Why is Taiwan's Democracy Crumbling?

Why is Taiwan's Democracy Crumbling?
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 3, 2015

Executive Summary: The 2016 presidential election is now approaching. Taiwan politics needs a major change, a major reorganization, a major shock to the system, one that breaks the pattern of narrow blue-green confrontation, that abandons barren and parochial political discourse. It needs new ideas and new political talent to emerge, to gather, to enage in healthy competition, to blaze a path towards a truly new and democratic Taiwan. We hope that in the coming year, political parties, legislative candidates, and presidential candidates, confront the issue of Taiwan's crumbling democracy and propose solutions. Voters must think hard and exercise independent judgment. Only then will they be able to cast votes that benefit Taiwan's democracy and future generations.

Full Text Below:

Is Taiwan democratic? Is Taiwan's political system too democratic, or not democratic enough? Is Taiwan's democracy in crisis? If it is, what is the nature of the crisis? What is the extent of the crisis, and why? What is the solution? What reforms should we implement? These questions are the key to Taiwan politics. Understanding these questions is the key to Taiwan's political predicament. People hold different views on these issues. That is the critical difference in Taiwan politics. We could say that how we answer these questions, is the key to political reform on Taiwan, and the key to socio-economic development.

This is all very surprising. Starting in the mid-1980s, Taiwan began its transformation into a democracy. Bans were lifted on the formation of new political parties and newspapers. Martial law was lifted. Legislators and the president were directly elected. Two changes in the ruling party followed. Yet some still maintain that Taiwan's political system is undemocratic. Those who maintain that Taiwan is undemocratic include anti-KMT pseudo-revolutionaries. They maintain that Taiwan is still a one party state. They maintain that the government, the legislature, the judiciary, intelligence agencies, and even the media are still dominated by a one party state. They insist that "Unless the KMT falls, Taiwan will not improve." Last year they used the STA as a pretext for the Sunflower Student Movement. They set the agenda, manipulated public sentiment, and played a major role in the nine in one elections.

Citizens' Movements Transformed into Opposition Movements

This time warp in political consciousness is rooted in a narrow understanding of Chinese reunification vs. Taiwan independence and even “ethnic” consciousness, so-called.  These pseudo-revolutionaries maintain that despite repeated elections, the ruling Kuomintang is a "foreign political party", and an "agent of [Mainland] China". This narrow understanding has led to anti-democratic, pseudo-revolutionary, "Down with the Kuomintang", “overthrow the one party state” political rhetoric, utterly detached from reality. This subjective perception was already on the wane, but was revived by the Sunflower Student Movement. This rhetoric has regressed political debate on Taiwan 30 years, and prevents a calm, serious, in-depth understanding of Taiwan's predicament and the ills of its political system.

Another fashionable myth in Taiwan's political realm concerns "citizens' movements" or "civic consciousness". During martial law, abuses due to cronyist economic development, as well as authoritarian oppression, gave rise to to protests, to the "self-help movement", and "social movements." The self-help movement was a response to unreasonable laws or their enforcement, and occasionally led to clashes. The social movements, meanwhile, addressed economic system reform. Interestingly enough, social movements debuted on Taiwan 30 years earlier. But the media suddenly replaced the term “social movement” with the term, "citizens' movement". What is the "citizens' movement"? On the surface it is a citizens' rights movement dedicated to the reform of unreasonable laws and institutions. It is dedicated to protecting the rights of citizens. But on Taiwan a "citizens' movement" is a protest against a non-existent "one party state". The original meaning of “social movement” as a movement that transcends partisan politics and reunification vs. independence, has been transformed, into a highly politicized "citizens' movement."

Problems with the Transplanting of Western Democracy

The fight for rights has been transformed into a fight for power. Taiwan's "citizens' movements" have flourished. They have nourished the DPP, the "third force", and facilitated the formation of new political parties. Civil society is a key to mature citizenship. The highly politicized, highly partisan "citizens' movement" has made rational discussion of public policy through open democratic mechanisms and procedures impossible. It has made the reconciliation of competing party claims and interests and balanced decisions impossible.

In such an atmosphere, the real ills of Taiwan's political system are completely concealed. This ills include powers inconsistent with the constitution, black box operations reflecting a weak legislature, inadequate rights protection, a bureaucracy lacking in efficiency and transparency, over commercialization, cutthroat competition, a politicized media environment, and complex problems of political reform. All of these are falsely characterized as clashes between the "Taiwanese people" and an alleged "one party state". Taiwan desperately needs rational debate, comprehensive dialogue, risk benefit analysis, and sound decision-making. All this is lost amidst populist sentiment.

Taiwan's democracy is indeed in crisis. This is nothing special. From a global perspective, democracy, or more precisely, "Western-style democracy" has encountered difficulties all over. These include the rise of populist political opposition, the escalation of partisan political divisions, the shortage of people of integrity and ability, and the proliferation of money politics. All of these have manifested themselves in different countries to different degrees. On Taiwan, they have manifested themselves simultaneously. Why? For starters, the transplanting of Western-style democracy failed to account for local political culture. Secondly, the major political parties on Taiwan have long trumpeted reform and innovation. But their point of departure has always been their own partisan or even personal interests. They steal credit and destroy the system, but lack the wisdom, foresight, and ability to create a new, flexible, and transparent system of democracy. As a result, Taiwan's democracy is crumbling all around us.

Voters Must Think Independently

The 2016 presidential election is now approaching. Taiwan politics needs a major change, a major reorganization, a major shock to the system, one that breaks the pattern of narrow blue-green confrontation, that abandons barren and parochial political discourse. It needs new ideas and new political talent to emerge, to gather, to enage in healthy competition, to blaze a path towards a truly new and democratic Taiwan. We hope that in the coming year, political parties, legislative candidates, and presidential candidates, confront the issue of Taiwan's crumbling democracy and propose solutions. Voters must think hard and exercise independent judgment. Only then will they be able to cast votes that benefit Taiwan's democracy and future generations.

真道理性 真愛台灣 系列8－台灣民主搖搖欲墜 原因何在？
2015年03月03日 04:10
本報訊

台灣民不民主？台灣的政治是民主太多，還是民主太少？

台灣的民主是否面臨危機？如果確實面臨危機，又是哪種性質的危機？危機深重的程度為何？該如何解決？有哪些改革的方案？這一連串的問題，是台灣政治的重大課題，如何理解這一系列問題，是掌握台灣政治困局的關鍵，人們對這一系列問題的不同認識、不同立場，是台灣政治的關鍵性分歧，我們甚至可以說，如何回答這些問題，事關台灣政治改革，更是台灣社會經濟整體發展的核心課題。

非常令人意外，台灣從1980年代中期開始推動民主轉型，先後歷經解除黨禁報禁、解除戒嚴，以及國會全面改選和總統直接民選，尤其經過兩次政黨輪替，一些民眾仍然認為台灣政治體制並不民主。高喊台灣不民主的人群當中，其實有一大群是「反國民黨」的「準革命論者」，他們認為台灣仍然籠罩在「黨國體制」之下，政府、國會、司法、情治系統甚至媒體都被黨國體制把持，於是「國民黨不倒，台灣不會好」的口號甚囂塵上，在去年藉反服貿為理由，掀起太陽花運動，一舉掌握輿論主流引領社會風潮，在九合一選舉中起了很大的作用。

公民運動成反抗運動

這種看似「時空錯亂」的政治認識，其背後其實根源於某種狹隘的統獨意識、甚至是族群意識，也就是認定經過選舉而多次執政的國民黨還是「外來政黨」、是「中國代理人」，也因為這種狹隘的認識，於是就產生了某種反民主、類似主張革命，卻完全背離現實的「打倒國民黨論」、「推翻黨國體制論」。這樣的情緒與認識，原本已經逐漸消退，卻在太陽花學運之後死灰復燃，而這樣的論述，可以說是使台灣的政治討論倒退了30年，更妨礙了人們冷靜、認真與深入的理解台灣政治體制的困局與弊病。

台灣政治領域另一個當紅時髦的名詞：「公民運動崛起」或「公民意識覺醒」，更是大迷思。解嚴前後，台灣就因為資本主義經濟發展的流弊，以及威權體制的壓迫所產生的弱勢者抗爭，而有了「自力救濟」與「社會運動」。「自力救濟」是針對不合理的法律或執法手段的自發性、偶發性抗爭，「社會運動」是更有意識地改革社會經濟體制的持續性運動。有意思的是，「社會運動」在台灣存在了30年，突然出現了「公民運動」一詞，在媒體上代換了「社會運動」。什麼是「公民運動」，表面上講的是公民的「權利」意識覺醒，要改革不合理的法律與制度，以求能更周延的保障公民的諸種權利，但是台灣版的「公民運動」卻在實際上被詮釋成對抗「黨國體制」的反抗運動，原本超越黨派統獨的「社會運動」蛻變成了高度政治性、排他性的所謂「公民運動」。

移植西方民主出問題

由爭取「權利」轉化成爭奪「權力」，台灣版的「公民運動」的表面蓬勃，一方面固然滋養了民進黨和雨後春筍般的「第三勢力」、「新興政黨」，另一方面，由於「公民運動」的高度政治性、黨派性，卻讓「公民社會」原本的重要內核、也是「公民意識」成熟的表徵：理性討論公共政策，透過公開、民主的機制與程序協調各方的主張與利益，做出相對穩妥與平衡的決策，幾乎喪失殆盡。

於是，在這樣的論述氛圍下，台灣政治體制的真正弊病完全被掩蓋，權責不相符的憲政秩序，黑箱作業又無法真正反映弱勢聲音的國會，仍不夠充分周延的權利保障，缺乏效率和透明性的官僚體制，過度市場化、惡質競爭和泛政治化的媒體環境等等複雜的政治改革難題，全部被化約成「台灣人民」與「黨國體制」的對抗，台灣原本迫切需要的理性思辨、廣泛對話、權衡利害、穩健決策，全部在這種民粹的情緒下被遺棄、被扭曲。

台灣的民主確實出現了危機，這並不特別，從全球的範圍來看，民主體制、或者更精確的說是「西方式民主」制度到處遇到了困難，民粹主義抬頭、政黨對立激化、選賢與能機制落空、金權政治氾濫等等，在不同國家有不同程度的出現，而在台灣，可以說是諸症併發。深究其原因，首先還在於移植「西方式民主」的過程中，缺乏根據本土社會的實際政治生態進行調整、改造。其次，台灣的主要政黨多少年來高喊改革、革新，但始終是從自己政黨、甚至政治領袖個人的私利出發，任意剪裁制度，破壞體制，卻缺乏真正打造彈性、透明、民主、效率的新體制的智慧、遠見與能力，台灣民主搖搖欲墜並非杞人之憂。

選民要獨立思考判斷

面向2016大選，台灣政治確實需要大分化、大重組、大震盪，一方面真正打破藍綠對抗的狹隘格局，揚棄既有偏狹貧瘠的政治論述，一方面讓真正有新思維、新魄力的新生政治人才得以浮現，各自集結，良性競爭，打開台灣新的、真正的民主深化改革之路，讓台灣民主鞏固下來。我們期盼未來一年，各政黨總統及立委候選人必須面對台灣民主搖搖欲墜的問題提出對策，選民也要作認真思考與獨立判斷，大選時才能投出有益台灣民主與後代子孫的一票。