The origins of Taiwan's democracy

First, you’ll excuse my ignorance - Taiwanese politics is not my forte and although I’ve got Denny Roy’s Taiwan - a Political History here in front of me, I haven’t cracked it open yet (it’s on the list). So, here’s my question…

Is it fair to say that democracy here came about through US pressure?

I’m guessing the answer is ‘no.’ I suppose it came about from a variety of factors.

(I just skimmed through the relevant section, but couldn’t find a satisfactory answer.)

Answers? Articles? Opinions? Links? Sarcastic remarks?

Thanks,

Edward

It’s fair to say US had a lot of influence over CJG in lifting martial law and appointed LTH to become President. LTH then used the ROC slush fund to hire an expensive Madison Avenue PR firm to do write ups about him in the English media that lead to his moniker “Mr. Democracy.”

However, the framework for the democracy on Taiwan was set in motion during 1911 and the establishment of the ROC by Dr. Sun. The ROC constitution basically laid the ground work for the political system currently in place in Taiwan.

But then again Dr. Sun was educated in Hawaii, so once again more US influence…

Ed, US pressure played a role, but the democracy movement in the 1970s and 1980s was by far the most important factor. The enigmatic Chiang Ching-kuo also took important steps including bringing in many members of the Taiwanese elite into his regime beginning in the early 1970s including Lee Teng-hui. His decision to lift martial law was also important. Lee Teng-hui’s studied rise to power after he became president also accelerated the democratic process. There were many factors. US pressure was one of the less important ones.

Thanks to both.

But ac_dropout, did/do Sun’s principles really form the guiding priniciples, or however you put it, of modern-day democracy in Taiwan? That’s what I’m trying to get at. They pay a lot of lip service to the doctor here, and in the PRC as well (as you doubtlessly know; he’s untouchable; a saint that transcends the political divide, etc., etc.), but the PRC announced in 2007 that it would not be ready for a multi-party system for another - wait for it - hundred years.

I think that everyday Chinese people wanted to see his ideas put into practice (here - and I’m sure many still do in the PRC), but can we really credit Taiwan’s becoming a democracy to Sun in anything more than theory? I understand that his theoretical guidelines contsitute the basis of Chinese democracy, but how instrumental were they actualy bringing about democracy? What was the primary cause? What were other causes? etc.

Thank you and sorry, I’m sleepy. This is not a coherent post, but I think you know what I mean.

Ghandi’s basic ideas kicked out the brits and established the INdia, Pakistan and Bangladesh of today.

As well as many deaths in sectarian violence.

Although it would be interesting to see how the PRC progresses into a more open political system, the ROC just recently enacted rules so that it would eliminate excessive party representation, effectively make it a two party process on the national level.

Thus promotioning the notion that too many voices in a democracy is not a good thing either.

As for Dr. Sun actual effect on the modern China, I do agree that a lot is mythos, because he unfortunately past away only in ROC Ming Guo year 13, leaving a lot of unfinished work, and a power vacuum that lead to the first part of the Chinese Civil war.

So to some extent credit needs to be given to the ROC constitution because it set the frame work for a democracy once martial law was lifted in Taiwan. Unlike Japan, as a counter example, their constitution was wholely a foreign imposition by the Allies after WWII.

The fundimentals to political freedom for China will be dependent on economic prosperity as well as political security of the government. Without those two factors there will be no time for the masses to want change and no interest of those in power to contemplate change.

Right, I see. Ghandi point well taken and that’s interesting about the limit of two parties. I wasn’t aware of that. Is it really a matter of too many voices, though? It depends on yer politics I guess. Americans, for example, see nothing wrong in a two-party system, but I’m not American.

I shall have to read up on it.

Ed

got any references for that statement, any primary sources that you’d like to share with us? it is usual when making such grand sweeping potentially-defamatory accusations about one’s absent enemies to have something to back them up.

otherwise people will just call you a liar and a troll.

anyway, why are you not in favor of the last good president that the KMT had in office? i thought you were true blue all through. share your thoughts on the man, please, and let us in on WHY you think that way… supporting documents, primary sources, secondary sources, all are more than welcome. but no hearsay, demonography or hagiography, thanks.

As an average Taiwanese I have access to information not available to other people. It is called the Chinese newspapers and magazines. Not to mention a social circle of other average Taiwanese to confirm or discredit various reports circulating in Chinese.

These are the views of top secret average Taiwanese…:laughing:

[quote=“Ed Lakewood”]First, you’ll excuse my ignorance - Taiwanese politics is not my forte and although I’ve got Denny Roy’s Taiwan - a Political History here in front of me, I haven’t cracked it open yet (it’s on the list). So, here’s my question…

Is it fair to say that democracy here came about through US pressure?

I’m guessing the answer is ‘no.’ I suppose it came about from a variety of factors.

(I just skimmed through the relevant section, but couldn’t find a satisfactory answer.)

Answers? Articles? Opinions? Links? Sarcastic remarks?

Thanks,

Edward[/quote]

I don’t think it was due to US pressure. I think LTH met up with a bunch of students demanding reform, decided they had a point and that was it

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Teng-hui#Presidency

[quote]1990 saw the arrival of the Wild Lily student movement on behalf of full democracy for Taiwan. Thousands of Taiwanese students demonstrated for democratic reforms. The demonstrations culminated in a sit-in demonstration by over 300,000 students at Memorial Square in Taipei. Students called for direct elections of the national president and vice president and for a new election for all legislative seats. On March 21 Lee welcomed some of the students to the Presidential Building. He expressed his support of their goals and pledged his commitment to full democracy in Taiwan. The moment is regarded by supporters of democracy in Taiwan as perhaps his finest moment in office. Gatherings recalling the student movement are regularly held around Taiwan every March 21.

In May 1991 Lee spearheaded a drive to eliminate the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion, laws put in place following the KMT arrival in 1949 that suspended the democratic functions of the government. In December 1991 the original members of the Legislative Yuan, elected to represent mainland constituencies in 1948, were forced to resign and new elections were held to apportion more seats to the bensheng ren. The elections forced Hau Pei-tsun from the premiership, a position he was given in exchange for his tacit support of Lee. He was replaced by Lien Chan, then an ally of Lee and the first native Taiwanese to hold the premiership.

The prospect of the first island-wide democratic election the next year, together with Lee’s June 1995 visit to Cornell University, sparked the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis. The previous eight presidents and vice-presidents of Taiwan had been elected by the members of the National Assembly. For the first time Taiwan’s leader would be elected by majority vote of Taiwan’s population. The People’s Republic of China conducted a series of missile tests in the waters surrounding Taiwan and other military maneuvers off the coast of Fujian in response to what Communist Party leaders described as moves by Lee to “split the motherland.” The PRC government launched another set of tests just days before the election, sending missiles over the island to express its dissatisfaction should the Taiwanese people vote for Lee. The military actions disrupted trade and shipping lines and caused a temporary dip in the Asian stock market. The 1996 missile launches boosted support for Lee.

On March 23, 1996, Lee became the first popularly elected ROC president with 54% of the vote. Many people who worked or resided in other countries made special trips back to the island to vote.[/quote]

And I also think that Zhao Ziyang had much the same reaction to the protesters at Tiananmen - he basically thought they were right. Other people in the Chinese Communist Party panicked, locked him up and run the protesters over with tanks. But that wasn’t what Zhao Ziyang wanted to happen. If Gorbachev quoted him accurately he intended to do what LTH did a year later.

good post

It is kind of sad to see the greenies try to monopolize the wild lily movement.

Not to mention the whole movement started more like a me-too demostration after 6/4

[quote=“ac_dropout”]As an average Taiwanese I have access to information not available to other people. It is called the Chinese newspapers and magazines. Not to mention a social circle of other average Taiwanese to confirm or discredit various reports circulating in Chinese.

These are the views of top secret average Taiwanese…:laughing:[/quote]

AC, stop your average Taiwanese bullshit. Most of the people on this site are married to the average Taiwanese.
I will accept my wife’s and wife’s family views as the average Taiwanese viewpoint over your’s anyday.

My son is the average Taiwanese, and unlike you, he is still here, and when he is 18, he will serve in the ROC military!

My wife is also an average Taiwanese. My kids are average Taiwanese as well. What’s your point?

That an average Taiwanese woman can’t have kids with an average Taiwanese guy, who just post his average opinions on the internet…in English.

So even though my wife’s opinions have similar pan-Blue leaning like mine, granted her support of MYJ is based more on her high school crush on the guy, and mine is a little more grounded on his Strait Policy position, I don’t validate my opinion because of my marriage to a Tai-mei.

Nor will I use my children’s future service, career, or accomplishments to validate me either…

These are the views of an average Taiwanese dad, husband, and all around good guy…

Well, that was interesting…

Thanks KingZog; that was a good post and I never thought about the Tiananmen connection. Couple things, though: that article says Lien Chan is a native of Taiwan; I thought he was born on the mainland. Also, the PRC fired missiles over Taiwan? I thought they landed just off the coast - down around Kaohsiung. No? One’s just as bad as the other, I suppose, but I’d never read that before.

[quote=“Ed Lakewood”]Well, that was interesting…

Thanks KingZog; that was a good post and I never thought about the Tiananmen connection. Couple things, though: that article says Lien Chan is a native of Taiwan; I thought he was born on the mainland. Also, the PRC fired missiles over Taiwan? I thought they landed just off the coast - down around Kaohsiung. No? One’s just as bad as the other, I suppose, but I’d never read that before.[/quote]

Well the article is Wikipedia so they probably got stuff wrong. But one thing you realise is that some sort of reassesment of Tiananman could’t happen while Jiang Zemin was leader, since he was the main beneficiary from what was effectively a military coup inside the CCP. Look at this

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_leader

Jiang was leader until Hu took over between 2002 (when he became General Secretary of the CCP) and 2004 (when he became Chairman of the Central Military Commission). Actually that sums up the PRC, you’re not Paramount Leader until you’re head of the military which is not the same thing as being President. Very different from the US, where the President is Comander in Chief from the moment he is inaugurated. Zhao was General Secretary but never Chairman of CMC, that was Deng Xiaoping, or President, that was Yang Shankun. Deng and Yang both agreed on a crackdown. Even if Hu was a reformer, he had to be very careful what he said until he had control of the military, because the military has a veto over politics. There was an interesting article in the South China Morning Post about how the military was going to be told to follow civillian traffic regulations during the Olympics. I.e. normally they can ignore red lights and the like, and it causes chaos.

So Hu has only had the power to reform things for a few years. Not that I think he is a reformer by the way, but my point is that even if he was we wouldn’t know until now.

I suspect it will take much longer than that, Jiang and other guilty parties need to die before it could happen.

Both the link and your comments were very interesting. Thanks.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]My wife is also an average Taiwanese. My kids are average Taiwanese as well. What’s your point?

That an average Taiwanese woman can’t have kids with an average Taiwanese guy, who just post his average opinions on the internet…in English.

So even though my wife’s opinions have similar pan-Blue leaning like mine, granted her support of MYJ is based more on her high school crush on the guy, and mine is a little more grounded on his Strait Policy position, I don’t validate my opinion because of my marriage to a Tai-mei.

Nor will I use my children’s future service, career, or accomplishments to validate me either…

These are the views of an average Taiwanese dad, husband, and all around good guy…[/quote]

You don’t live here, nor does your wife anymore, and as for your kids, they are Americans, and very likely speak and read Mandarin with even less fluency than you do English. BTW, are you kids fluent in English? I assuem they are, which btw makes them absolutely not average Taiwanese.

As bobl said, we all live here and are surrounded by Taiwanese friends, spouses, children and media. Some of us are even capable of reading a paper and listening to a radio talk show. The idea that you in your little wsr bubble in New York have better access to the Taiwanese mindset is a nice fiction and I hope it gives you a good night’s sleep to believe it.

Mucha Man,

My parents are fluent in English as well. Yet no one questions their average Taiwanese status.
Speaking more than one language is a hallmark of the average Taiwanese. Speaking English maybe one of the languages but not a neccessity. Just like not speaking Minnan could also be a poor indicator of who is and isn’t Taiwanese.

An interesting identity issue hypothesis. So if I’m surrounded by Whites, Blacks, or whatever that will make me an average White, Black, or whatever. So those ABC that participate in f.com happy hours are really White?

Your argument on identity is getting more convoluted by each post.

It would be silly to think that just by supporting Taiwan Independence would make anyone more or less Taiwanese.

You know, I was thinking about this. It seems like 70-90% of Taiwanese people support Taiwanese independence, at least in theory. In practice a similar percentage know that at present it would mean a war with China which they don’t want so they support the status quo now.

So the majority of foreigners supporting TI now means that perhaps those foreigners are somewhat naive about the geopolitical realities of Taiwan and China. But you have to admire their patriotism. My guess is that they are far more patriotic about Taiwan than the average immigrant in the West would be about their adopted countries, and quite possibly more patriotic than the average Taiwanese. Which is odd really, Taiwan as a country doesn’t really try to turn immigrants into citizens - it still ties citizenship to ethnicity and tends to expect foreigners to visit for work and then go back home. You could say that it follows the “guest worker” model of how to handle foreigners.

In a sense, it confirms something I’ve always suspected. If you make it hard for immigrants to integrate most will leave but the ones that stick it out will be hyper patriotic. You can see it in Western societies to some extent. Places like Sweden give immigrants lots of support in terms of benefits and free language classes but the integration rate is very low - most immgrants end up unemployed and basically hating Sweden. The US by contrast gives immigrants little support but the people that stick through it are fiercely pro American, probably more so than most native born Americans. Mind you the US doesn’t follow the “guest worker” model, it actively encourages people who have staid for a long time to apply for citizenship. The UK is somewhere between the two in terms of support, but seems to be moving toward the US model.

In a sense Taiwan is, at least on paper far more immigrant hostile than the US - immigrants need to renounce their original citizenship to become Taiwan citizens unless they are ethnically Chinese. But the people that do so are strongly patriotic.

Now the interesting thing is that if this becomes an issue for Taiwan it would be easy to fix - Taiwan could move a bit toward the US model and immigrants will become less patriotic. Or rather the hyperpatriotic ones will be diluted by more pragmatic economic migrants.