Why Does the Public on Taiwan Feel So Lost?

Why Does the Public on Taiwan Feel So Lost?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
August 20, 2013

Summary: Political and social differences on Taiwan have intensified. Perhaps members of the public should begin with themselves. They should avoid negative language that provokes a negative response. They should minimize differences with their political enemies. They should restore such values as democracy, freedom, and humanity. They must attempt to transcend Blue vs. Green. They must attempt to recover, bit by bit, the middle ground. They must not permit themselves to become mire in collective cynicism and self-pity. That is a lesson the preceding wave of democratization taught us.

Full text below:

Recently UDN TV interviewed Minister of Culture Lung Ying-tai. Lung compared today's society to society a decade ago, when she was Chief of the Taipei City Bureau of Culture. She said public trust in government has nearly evaporated. She said the public on Taiwan is much less confident than it was 15 years ago.

We hardly need Lung Ying-tai to remind us. Everyone knows public trust in government has evaporated. Everyone knows we have lost faith in ourselves. These are very real and serious problems. Chart them on a graph. Over the next few years at least, the trend lines will continue to decline. Lung Ying-tai most laments the former. She laments the fact that "Officials are finding it hard to survive." But the latter is far more troubling. The public fears that no solution can be found for its long-term feeling of loss.

The self-deprecating witticism, "Officials are finding it hard to survive" is something officials have been repeating ever since democratization. The government has lost its authority. Officials have failed to keep up with the times. They have failed to change their attitude toward those they serve. Naturally they are finding it hard to win people's trust. From the peoples' perspective, democratization has made them "masters in their own home." It has made them more self-confident. It has made them less afraid to complain to officialdom. It has provided them with more opportunities to express defiance. The result however, has not been improved government efficiency. It has not been better solutions to practical problems. Such a democracy is an illusion. How can people not be disappointed. How can they not feel a sense of loss? How can they not become cynics?

Public loss of confidence in Taiwan, involves three factors. One. A loss of pride in our democracy. In 2000, ruling party change was risky business. People had high hopes for the new political order. People were proud of the fact that the ROC was the forerunner of democracy in Chinese society. Unfortunately this vision was shattered by eight years of DPP policy chaos. Chen Shui-bian family corruption was an even greater betrayal. Together, they shattered the twin myths of democratization and nativization.

Two. The economy has declined. Taiwan had an opportunity to ride the Mainland's coat tails to new economic growth and opportunity. Lee Teng-hui's "avoid haste, exercise patience" policy, and Chen Shui-bian's Closed Door Policy caused Taiwan to miss out. A second ruling party change under Ma Ying-jeou improved cross-Strait relations, but could not make up the lost economic momentum. This includes the 12 i-Taiwan Projects and the four year 500 billion public works program. These involved huge investments of funds, but failed to increase production or employment. This year, economic growth, youth unemployment, pensions, welfare, and other fundamentals, deteriorated. Neighboring countries on the other hand, continued to prosper. People were predictably frustrated.

Three. Any social consensus or sense of shared values has been lost. Under DPP rule, struggles over reunification vs. independence intensified. They became struggles between Blue and Green. Political party struggles intensified political differences within society. People on Taiwan no longer share a common language or common values. Nothing in today's society escapes the Blue vs. Green litmus test. It determines the truth or falsity of everything. This irrational Blue vs. Green conflict has expanded into every corner of society. Taiwan once had a middle ground, in academia, in civil society, and in religion. Now neutral parties remain silent in order to avoid being dragged into the conflict. Opportunists meanwhile, jump on the bandwagon and choose sides. There is no longer any middle ground. Society has lost its sense of proportion. It has lost any respect for democracy, freedom, the rule of law, professionalism, and reason it might have once had.

People on Taiwan today feel a sense of loss. They know that the ROC is sliding downhill. They know that feel-good sentiments cannot hide the truth. They see no force that will slow the ROC's descent into oblivion. Will the Ma administration suddenly wake up and get its act together? Will the next ruling party change made any difference? Will protesters once again have to take to the streets?

Wang Chien-hsuan recently thundered, "The Control Yuan may as well close up shop!" But that was irrational. High officials cannot solve our problems. But when they vent their emotions this way, they merely deepen public cynicism. Government officials must promote public confidence. The public on Taiwan has lost confidence in itself. It is waiting for the government to offer encouragment.

Political and social differences on Taiwan have intensified. One cannot expect people to believe that some high official can address this feeling of impotence. Perhaps members of the public should begin with themselves. They should avoid negative language that provokes a negative response. They should minimize differences with their political enemies. They should restore such values as democracy, freedom, and humanity. They must attempt to transcend Blue vs. Green. They must attempt to recover, bit by bit, the middle ground. They must not permit themselves to become mire in collective cynicism and self-pity. That is a lesson the preceding wave of democratization taught us.

台灣何以充斥失落感與憤世嫉俗？
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.08.20 02:14 am

文化部長龍應台接受udn tv專訪時說，比起十幾年前她出任台北市文化局長，今天社會對政府的「信任感」幾乎「蕩然無存」。她還說，十五年前後相比，今天台灣人對自己的「信心指數」也降低很多。

不用龍應台提醒，大家也知道，人民對政府「信任感」的消失，與民眾「自信心」的下降，都是極真實而嚴重的問題。如果把兩者放在時間的向度裡觀察，至少在未來幾年，我們看不到這兩條拋物線的下墜終點。更讓龍應台慨嘆的，顯然是前者，所謂的「官不聊生」；但格外值得人們關切的，其實是後者，社會憂慮台灣長期找不到出路和解方的「失落感」。

所謂「官不聊生」，是台灣民主化以來，官員一直掛在嘴邊的自嘲。政府的權威失落，而官員未隨著時勢變化而調整服務心態，當然難以得到人民的信任。然而，對民眾而言，如果民主化的結果，給了人民更多「當家做主」的自信，更多向官員嗆聲、反脣相稽的機會，結果卻無助於提升政府效能，亦無助於實際解決問題，這樣虛幻的民主，怎不令人感到失望與失落？人們又如何不憤世嫉俗？

台灣自信心的流失，或可從三方面觀察。第一，是民主驕傲的蒙塵。公元兩千年的政黨輪替雖在艱險中締造，民眾對於政治新局的開創其實仍充滿期待，同時也以台灣作為華人社會的民主先行者感到驕傲。不幸的是，這項憧憬，卻以民進黨八年的施政混亂作收，而陳水扁家族的貪瀆無行則更是對台灣社會的一記迎頭重擊，民主化和本土化神話同遭粉碎。

第二，是經濟風光的消褪。從李登輝的戒急用忍到陳水扁的鎖國政策，台灣經濟錯失了利用大陸崛起以追求壯大及脫胎換骨的契機；但二度政黨輪替後，馬英九雖改善了兩岸關係，卻在經濟面向遲遲無法找回成長的動能。包括愛台十二項建設和四年五千億擴大公共建設方案，都投入了鉅大的經費，卻看不到帶動生產和就業的附帶效益。這兩年，經濟成長、青年失業、年金及福利負擔不支等基本面表現不斷惡化；比起鄰近國家的向榮趨盛，不免讓人喪氣。

第三，是社會共識和共同價值的散失：民進黨執政期間，台灣的「統獨之爭」進一步擴大為「藍綠之鬥」，政黨的鬥爭深化為社會大眾的顏色分化，至此，台灣就完全失去了共同語言與共同價值。今天社會上發生任何事情，都要經由「藍」或「綠」的試紙檢查，來驗證它的屬性和辯正方向。經過這種非理性的藍綠運動，原來台灣還存在的「中間地帶」，包括學術界、宗教界乃至民間社團在內，清者噤聲以求身免，濁者輕易投身選邊而站。失去中間地帶的台灣，不僅失去了調和社會平衡的力量，也失去了原先對民主、自由、法治、專業、理性等價值的認知和信仰。

今天台灣人充滿失落感，一個原因是人們認知到國家正在走下坡，這是再怎麼假裝「自我感覺良好」都掩飾不了的事實；另一個更重要的原因是，人們看不出這個「台灣往下掉」的情勢，要碰到什麼樣的力量，才能把它托住。要靠馬政府突然的覺醒和振作嗎？靠下一次政黨輪替嗎？還是靠抗爭團體不斷接力在街頭衝撞？

王建?日前發飆責罵「監察院不如關掉」，其實正是這種失落心理的反射之一。問題是，高官無力解決問題，卻採取如此非理性的暴衝手法發洩，只會加深人民的憤世嫉俗。政府官員需要民眾的信任來推動國家，但台灣失落的自信心，不也在等待政府的作為來填補與提振？

老實說，當台灣政治和社會歧見深化到這種地步，人們要期待什麼高人一出手就能化解民眾的無力感，恐怕是不可能的事。民眾可以做的，或許是從自身做起，盡量避免用負面語言引發負面對應，盡量減少用政治顏色來分別敵我，盡量還原自己對民主、自由、人道等價值的原色信仰，盡可能追求超乎藍綠的客觀價值。無論如何，要一點一滴找回中間地帶，切勿再陷入集體憤世嫉俗的悲情，那是我們在前一波民主化已經切身體驗過的一課。