is essential to the DPP's transformation.

Political party transformation sounds enigmatic. Actually, it is quite prosaic. The key is common sense. As former Democratic Progressive Party Chairman Hsu Hsin-liang said, the DPP's cross-Strait stance must keep pace with the rest of the world. Otherwise, it will suffer the same fate it did during this election. It will be shut out by both Beijing and Washington. The whole world is reaching out to the Mainland. If the DPP tries to remain aloof, it will merely be swept into the dustbin of history.

The DPP's official review of the reasons for defeat at the polls has been released. But the DPP has only just begun its transformation. The Green Camp remains a prisoner of the past. It is also wracked by a power struggle for the party chairmanship. The road ahead will inevitably be strewn with obstacles. But if it refuses to transform itself, the DPP will have no future whatsoever, members of the Democratic Progressive Party elite have already begun debating the party's future. They must have the determination to begin anew. Looking back is no longer an option.

社論－民進黨反省，先回歸常識
2012-02-23 00:55
中國時報
【本報訊】

民進黨昨日終於正式提出敗選檢討報告，這一份留白甚多的報告，連黨內人士都多所質疑；值得慶幸的是，隨著此次敗選帶來的震撼教育，黨內總算又找回檢討批判的風氣，民進黨若要成為一個有競爭力的政黨、進而重返執政，黨內建立開放討論路線的風氣，是必要的第一步。

「檢討報告被檢討」，這是蔡英文及黨中央當前的處境。前副總統呂秀蓮搶在同一天發表萬言書，號稱是「民間版」的檢討報告，字字犀利，言民進黨中央所不敢言，例如，她批評蔡英文大選時迴避宇昌案，最後不但操守、連應變能力也受質疑；再如，她直言蔡英文並未切割貪腐印記，「為何黨紀對許多涉案人可以選擇性地處理或不處理」？難怪國民黨大選前一則「俄羅斯娃娃廣告」會造成巨大的殺傷力。

呂秀蓮這一份報告也可稱之為「常識版」的檢討報告。例如，她批評蔡英文提出的「台灣共識」語焉不詳，競選總部的「小豬對抗大野狼」訴求，也播下與企業界對立的種子。可以說，呂秀蓮的萬言書，說得是大家都知道的事，反襯出民進黨黨中央檢討報告模糊遮掩，活生生就是國王沒有穿衣服的翻版。

當然，民進黨之不願面對現實、與人民常識脫節久矣，敗選報告只是一個表徵；因此，呂秀蓮的萬言書雖然點出問題，但是單單責怪候選人，某種程度是挑小放大，沒有直指民進黨問題的核心；事實上，包括呂在內的天王，同時也是問題的一部分，呂秀蓮批評蔡英文領導下的民進黨，是「歷史斷層、經驗也斷層」，但是蔡英文之前的天王階段，又有什麼經驗是值得傳承的呢？

天王時代的民進黨，不但理念極獨，連修辭也極端民粹化，不只排斥兩岸交流，更不惜在台灣內部挑起對立；蔡英文至少以她溫和理性的形象，重整了反對黨的修辭學，改善台灣的政治文化，不再動輒挑起族群、統獨爭議；但是，蔡英文的問題在於，她及民進黨菁英認為，只要表面上的調整，不必徹底轉型，更不必處理兩岸罩門，就可以「頭過身就過」，讓民進黨重回執政。

這次的選舉結果證明，只是表面的擦脂抹粉，或是換了一個令人有好感的領導人，並不足以讓選民對民進黨產生信任感。蔡英文選舉時講一百遍將持續與中國交流，都比不上立法院朝野為了承認大陸學歷以及陸生來台大打出手，來得讓選民印象深刻。選民已將民進黨定位為反中、反兩岸交流的政黨，單憑大選時的承諾，顯然無法改變選民心中的觀感。

畢竟，不論是兩岸之間還是在台灣內部，所謂的信任必須是長期培養的。正如該黨中生代段宜康所說，民進黨平時的態度和政策對中國太不友善，未來兩年，民進黨要趁沒選舉時扭轉這種印象，因為這不是選前用幾句新創的口號或論述就能改變的；李應元更直言，民進黨如果不檢討兩岸政策，到二○一六年還是一樣，選舉再熱、呼聲再高，到最後一個禮拜還是發現大勢已去。

值得慶幸的是，民進黨雖然第二度遭逢敗選，但黨內務實派卻逐漸抬頭，蔡英文敗選的最大意義在於，民進黨菁英某種程度開始認清現實，如果他們不正視黨內的兩岸罩門，就不可能走完最後一哩路。因此，近來民進黨終於重現百花齊放的場面，這對民進黨轉型攸關重要。

所謂政黨轉型，聽來莫測高深，但其實平淡無奇，關鍵重點在於依常識而行。正如前民進黨黨主席許信良所說，民進黨的兩岸立場至少要和全球同步，否則就如這次大選，必將引來中美聯手封鎖；當全球都和中國打交道，民進黨如果置身事外，最後只有等待被歷史淘汰。

敗選報告出爐，民進黨轉型卻才要踏上第一哩路，鑑於綠營長年情結，再加上黨主席選舉所牽扯的權力鬥爭，此路必然險阻重重；但是，如果不轉型，民進黨毫無前途可言，已經啟動辯論的民進黨菁英，要有破釜沉舟的決心，因為他們已無回頭路！