Inaugural Protest Marches Compared: Su Tseng-chang vs. Tsai Ing-wen

Inaugural Protest Marches Compared:
Su Tseng-chang vs. Tsai Ing-wen
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 4, 2012

Summary: Su Tseng-chang announced that the DPP will hold a "Raging Citizens Protest March" on January 13. This symbolic act, made upon assuming the party chairmanship, attempts to build consensus. It also suggests the path Su intends to take. Contrast this with several "inaugural protest marches" that Tsai Ing-wen led upon her own inauguration as party chairman. The differences underscore the changes that have taken place within the DPP over the past four years, and the DPP's current dilemma.

Full Text below:

Su Tseng-chang announced that the DPP will hold a "Raging Citizens Protest March" on January 13. This symbolic act, made upon assuming the party chairmanship, attempts to build consensus. It also suggests the path Su intends to take. Contrast this with several "inaugural protest marches" that Tsai Ing-wen led upon her own inauguration as party chairman. The differences underscore the changes that have taken place within the DPP over the past four years, and the DPP's current dilemma.

When Tsai Ing-wen became party chairman on May 20, 2008, she faced two major problems. One. The Ma administration's new cross-Strait policy was about to go into effect. Two. The Chen family corruption case was about to be tried in the courts.

Amidst this atmosphere, several "inaugural protest marches" took place in swift succession. On August 30, 2008, Taiwan independence hardliners launched a "Prevent hunger, Defend sovereignty, Seek sunshine" protest march. Tsai Ing-wen initially expressed reservations about participating. Later, under duress, she and the DPP participated. But she made clear that the DPP was "merely a participating organization and not the initiating organization." The DPP agreed to join the protest march, but a proviso was added. No Taiwan independence banners would be displayed, and no pro Ah-Bian slogans would be shouted. On October 25, Taiwan independence organizations came forward yet again. They held an "Oppose blackhearts, Defend Taiwan" protest march. This time the DPP was unable to block Chen Shui-bian. Chen Shui-bian held forth from atop a sound truck, causing a sensation. Then, between November 3rd and November 7th, Chen Yunlin arrived on Taiwan for the second Chiang-Chen Meeting. The DPP launched a string of protests. They held high banners reading, "Chen bandit Yunlin get out!" and" Commies get out!" In June their "Surround Chen" protests continued into the night, leaving the streets of Taipei in shambles. Later, Tsai Ing-wen made clear that the Democratic Progressive Party's participation ended at dusk.

Contrast Tsai Ing-wen's string of "inaugural protest marches" with Su Tseng-chang's "Raging Citizens Protest March."

First of all, the protest marches Tsai took participated in had some purpose. They expressed opposition to the Ma government's new cross-Strait policy. They expressed the concerns of Chen Shui-bian supporters. By contrast, Su Tseng-chang's "Raging Citizens Protest March," which demandds "Survival, Democracy, and Reform" feels like a case of clutching at straws.

Secondly, in 2008, following the defeat of the Democratic Progressive Party in the presidential election, the Green Camp experienced a sense of crisis and solidarity. The protest marches Tsai Ing-wen took part in felt like bottom-up, outside-in affairs. Tsai Ing-wen hastened to add that she and the DPP were merely participating in, not initiating the protest marches. By contrast, Su Tseng-chang's "Raging Citizens Protest March" cannot paper over the schism that has developed within the Green Camp. On the one hand Frank Hsieh's "trail-blazing journey" has a sequel. On the other hand, the Taiwan independence hardliners are even more arrogant than they were in 2008. Su Tseng-chang could not even get his "China Affairs Committee" started. No wonder his top-down protest march is meeting with increased skepticism, even from his own camp.

Such comparisons however, merely skim the surface. Far more profound changes have taken place over the past four years. Tsai Ing-wen's "inaugural protest marches" attempted to distance themselves from Chen Shui-bian. They attempted to block the Ma government's new cross-Strait policy. The next development was opposition to ECFA and the 1992 consensus. These became Tsai Ing-wen's trademark. These became part of her 2012 presidential campaign. But this is not the ultimate answer. Tsai Ing-wen initially had reservations about supporting Ah-Bian. Today however, she has become Chen Shui-bian's champion for "medical parole." She initially denounced ECFA as a "forfeiture of sovereignty and an insult to the nation." She said it "pandered to [Mainland] China, and sold out Taiwan." Later however, she reversed herself. She said "If the Democratic Progressive Party returns to power, it will continue the previous administration's cross-Strait policy." She said she "unconditionally accepts ECFA." Such are the paradoxes of political calculation.

Tsai Ing-wen participated in several high profile "inauguration protest marches." She attempted to distance herself and the DPP from Ah-Bian. She led crowds who shouted "Chen bandit Yunlin get out!" She denounced ECFA as "pandering to [Mainland] China, and selling out Taiwan." Today, four years later, people are asking questions. Will they get any answers?

Now no one in the DPP utters a peep about ECFA "pandering to [Mainland] China, and selling out Taiwan." Instead, DPP members mutter about "reform." This shows that the DPP is unwilling to reform its cross-strait policy. No one dares to utter a peep about distancing the DPP from Ah-Bian. Instead, DPP members mutter about "medical parole." This shows that Taiwan independence hardliners have taken over the DPP, the way cancer cells take over a body. In fact, Su Tseng-chang is dealing with the mess left behind by Tsai Ing-wen.

Taiwan society has never lacked "Raging Citizens." The DPP has never failed to exploit raging public anger and grievances. Tsai Ing-wen's "Inaugural Protest March" was dominated by "Raging Citizens." When these citizens surrounded Chen Yunlin that night, they threw rocks, human feces, and Molotov cocktails. They proved they were raging alright. But what has happened to her leadership and the DPP since then? What has happened to the rage incited by the "Oppose ECFA" and "Oppose the 1992 consensus" protest marches? It has become dead political ashes from which no smoke emerges. Yesterday's fearsome rage has become today's ridiculous tantrum.

When we contrast Su Tseng with Tsai Ing-wen, we must look at more than Tsai's high profile "inauguration protest marches." We must also look at the rage felt during the "Oppose the 1992 consensus" and "Oppose ECFA" protest marches. Today those flames have burned out. So-called "distancing the DPP from Ah-Bian" has become a joke. Today Su Tseng-chang is desperately attempting to reignite the raging fires that burned when Tsai Ing-wen was chairman. Naturally he feels impotent, and plagued by doubt.

Actually, the history of the DPP is a history of rage. During the early years of martial law and the "ten thousand year assembly," the DPP raged. When the DPP promoted liberal democracy on Taiwan, it raged. But when it came time for Tsai Ing-wen to "Oppose the 1992 consensus" and "Oppose ECFA," the DPP's rage burned out. Now it is Su Tseng-chang's turn. The DPP raged over gasoline price hikes, electricity rate hikes, the capital gains tax, and U.S. beef imports. They raged so intensely they held a five day/four nights sleepover on the legislature floor. This too will become a footnote in history.

Su Tseng-chang's "Raging Citizens Protest March" has clearly not received the same applause as Tsai Ing-wen's numerous "inaugural protest marches." Tsai Ing-wen has long ceased opposing ECFA. She has long since ceased shouting "Chen bandit Yunlin get out!" But her past rage makes her by far the most popular politician on Taiwan. Is Su Tseng-chang jealous of her successful exploitation of rage?

But Su Tseng-chang should not complain. How can he rekindle a raging fire from the dead ashes left by Tsai Ing-wen? Besides, after he finishes raging, what will he be left with? Other than the bitter ashes from some meaningless memories?

比較蘇貞昌與蔡英文的「就職遊行」
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.01.04 01:52 am

蘇貞昌宣布，民進黨將於一月十三日發動「火大遊行」，這是他就任黨主席後標舉路線及凝聚民氣的指標性動作；若與二○○八年蔡英文就任黨主席後的幾次「就職遊行」相較，非但可以看出蘇蔡二人處境之迥異，尤可反映民進黨四年多來路線的轉變與困境。

蔡英文在二○○八年五月二十日就任黨主席，面臨了兩大情勢：一、馬政府推動的兩岸交流新政即將上路；二、陳水扁家族貪汙案的司法程序正要啟動。

在這種氛圍下，幾場「就職遊行」相繼登場。二○○八年八月三十日，獨派發動「顧腹肚／護主權／要陽光」大遊行，蔡英文原持保留立場，後來在情勢所迫下，民進黨以「只是參加的團體／不是發起的單位」，加入遊行；背後的條件是，不可有台獨旗幟，不可有挺扁口號。十月二十五日，又以獨派團體出面，舉行「反黑心／顧台灣」大遊行；這次未能擋住陳水扁，阿扁在宣傳車上開講，造成轟動。接著，十一月三至七日，陳雲林來台出席第二次江陳會，民進黨發動連續抗爭，高舉「陳匪雲林滾蛋！」「共匪滾蛋！」的大旗，六日的「圍陳」行動更一直進行到深夜，弄得台北街頭一片狼藉。事後，蔡英文說：民進黨的活動已在傍晚宣布結束。

蔡英文的這幾場「就職遊行」，可與蘇貞昌的「火大遊行」相較：

一、蔡的幾場遊行較有針對性，一在反對馬政府的兩岸新政上路，二在宣洩挺扁者的憂慮；蘇貞昌的「火大遊行」，則標舉「要生活／要民主／要改革」，不著邊際。

二、二○○八年，民進黨在總統大選慘敗之後，綠營內部的危機感與凝聚力較強；蔡英文的幾場遊行，可以感覺到一種由下而上、由外而內的動員力量，蔡英文則反而採取「只參加／不發起」的姿態。相對而言，蘇貞昌舉行「火大遊行」的此時，綠營的撕裂已難掩飾；一方面謝長廷的「開展之旅」將有續集，另一方面獨派的氣焰已高過二○○八年，而蘇貞昌則連「中國事務委員會」也無法開張；難怪面對這場由上而下發動的遊行，內部的質疑聲浪此起彼落。

不過，這樣的比較，仍只是浮面而已，四年多來最深層的變化是：蔡英文當年的幾場「就職遊行」，一方面嘗試與陳水扁切割，另一方面則表態欲阻擋馬政府的兩岸新政上路；接下來的發展是，反對ＥＣＦＡ與反對九二共識成了蔡英文的品牌路線，一路殺到二○一二總統大選。然而，這卻不是終極的答案；原本對挺扁持保留立場的蔡英文，如今已成了陳水扁「保外就醫」的號召者；而原本指ＥＣＦＡ「喪權辱國」、「傾中賣台」的蔡英文，後來竟改口稱「民進黨若執政將延續前朝兩岸政策」、「概括承受ＥＣＦＡ」。政治操作之弔詭，一至於此。

在四年後的今日，國人可問的是：蔡英文在其幾場轟轟烈烈的「就職遊行」中，不論是為切割陳水扁所作的嘗試，或為「陳匪雲林滾蛋」及其後「反對ＥＣＦＡ傾中賣台」所作的努力，今日究竟得到什麼答案？

此時民進黨中，早已不聞「ＥＣＦＡ傾中賣台」，卻是「轉型」之聲不絕於耳，這顯示了民進黨的兩岸政策仍無出路；更已不聞「切割阿扁」之聲，「保外就醫」竟成顯學，這又顯示了獨派已成民進黨的附骨之疽。其實，蘇貞昌正在面對蔡英文留下的爛攤子。

台灣社會從來不缺「火大」，民進黨更從來不虞沒有可以操作「火大」的民憤及民怨。回想蔡英文當年「就職遊行」的「火大」之「大」，「圍陳」當夜的石塊、糞便及汽油彈，皆可證明「火大」得不得了；但她領導民進黨四年且競選總統以來，以「反對ＥＣＦＡ」及「反對九二共識」所掀起的「火大」，如今卻已成為一片連煙都不冒的政治灰燼。當年的火大，變成了今日的可笑。

因而，在將蘇貞昌與蔡英文作對比之時，不能只看到蔡當年「就職遊行」的轟轟烈烈，也要看到當年「反對九二共識／反對ＥＣＦＡ」的「火大」，如今已完全熄火，「切割阿扁」也成了一場自欺欺人；蘇貞昌如今欲在蔡英文留下的這一片「灰燼」中，重新燃燒起什麼轟轟烈烈的「大火」，自不免有些力不從心，且質疑四起。

其實，民進黨的發展史，可謂就是一部「火大發展史」。早年對戒嚴體制與萬年國會的「火大」，促進了台灣的自由民主體制。但是，到了蔡英文「反對九二共識／反對ＥＣＦＡ」的「火大」，四年已燒成灰燼；現在輪到了蘇貞昌，他在油電雙漲、證所稅及美牛案強調的「火大」，甚至「火大」到民進黨在立法院打了五天四夜的地鋪，亦將留待歷史評說。

蘇貞昌的這一場「火大遊行」顯然未得到如當年蔡英文幾場「就職遊行」所獲的掌聲。今天，蔡英文早已不反ＥＣＦＡ了，也早已不主張「陳匪雲林滾蛋」了，但當年的「火大」，卻使她迄今仍是台灣人氣最高的政治人物，這樣的「火大」，蘇貞昌不忌妒嗎？

但蘇貞昌也不必怨艾，他是在蔡英文留下的灰燼上生火，如何「火大」得起來？何況，「火大」之後，會不會又只是留下一堆無意義的灰燼而已？