My quest for the "reasonable" KMT

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

My quest for the "reasonable" KMT...

(Photo: "Long Live the King" is a common sight here in Thailand)

I've been thinking about a recent email conversation with another Taiwan blogger. I have not asked the author's permission to publish these emails, so (s)he shall remain anonymous.

The original email conversation started over my recent posts looking at views being promulgated at The China Desk. My interlocutor (who has emailed me often with helpful information and details, who knows that I don't always agree with him, and who respects that) warned me not to expect any substantial dialogue with an "anti-democracy, pro-free-market-anarcho-capitalist authoritarian." Did I mention that said person doesn't mince words?

I responded:

I did know he's about as blue as they come, and I've read his site for some time. This past week, though, was the first time I actually got around to writing about something he wrote.

I would like to get a better understanding of what some blue-leaning people think about the state of Taiwan, but I haven't been able to find much in the line of reasonable stuff. I (and we may disagree on this) believe that some blues are reasonable people with strong and valid reasons for their political positions, and I'd like to understand that better. The China Desk, though, certainly isn't the place to find it.

The subsequent response brought a challenge: give an example of what I would call a "reasonable" blue supporter.

That got me. The truth is, and I have commented on Chu's site to this effect as well, most of what I have found is exactly what I've been told I would find: KMT apologetes who don't seem willing to accept the wrongs of their forbearers, while all too readily accepting even the most minor faults of the DPP.

I thought for some time about this before replying:

Perhaps what I mean is that, yes, a lot of blues are exactly that (people operating on what are false precepts, just as many greens probably have exaggerated impressions of blues -- e.g. that they are all responsible for the ills of the KMT -- but the way some people will attack a blue with vitriol, I feel, only makes them cling more to their beliefs [and vice versa]. I often get the impression in Taiwanese and American politics that the idea of us all being in this together has been totally lost. For my part, though, I'm going to try [to] keep my calm and present my counter arguments the best I can.

So, I guess what I was trying to say is that I've been looking to better understand why the blues believe what they do and how that can change. It comes from being a pretty liberal-leaning person in one of the reddest states in the US. Just because these people...lean towards a politician I find to be despicable, I don't villainize them, nor even the politician for that matter. All I can do is learn how best to make my case and hope people will see where I'm coming from. The hardest part is accepting that some people just won't change or don't care. Yelling and sermonizing doesn't change that.

So, that's what I've been trying to do. I've been trying to learn what makes blues tick. I'm not talking about the evil ones who are responsible for all those horrible things, but the ones who support those evil ones. What makes the voters look past their politicians' faults?

Moreover, just because I can't give you an example of a good or reasonable blue, doesn't mean they don't exist. I admittedly know very few blues.

Looking back at the email, I want to be clear that the first word of the first sentence is "perhaps." I make this note, because I have, for several months now, been asking myself if Ma's election was actually the best outcome, and I don't think I'm operating on false precepts. I am too tired and busy to go into it now in great detail (I'm in Bangkok right now), but I will try to outline it as best I can.

I've written extensively of my views on the DPP's failings, the fact that their objectives (Democracy, Justice, Progress, etc.) demand a higher standard, which they have not lived up to. Of course, that doesn't mean that the argument cannot be made that the DPP, since its inception, has conducted itself much better than they KMT. The point is, rather, that the Taiwanese don't necessarily hold the KMT to the lofty goals they once did the DPP, so corruption and lies from the KMT don't weaken the KMT as much as even one rotten DPP politician. Therefore, the fact that the DPP has not proved to be above the sort of vice and ineptitude that Taiwanese are used to from the KMT, one could make the case, undermines the entire party.

Remember the bacon debate? Well, I'd just as soon let sleeping dogs do what they do best, but, in the months that have passed, I have not stopped thinking of that debate. I can't stop thinking that what the Taiwanese did was just what people in every other country do when they've lost faith in their politicians: they vote for the party that will get them the best incentives. That's what it's about after all, isn't it? Incentives. The KMT may have torn up the infrastructure the Japanese built up over the fifty years they occupied Taiwan, but will the KMT be the party to build it up again? They likely have the power, connections, and, yes, bacon to get it done.

If you lose faith in the DPP's moral high ground, ability to improve Taiwan, and capacity to move Taiwan into a new era of prosperity, then you vote for the party that has the money, the structure, and the connections to do it (rightly or wrongly, justly or injustly). The world is full of people (in Iraq, Russia, etc.) looking nostalgically backwards to the authoritarian rulers who limited their freedoms but, at least, provided them with stability, e.g. a steady job. A prominent international criminal law/human rights professor mentioned to me yesterday a scene from the BBC documentary "No More Mandelas" (which I have not yet watched) where a black man in Soweto looked back at the Apartheid and the Nationalist Party asking, were we better off? Blacks were an oppressed majority then, but, at least, they could put food on the table.

The conversation about this documentary took place at the seminar on Transitional Justice that I'm participating in in Bangkok right now. It's striking how often, during the course of the presentations and discussions, I come back to the importance of cooperation, which I realized in the email conversation above was what I was getting at. I don't think the DPP has much of a chance for survival if it doesn't try to maintain the moral high ground, and that has to do largely with whether or not they can bridge the gap between themselves and the KMT. I'm starting to believe more and more that Taiwan has two governments, and many people choose which of those two governments they wish to follow and largely disregard the other. Someone needs to bring about the idea that everyone on that island is "in it" together. Villainization and debasement of the "other side" serves very little purpose as does a salvo of personal attacks.

I'm not saying, either, that I've never taken part in this myself. It's quite easy to do, but, more and more, I'm starting to learn that there are better ways to move forward.

...and I'm still looking to have an enlightening conversation with some blues, as I do believe that there are intelligent people on both sides of the divide.

Most Visited Article Pages

How long should we wait for democratic reforms in China?

Does the US encourage China's militarization of space?

The importance of Tourism in Taiwan

Continuing Talk of Education in Taiwan, the US, and France

Discussions with the Strawberry Generation

The Global Generation Gap

Willing to fight for Independence?

Learning that there is no "mainland"

The Culture of Cute

Tech and learning Chinese

Taiwanese media: the bad side of freedom