DPP rapidly losing political turf in Taipei on scandals, Shen says
2006/6/9
The China Post staff
The "pan-blue" alliance is enjoying a much higher constituency ratio than the "pan-green" camp at about 80:20, compared with the past level of 55:45, following the exposure of a spate of scandals surrounding President Chen Shui-bian's wife and son-in-law, according to ex-lawmaker Shen Fu-hsiung of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Shen made the remarks when delivering a speech at Shuteh University of Science and Technology in Kaohsiung, southern Taiwan, Wednesday night. Shen forecast that the number of seats at the Taipei City Council held by the DPP would drop to 12 or 13 from the existing 17, while that for the pan-blue camp would rise to 59 or 60.
DPP elder Shen Fu-hsiung, black sheep of the party
Comment: Unfortunately for the DPP, Shen Fu-hsiung is right. Unless the DPP party hierarchy wises up and listens to black sheep party member Shen Fu-hsiung, who insists that the DPP must undergo fundamental reform and reconsider what it stands for, the DPP is finished.
Shen dared to tell DPP True Believers that "The emperor has no clothes!" and had better cover itself up, PDQ. Such frankness is no longer acceptable within today's willfully blind DPP, and Shen has since become a pariah within his own party.
Will the DPP party hierachy heed Shen's advice?
No it won't.
Formally Shen is still a DPP party member, but in name only. Practically speaking, Shen is already an ex DPP party member, and has joined the ranks of ex DPP members Hsu Hsing-liang, Shih Ming-teh, Sisy Chen, and Cheng Li-wen.
The DPP was once a genuinely "democratic and progressive" political party, in which anything and everything was up for debate. But the moment it seized power in 2000, the DPP changed.
Lord Acton said: "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." One is tempted to add: "Near absolute power, corrupts nearly absolutely."
What the DPP acquired in 2000, thanks to the machinations of Pan Green wolf in Pan Blue sheep's clothing Lee Teng-hui, was near absolute power. What that near absolute power did, was corrupt the DPP nearly absolutely.
That near absolute power has nearly absolutely corrupted the Taiwan independence movement, the pro Taiwan independence Democratic Progressive Party, but most of all, the unchallenged leader of both the movement and the party, Chen Shui-bian.
The DPP party hierarchy made a fateful decision with its recent joint statement, signed by DPP Chairman Yu Shyi-kun, Vice President Annette Lu, Premier Su Tseng-chang, and former premier Frank Hsieh.
On May 27, 006, these "Si Da Tian Wang" (Four Great Kings of Heaven), so-called, rallied behind Chen Shui-bian, despite everything Chen has done over the past six years. In doing so, they signed a suicide pact.
As I said in my recent article, "The DPP continues down its Suicidal Path," I welcome their decision. I mean that, in all seriousness.
Why wouldn't a Deep Blue Chinese reunificationist such as myself welcome such a strategic Pan Green blunder?
The DPP is its own worst enemy. The DPP party hierarchy's monumentally short-sighted decision will inflict more political damage upon the largest and most powerful pro independence political party than the shrewdest attempt at political subversion by any strategist within the Pan Blue camp.
The DPP party hierarchy's myopic beyond belief decision to sweep Chen's egregious shortcomings under the rug and pretend nothing is wrong, will ensure the early demise not only of the DPP as a political party, but far more importantly, of Taiwan independence as a political ideology.
Strictly speaking, Pan Blue pundits such as myself shouldn't be putting such insights out there. After all, as Napoleon Bonaparte warned, "Never interrupt your enemy while he's making a mistake."
But Deep Green political leaders are so blinded by their doctrinaire fundamentalism, nothing Pale Green DPP elders such as Shen Fu-hsiung might say or do, let alone anything detested Deep Blue New Party pundits such as myself might say or do, is ever going to persuade them to reflect upon the error of their ways.
As a result, the DPP party hierarchy will continue alienating more and more Chinese people on Taiwan.
As a result, I eagerly look forward to the outcome of the upcoming 2007 Republic of China Legislative Election.
If you thought the 2004 legislative election was a Pan Green debacle, wait til you see the returns from the 2007 legislative election.
This fall, the DPP will celebrate its twentieth anniversary.
It had better make the most of it, because at the rate it's going, it might not be around to celebrate its twenty-first.
Yes, thank you Bluefriendz for reposting the article, which was linked already. Anyway similar things have happened in the past, like when UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan's Son was suspected of being involved with corruption involving the oil-for-food program. That was direct.
ReplyDeleteIn the end, Chao isn't even a blood relative of President Chen and has nothing to do with him. However there will be a media frenzy regardless, just like when the Bush Twins were caught drinking underage.
Anyway, on a more important note, Chao has withdrawn his DPP membership. Lien and Soong have not left their parties considering the mountain of evidence that they stole millions in tax payer money to purchase various properties for themselves and their kids, instead they used immunity to halt and prevent court proceedings and to escape prosecution. Technically if Chao held any post of significance, he'd have also escaped prosecution due to legislative immunity; instead he chose to withdraw his membership.
Possibly the most curious part is that generally, Pan Blues are calling for a Presidential Recall, over something the President didn't do nor have knowledge over, yet none are proposing that Lien or Soong face up to actions that they themselves did do and admit to on public television, stealing millions that have directly hindered the infrastructure and progress of the Taiwan nation.
I am only too happy to approve the above comment by "sean su."
ReplyDeleteWhat better evidence of the accuracy of my original observation could I ask for?