Taipei, 4 Nov (Xinhua) -- The "four major referendums" will be held in the Taiwan region next month, which the DPP authorities regard as a "battle to defend the ruling party" and characterize it as a "blue-green showdown." Together with the "wolf smoke" of the "referendum" declared that the DPP would do its utmost to block the "referendum," specific issues that originally mainly involved the economy and people's livelihood were "packaged and labeled," and public opinion demands and rational speculation were "downgraded and sunk." In short, the "four referendums" case has changed from a people's livelihood issue to a political issue, and to some extent it is losing focus and changing its tone.
The "four referendums" include "anti-pig imports", "cherishing algae reefs", "restarting nuclear four" and "referendum binding elections", the first three respectively appeal to ensure food safety, maintain the ecological environment, and solve the energy gap, and the latter involves reducing the cost of election services and making good use of public funds resources. Except for the "nuclear fourth," the rest are the propositions and promises of the DPP when it was in the opposition, but now its "comprehensive ruling" has put forward the so-called "four disagreements" and stood against its own opposite and public opinion.
According to the latest polls by the Green Camp, all four cases were approved by the lead, and the proponents were quite cross-party. In the face of the pressure of public opinion, the leader of the DPP authorities issued a mobilization order and personally set the tone in the line of fire, directly criticizing "the KMT's operation of the 'referendum' as a tool for the party to fight against differences," while Su Zhenchang, head of Taiwan's administrative organs, scolded "the KMT will be chaotic in everything."
The "referendum" is the populist "god card" that the DPP has long "enshrined." Public opinion on the island pointed out that the DPP is well aware that once it enters a confrontation of policy positions, it will be difficult for it to face its own "yesterday was not and is not today," so it simply reversed it into a blue-green dispute in an attempt to fundamentally negate the legitimacy of the "referendum" case from the theory of motives.
In Taiwan, "color correctness" has become the most fundamental "political correctness," and the DPP has "made indispensable contributions." It is not surprising that it has repeated its old trick in the face of the "four major referendums." With only three words and two words and a hat, policy issues such as food safety, environmental protection, and energy have been virtualized, leaving only the "killing" of party politics. The China Times pointed out that the rulers habitually divide and oppose the people in order to kidnap the majority, so that the "four major referendums" case, which is essentially the people's livelihood economy, will go to the road of no return. The DPP authorities have no intention of communicating and dialogue with mainstream public opinion, but instead summon ideological ghosts to make voters forget right and wrong and "put colors in the middle."
For some time now, in Taiwan's political reality, once everything is directed to the level of political party duels, there is only a blue-green distinction, no black and white right and wrong, and the livelihood of the people and the voices of the grassroots all give way to the interests of political parties. Looking back at the DPP's "path to power," "color" has always been its favorite "main card." During the Chen Shui-bian period, it was embodied in the creation of the "provincial nationality" confrontation and manipulation of the issue of reunification and "independence"; the party was reduced to the opposition to come to power again, carried out "upgrading," and raised the banner of "resisting Central Taiwan and defending Taiwan." It is no wonder that the media on the island criticize that only asking about color and not asking about right and wrong, smearing and smearing have gradually become a panacea, and unreasonable political culture has become a characteristic of "Taiwan-style democracy."
In the face of the "four major referendums" case this time, the DPP, which is full of firepower, also played the "anti-China card" in the "first move," and Su Zhenchang and others directly shouted out the KMT's "pro-China rebellion." In this regard, Taiwan's public opinion has confronted the criticism: The DPP has played the old trick and used the "anti-China defense of Taiwan" as a cash machine.
The "Lianhe Pao" pointed out that two of the "four major referendums" were initiated by the people, and the content had nothing to do with cross-strait issues, and the DPP authorities were unwilling to conduct substantive debates on the policy, and used the "anti-China card" that must be operated every election, and continued to sell "dried mangoes" (the harmonic sound of "sense of national subjugation"). Li Min, a commentator on current affairs, wrote an article asking: Has the mainland forced you to ban "beautiful pigs"? Did you get a lack of electricity? Which of the four issues does the mainland have to do with?
Just as people of insight in Taiwan have said, the DPP is best at manipulating political confrontation and creating social rifts, and those who oppose it are all "China common passers-by" who are "pro-China and sell Taiwan." Public opinion on the island is deeply worried that this self-proclaimed "democratic and progressive" political party is making Taiwan continue to be trapped in the black hole of vicious politics, which in turn will cause economic development to stagnate and people's livelihood problems, and who will bear the consequences?
With more than a month to go before the vote, can the "four referendums" regain the focus and correct tone? The Taiwan media reminded the DPP as follows: "Continue to ignore public opinion and are doomed to wait to be countered by the tsunami of public opinion." (End)