The sad story is true. The Taipei Times describes the effects on the DPP:Lin joined the DPP in 1994 and served as the party's chief counselor in 1996. In 1998, Lin was elected as the eighth DPP chairman and served as the party's campaign manager during its successful presidential campaign in 2000.
Lin has been viewed as the "divine leader" of the DPP because of his political faith. But the source of Lin's influence goes back to a notorious incident during the White Terror that came to be known as "the Lin Family Murder." Lin's seven-year-old twin daughters and his elderly mother were stabbed to death by unknown intruders in Lin's house, which was then on an alley off Xinyi Road.
The murders were widely believed to be politically motivated, since Lin had challenged the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime and was jailed for his
participation in the 1979 Kaohsiung Incident.
ESWN has a translation of Lin's letter. I hardly know what to say. There seems to be a vast population of individuals who thought that with one political alliance out to destroy Taiwan by annexing it to China and snuffing out its democracy -- based on a political identity whose core theology is essentially anti-Taiwan -- and the other out to build an independent identity for nation based on local rule -- that somehow politics could be nicey-nicey and everyone would act in good faith. It's certainly a nice wish and I hope someday that the KMT gives up its attempt to build an ethnic coalition to oppose the pro-Taiwan parties, and gets down to the serious business of growing Taiwan. But reading the commentary from people who wish for never-never land, I feel like the Christopher Reeves character in The Remains of the Day toasting those moral failures about to be overwhelmed by WWII: "This is the age of realpolitik." I admire Lin's ideals and deeply appreciate all the sacrifices he has made. But at his age, to sensationally resign -- a deeply political act -- and then pretend to be above politics, is an act of selfishness that has harmed the causes he supports. I hope this isn't a case of "I didn't get my way so I am taking my ball and going home" -- after all, Lin supported one of the losers in the DPP Chairmanship election. But after other famous defections, like Shih Ming-te and Hsu Hsin-liang, nothing would surprise me anymore.
[Taiwan] [DPP]
6 comments:
Michael, I'm giving Lin the benefit of the doubt here (which he deserves, given his history), but my interpretation is this:
He has resigned from *the DPP* and not from the cause which he worked for in the 70s/80s/90s. His resignation has certainly harmed the DPP, but for you to claim that it "has harmed the causes he supports" does not follow.
The DPP does not embody the spirit of democracy and progress - and it is dangerous to even imply that. Remember that the grand majority of people in Taiwan would approve of the principles that Lin stands for while having serious reservations about the DPP (and not being members).
His resignation is partly an acceptance of the fact that he can't influence things inside the DPP (as the recent DPP elections proved) - will he try to influence politics from outside, and be able to if he tries? Who knows, but I like the principle of having a strong voice outside both parties attempting to keep both of them honest ...
Incidentally, I was surprised to see he only became a member of the DPP in 1994 - perhaps he's just not a 'party person'?
First, I don't know if one could call this a defection. In his letter, Lin blamed all of the main political parties in Taiwan for bringing about the poisonous social atmosphere. He's bowing out of party politics altogether and isn't joining "the other side"- for now.
Of course, there was a measure of personal calculation involved. This man's a true symbol of Taiwan's democratic change. If he can't affect change to the course of the DPP, then it's time to move on.
Trying to paint him as either a "wily political operator" or as a "selfless democrat" is to miss the true nature of the man. We have to remember that Lin is first and foremost a politician, and politicians specialize in following (and occasionally manipulating) public opinion. Resigning from the DPP like this is indeed a ploy to gain the public's sympathy, but can the man be blamed for selfishness when his goals are noble?
Lin has proven himself adept at playing both the populist and the back-room dealer (a la James Soong), but the one thing that seperates him from the Soongs of Taiwan is that Lin has actual ideals that he's working toward to make Taiwan a better place. And to achieve these goals, you've got to play the game.
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Lin continues to try to work his "backroom populist" mojo and influence politics through a think-tank like organization.
David: at the moment, the DPP is the only organization capable of achieving a democratic and independent Taiwan. It is irrelevant whether the DPP "embodies" the spirit of democracy and progress as it is at the moment the only game in town. The TSU is too small and we all know what the Blues stand for.
The ntext two elections are absolutely critical for the future of Taiwan. For Lin to pull such a stunt at this time is inexcusable. I hope Jason is right, though, and he won't disappear.
I just attended Linda Arrigo's presentation on the Kaohsiung Incident of 1979, yesterday in Taipei. Jerome Keating was there as well. I learned a lot. One thing that stood out was how complex the early movement was, with mainlanders and Taiwanese both working together for democracy. I think Lin was nurtured in that atmosphere, and can't live in the current one. And further, this is really the last defection -- of the original group of 5, Shih Ming-te, Hsu Hsin-liang, Annette Lu, Lin, and one that I forget, who were the secret leadership of the 1979 movement, only Lu remains. The others have all left. What were are looking at is generational change in the movement. The last of the revolutionaries is gone.
It's a damned sad day, whatever happened.
Michael
Michael - sorry, I don't buy "the DPP is the only organization capable of achieving a democratic and independent Taiwan". For starters, don't we already have a democratic and independent Taiwan? (and if we don't isn't it the US government that is the only organisation capable of producing it?) Second, you seem to be advocating a move to a one-party state to save democracy ... which is the argument the other side makes.
"The ntext two elections are absolutely critical for the future of Taiwan.". More critical than the previous two? Or the two before that? I bet you'll be saying it's the next two in 4 years time too. I don't believe the sky will fall if the KMT win the next LY election, and it won't fall when Ma wins in 2008.
"For Lin to pull such a stunt at this time is inexcusable."
We're two years away from a major election - seems the perfect time to rearrange the furniture to me.
One of the biggest problems that Taiwan's democracy has at the moment is that the DPP is currently a mess. Saying it's the only game in town and gritting your teeth isn't going to solve that. Lin tried to influence its direction from inside and failed spectacularly, so he's (maybe) taking another route.
Incidentally, I'm having a similar discussion with Jason on his post on Lin retiring.
I'd have been interested in seeing Linda Arrigo's presentation too - but two small children and yesterday being my wedding anniversary took precedence :)
I'll go over to Jason's blog...
Post a Comment