Whence the Term "Economic Voters?"

Whence the Term "Economic Voters?"
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 27, 2014

Executive Summary: The current election has caught the eye of many Mainland tourists on Taiwan. Many of them feel the attraction of Taiwan’s democracy. What they don’t realize is that Taiwan's democracy is incapable of solving economic problems. It even hinders long-term economic development. On this point, the public on Taiwan should be  worried indeed.

Full Text Below:

The nine in one elections are merely local elections. The hour of reckoning is near. Yet an endless procession of government officials and private entrepreneurs have appealed to voters concerned about the economy, so-called "economic voters.” They have asked them to help pass the STA, MTA, and other free trade agreements. They fear Taiwan's economy will lose its competitive advantage. Will playing the "economic card" work?  That remains to be seen. But the unique appeal to "economic voters” is itself an intriguing phenomenon.

"Economic voters” is an invention unique to Taiwan's democracy. It is a peculiar product of Taiwan’s political divide, identity differences, and developmental disorders. Man is an economic animal. People participate in politics primarily to make their own lives better through democratic means. In Western democracies, political parties are classified as left, center and right. They attempt to help the underprivileged, increase equality, and increase prosperity, respectively. Changing economic circumstances in other countries lead to changes in the ruling party. But on Taiwan, differences between the blue and green parties are not based on ideological differences. They are not based on right vs. left political differences. They are based on strategic differences between the ruling and opposition parties vis a vis the Chinese mainland. Over the years, these entangled political and economic considerations have created additional obstacles to Taiwan’s pursuit of common prosperity.

Left vs. right divisions have long confused the public on Taiwan. They have never been clearly defined. Politically the KMT has long been regarded as pro-capitalist, while the DPP has been regarded as populist. But this impression is a consequence of early period KMT one-party dominance. Democratization led to dramatic changes. During the DPP's eight years in power, capitalists competed to pay tribute to the DPP. They bestowed gifts of jewels and cash. As we can see, capitalists cozy up to those in power no matter what the era. Nor do those in power also bother with distinctions about the capitalists’ political coloration.

The TSU is located on the “deep green” end of the political spectrum. It trumpets its opposition to Mainland China. In fact, it seldom proposes any economic policies to take care of the poor and underprivileged. Conversely, the New Party, which is located on the “deep blue” end of the political spectrum, urges cross-Strait exchanges, but has has no specific policy on the economy. As we can see, left vs. right political labels on Taiwan have long been idiosyncratic and inaccurate. They cannot be equated with left vs. right political labels in the West. The problem is that Taiwan has paid a terrible price for this political and economic confusion.

Taiwan was once bore the title "economic miracle." It also boasted a relatively balanced distribution of income. But over the last decade, the domestic wealth gap has continued to widen. The reasons are not difficult to imagine. One. The rise of emerging economies. Taiwan has been complacent and closed off. It has lost its dynamism and vision. Two. All countries face global competition. The Chinese mainland has become the world's factory. Yet Taiwan remains mired in cross-Strait political opposition, binding itself hand and foot. Three. During democratization Taiwan accumulated many insoluble problems. These led to vicious ruling vs. opposition party struggles and vendettas that hijacked the public interest. The economy became the victim. Four. When the economy slows, calls for a more equal distribution of wealth are silenced. Government officials and private entrepreneurs have appealed to "economic voters.” Essentially they hope to catch the attention of more rational voters. They hope that people will not to allow Taiwan's economy to further deteriorate. But their appeal may fail. Politics on Taiwan has long been mired in blue vs. green confrontation. Politics is perceived as opposition on economic issues. As a result, the green camp opposes Mainland China, environmentalists oppose industry, homeowners oppose rezoning, student oppose the STA, and mothers oppose the Number Four Nuclear Power Plant. Everyone opposes something or another. Their goal is not to seek solutions, but to leave everyone paralyzed. This can only be construed as political failure.

The PRC-ROK FTA has been signed. Taiwan's economy will be hard hit. The ruling and opposition parties differ dramatically. But the most affected are small and medium enterprises in central and southern Taiwan. That is beyond dispute. Unemployment in the depressed center and south are much higher than in the north. But economic issues cannot impress voters in the center and the south. Those regions lack so-called "economic voters." Political demagoguery has also stigmatized the term "economic voters" as supporters of exploitation and injustice, and equated them with capitalist lackeys. This is the result of long-term ruling vs. opposition party confrontation and political demagoguery. It has led many to express indifference to economic considerations, to vilify economic growth, and express contempt for entrepreneurs, even as they complain about low wages and grim futures.

People on Taiwan have coined the term "economic voters." But economic voters are merely rational voters. The term “swing voters” was worked to death. Out of desperation people were forced to invent a new term, "economic voters." This was clearly a response to such terms as "political voters" or "anti-economic voters.” Ironically, "economic voters" has become a rallying cry in the campaign. Taiwan's economy is in decline. The scene provokes melancholy.

The current election has caught the eye of many Mainland tourists on Taiwan. Many of them feel the attraction of Taiwan’s democracy. What they don’t realize is that Taiwan's democracy is incapable of solving economic problems. It even hinders long-term economic development. On this point, the public on Taiwan should be  worried indeed.

為什麼有「經濟選民」這種分類？
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.11.27 02:21 am

儘管九合一只是地方選舉，選戰進入決戰時刻，仍不斷有官員和企業家跳出來向「經濟選民」喊話，呼籲他們支持政府通過服貨貿等協議，以免台灣經濟喪失競爭優勢。這樣的「經濟牌」能否奏效，仍有待觀察；但特別針對「經濟選民」訴求，卻是一個耐人尋味的現象。

「經濟選民」一詞，是台灣民主政治的獨特發明，也是台灣在政治分裂、認同歧異、發展失調下的一種奇特產物。人是經濟的動物，人民參政，無非是要透過民主手段追求自己更好的生活。在西方的民主國家，政黨有左、中、右之分，分別以扶弱、求均、求富的政策訴求號召選民支持；同時，也因各國經濟情勢之遞變而產生政黨輪替。但在台灣，藍綠兩黨的理念差異，並不是根據左右的路線而分，而是沿著朝野對中國大陸的戰略差異而區隔。多年來，在這種政經夾纏的情況下，也就增加了台灣在追求均富之路上的顛簸。

路線左右的問題，在台灣一向頗為混淆，未曾被認真釐清。在政治上，國民黨長期被視為親資本家，民進黨則被視為親基層民眾；此一印象，其實是早年國民黨長期一黨獨大使然，但在民主化之後已有了相當大的變化。事實上，在民進黨執政的八年，資本家競相入府「進貢」，送上珠寶獻金；可見，資本家對於權勢的靠攏是不分時代的，而權力對資本家的親近也是無分色彩的。

進一步看，在政治光譜上位於「深綠」一端的台聯，除了標榜「反中」，其實甚少提出什麼照顧貧弱的經濟主張；而位於光譜「深藍」那端的新黨，除了力促兩岸交流，也未見經濟上有什麼具體政策。由此可見，台灣長期以來劃分政黨色彩左右的標準，其實是相當特殊而不準確的，與西方談論左右的路線完全不能畫上等號。問題是，在這樣政治與經濟夾纏下，台灣經濟發展卻付出極大的代價。

早年台灣挾著「經濟奇蹟」的光熱，同步創造了相對均衡的所得分配；但近十幾年，國內貧富差距卻不斷惡化。其中原因，其實不難想像：第一，許多新興國家崛起，而台灣卻因自滿自閉，而失去了向外的動力和視野；第二，當各國都在面對全球格局的競爭，中國大陸成為世界工廠，台灣卻拘泥於兩岸的政治關係，反而自我設限與羈絆；第三，台灣在民主化過程中積累的硬塊無法消化，導致朝野陷入惡鬥、報復、綁架共業的泥淖，經濟這一區塊即成為犧牲。第四，當經濟發展減速，追求均富即更失著力點。

官員及企業界訴求「經濟選民」投票，主要是希望拉回比較理性選民的目光，呼籲人們不要讓台灣經濟日漸萎弱的現象惡化；但這樣的籲求，未必有效。原因是，長期以來台灣的政治不僅在現實上演成藍綠對峙，在思維上更儼然被操作成政治就是與經濟對立的東西。於是，綠營反中國、環保反工業、釘子戶反都更、學生反服貿、媽媽反核四；形形色色的「反」，並不是為了在異議中尋求出路，而是要讓大家都動彈不得，這其實是政治的大失敗。

中韓自由貿易協定實施後，台灣經濟會不會受到重創，朝野說法大異其趣；但不可否認的一點是，受影響最大的是中南部的中小企業。儘管中南部的失業及蕭條遠高於北部，但經濟議題打動不了中南部選民，因為那裡缺乏所謂的「經濟選民」；或者說，在政治操作下，「經濟選民」一詞已被汙名化，和支持剝削、不公不義、資本家的走狗等畫上等號。這就是台灣朝野長期對峙及政治操弄的結果，許多人貶抑經濟、醜化成長、蔑視企業家，回過頭來又卻怨嘆低薪、沒頭路。

台灣之所以有「經濟選民」這樣的名詞，無非是理性選民、中間選民等分類法皆被耗光之後，在民主的窮途中一種無可奈何的發明。名之為「經濟選民」，顯然是相對於「政治選民」或「反經濟選民」而言。諷刺的是，「經濟選民」在選戰中受到召喚之日，其實也是台灣經濟江河日下之時，這是令人惆悵的一幕。

這次選舉，受到不少來台觀光陸客的矚目，許多人在台親身感受了民主的魅力。但他們不知道的是，台灣的民主政治沒有解決經濟問題的能力，甚至長期妨礙經濟的發展；這點，台灣人民還在發愁呢！