The “nine in one” election in Taiwan was over. The Kuomintang won the election and the Democratic Progressive Party was defeated. For a while, the opinions of “the Democratic Progressive Party is the mainstream public opinion to be taken off the shelf” and “2024 is expected to reappear in the blue sky” once again permeated the public opinion field in the island. However, paradoxically, many people in the defeated green camp and Taiwan society still assumed that 2024 would have a “pendulum effect” in favor of the Democratic Progressive Party.
Then, the question arises: what changes will this “nine in one” election bring to Taiwan’s politics? Behind the noisy public opinion in the island after the election, which interpretation is really reasonable, accurate and can stand the test? At this time, it is necessary to jump out of the small logic of blue, green and white in the island, abandon all kinds of wishful expectations, and observe the real reasons for the sharp fluctuations of public opinion in the island in recent years.
Similar to the “Nine in One” election when the “Korean Wave” rose four years ago, this election is a collective opinion statement of “hating the Democratic Progressive Party” or “hating the Tsai authorities”. It is true that the DPP authorities are unpopular. But the problem is that under Taiwan’s existing electoral system and political culture, using the votes in hand to promote “party rotation” or express the political appeal of “changing the status quo” is essentially just an emotional vent. In Taiwan’s grassroots language, it is “Shouting Shuang”.
If the Democratic Progressive Party does not do well, the Taiwan people are “unhappy”. When the Democratic Progressive Party is elected from power or ends up in a disastrous defeat, the Taiwan people will naturally “feel happy”. so what? Has the real problem been solved? Taking the “Korean Wave” born four years ago as an example, the emergence of Korean Yu did make many Taiwanese people feel “very happy” for a time, but he did not even sit in the chair of Kaohsiung Mayor. Soon, he was rushed to participate in the “2020” election by “super cool” fans. As a result, more people were “unhappy”, which not only triggered the split and defeat of the Kuomintang, but also led to the dismissal of the mayor’s post.
Between “good” and “bad”, Han Guoyu, a political star who had left a good impression on the people of Taiwan, such as “fighting economy” and “being grounded”, was repeatedly harassed and finally returned to “ordinary people”.
In the same way, the reason why the DPP’s senior leaders pushed out the controversial Chen Shizhong to run for mayor of Taipei in this election must also be to see Chen Shizhong’s high popularity in the Green Camp Basic, but this popularity is based on manipulating populism, reversing right and wrong, and inciting “Taiwan independence”. When the “loyal people” are “more comfortable” with Chen Shizhong, the Taiwanese people will be “more unhappy” with him. The election results show that the DPP’s great defeat in the north has contributed to the spillover effect of “hating Chen Shizhong”.
It can be seen that under the institutional environment of Taiwan’s electoral politics, public opinion, sentiment and votes can almost be equated. People’s emotions are changeable, so the public opinion is capricious, and the votes become arbitrary. Rational policy debates that should focus on public policies and governance performance will always degenerate into image tarnishing, laughing and swearing, populist mobilization and ideological confrontation. Those with ideals, ambitions and talents are bound to be black and fishy once they enter this vat.
Whether it is blue, green or white, what they say is to serve the voters and listen to the public opinion. In fact, they are not “coaxing”, “cheating” or “scaring” the public opinion, but the truth and falsehood, interests and justice, time and power, good and evil that really matter for the long-term survival and development of Taiwan society are often ignored and distorted. Taiwan’s people are still trapped in the “bottom of the well”, unable to see the real appearance of the world, and are always immersed in the small logic and small happiness of self construction.
This is the institutional dilemma of “desktop democracy”. Everything sways between the so-called “cool” and “uncomfortable”. It seems to be a big event, but it is actually no help to whoever comes to power and who leaves.