【Text/Observer Network Columnist Song Luzheng】
On September 25, the Chinese Kuomintang held a new election for party chairman, and will compete for a new party chairman among Jiang Qichen, Zhuo Boyuan, Zhang Yazhong and Zhu Lilun.
As we are familiar with, this time the kmt party chairman election is still indispensable to the drama of "infighting." Zhang Yazhong, who once jumped to the top spot in the polls, was accused of repeatedly attacking another candidate, Zhu Lilunzhi, and was almost transferred to the Examination Discipline Committee, causing an uproar.
Probably because it is too "indisputable," the kmt chairman election has not attracted enough attention on the mainland. Since the 2016 defeat and the DPP's continuous removal of wings, today's KMT has lost its real influence on Taiwan from the institutional level, and its only sustainable capital is that the county mayors are still the majority. What is even more worrying, however, is that the KMT has still not slipped to the bottom and is increasingly marginalized by facing three huge insurmountable challenges:
First, the trend of Taiwan's localization has become fierce under the manipulation of the DPP, and the KMT's public opinion base has been shrinking continuously.
Second, in the case of the long-term inability to win the "ruling power," the number of talents is also decreasing, and the internal line and interest differences are also intensifying, and it is very difficult to maintain unity. A political party that has been constantly divided since its inception has not yet found an effective way to unite, and the failure of the next general election may be the trigger for another split.
Third, the Sino-US strategic game, the importance of the Kuomintang to the United States has declined, and even become a negative asset, and the Support of the United States for it is not only a matter of reduction.
On September 4, the Chinese Kuomintang held a televised political speech for party chairman candidates, pictured as four candidates Jiang Qichen (from left), Zhang Yazhong, Zhu Lilun, and Zhuo Boyuan. (Image source: Taiwan's "Zhongshi News Network")
Five major factors determine the different fates of the Kuomintang and the Communist Party
Looking back at the centennial history of the two parties, it should be said that the turning point in the fate of the two parties was 1949. This not only made the CCP the ruling party, but also made the KMT a local political party, losing the support of the matrix of Chinese civilization. With the withdrawal of the older generation of Kuomintang members from the stage of history, the composition of the Kuomintang has become more and more dominated by native Taiwanese, and its cultural concepts, psychology, and political consciousness have actually been "Taiwanized."
Although the KUOMINTANG and the DPP agree on the opposite side, apart from this, there is not much difference between the two parties in contact. To put it simply, the differences between the KMT and the DPP are smaller than those between the two sides of the strait. There have always been voices in the outside world criticizing the KMT for not having the ambition and spirit of sacrifice in its early years, and a big reason is that its mentality has become a small island, not to mention that it wants to chase deer in the Central Plains, and it is impossible to even go to the tang for the sake of national reunification, thinking more about its own immediate interests.
Second, China is a post-developing country, and unlike the West, which has a country before a party, the Kuomintang and the Communist Party both build the country with the party and lead the government, and the ideology comes from the West. But the Communists succeeded, but the Kuomintang failed. In addition to the personal factors of the leaders, the root cause of this lies in the different forces on which the two sides rely. The CCP relies on the broadest masses of the lower classes, namely the workers and peasants, the capitalist elite and the intellectual elite, which are not at its core. The Kuomintang, on the other hand, was the opposite. Therefore, most of the governments formed by the Kuomintang when they were on the mainland were doctors who had returned from overseas -- until now, the CADRES at all levels of the CCP have been trained step by step from the grass-roots level. One does not understand the national conditions, is out of touch with the national conditions, and one is deeply rooted in the motherland, knows the will of the people and the voice of the people, and it is clear who wins and who loses.
Third, looking back at the century-old history, although both the Kuomintang and the Communist Party had modern overtones when they were born, the modernity of the early CCP surpassed that of the Kuomintang. For example, Chiang Kai-shek relies more on personal factors to run the country and political parties, relying on his personal relations and interests with various subordinate forces to buy off, but the CCP relies more on discipline and ideological cohesion. After Taiwan's democratization, the KMT transformed into a Western-style political party, and the CCP still maintained its traditional party characteristics. But the KMT was still unable to resolve the shortcomings of discipline and ideological cohesion, and it was repeatedly divided. Even if it loses power in Taiwan again, after returning to power, it will be old and cute, and eventually fall even heavier. It can be said that the Kuomintang has no modern form and no traditional foundation, so it cannot develop and grow.
The Communist Party, on the other hand, keeps pace with the times and constantly renews its ideas. As Han Botian, a German scholar and expert on China at the University of Trier and a former leader of the Mercator Center for China Studies, put it: "What he sees is a successful modern system that provides the services that many people want." It is already one of the leading countries in science, technology and innovation, and will soon make greater progress. The problem that Western democracies face in this is: "The current China is really modern and really efficient." ”
Fourth, the different fates of the two parties lie in the fact that although both parties have made major mistakes in the course of a hundred years, the CCP is better at correcting mistakes in a timely manner and has more ability to innovate. Timely correction is very important, if the correction is too late, it is useless. The KmT's biggest mistake on the mainland was to rely on a small elite to ignore the will of the people, coupled with corruption and incompetence, thus losing the hearts and minds of the people. When it is too late to correct mistakes in Taiwan after defeat and retreat, there will be no chance to become a national political party. In Taiwan, the KMT's biggest mistake was to underestimate the growth of localization and "Taiwan independence" forces, and to allow the "Taiwan independence" ideological trend to spread in the later stages of its administration, and eventually lost its ruling soil. The first time, the Kuomintang was able to correct its mistakes and achieve the effect of partial security, and the second time it did not even have the opportunity to correct its mistakes. For the Kuomintang, both of these mistakes were fatal.
The last factor affecting the fate of the Two Parties was the fact that in the face of enormous internal and external challenges, one had to transplant the Western political system under pressure from the United States, and this was the so-called democratization initiated by Chiang Ching-kuo. The other actively explored and forged a path suited to its own national conditions, and that was the reform and opening up initiated by Deng Xiaoping.
The democratization led by Chiang Ching-kuo, which in the short term is conducive to the decriminalization of the KUOMINTANG (white terror, 38 years of martial law), can be spared liquidation, and can also return to power in the short term. But in the long run, as generations change, the marginalization of the Kuomintang is an inevitable result. Moreover, the "Taiwan independence" forces that accompany this democratization have become a major obstacle to national reunification. From this point of view, Chiang Ching-kuo not only defeated the Kuomintang, but also defeated the Chinese nation. It should be said that at an important juncture in history, Chiang Ching-kuo failed to shoulder his own historical responsibilities and explore a development model suitable for his own culture, thus laying the root cause of the kuomintang's second decline in the history of the kuomintang after it came to Taiwan. Especially from the perspective of the plight of the West today, and from the bitter lessons of Afghanistan and Iraq, Chiang Ching-kuo's choice at that time was indeed wrong.
Chiang Ching-kuo was followed by Lee Teng-hui, and Taiwan has since embarked on the "Taiwan independence" route (data map)
The two parties have brought inspiration and reflection on the different fates of the past century
The future of the Kuomintang depends on how to deal with the historical trend of reunification.
Theoretically speaking, there are two possibilities for the KMT in the future: First, it will cooperate with the trend of cross-strait reunification and continue to play a political role in Taiwan after reunification; second, it will gradually withdraw into the Taiwan Kuomintang. In the face of Taiwan's increasingly mainstream localization, in order to win the election, the KMT evolved into the Taiwan Kuomintang either programmatically or by name. Jiang Qichen, the current party chairman, has signs of such an evolution. At this time, the KMT will likely split again, and even if the two sides of the strait are reunified, it will be difficult to play an important political role.
It should be noted that the kuomintang that continues to shrink will not bubble up before or after reunification, because the existence of the mainland and the huge political and economic benefits it can provide enable the Kuomintang to still find the meaning and value of its existence. For example, if the DPP is in power, cross-strait relations are tense, and communication is cut off, the KMT can play a role in safety valves and promote communication at the economic and trade levels to a certain extent, and can still win the support and recognition of the economic circles and a certain number of people.
The two parties were born in a turning point in China's destiny, and whoever can grasp the historical trend and conform to the historical trend can have vitality and vitality. The Communist Party grasped the trend of history for the first time and gained power, and the second time it achieved national rejuvenation, which also brought the Communist Party itself to a new historical height. The Kuomintang twice went to the opposite side of the historical trend at the most crucial time, and it was also doomed to its fate today.
From a historical point of view, whether it is the success of the Communist Party or the defeat of the Kuomintang, it is an important part of China's history and a valuable historical legacy in both positive and negative aspects. It is not only a warning to today, but also to those who come after. For today's KUOMINTANG, although it is important to elect the chairman of the party, it is more important to learn the lessons of history, clearly understand the trend of the times, and embrace the trend of the times. History has left little time for the Kuomintang, and at this critical moment in history, today's choice will determine the final historical positioning and destiny of the Kuomintang.
This article is the exclusive manuscript of the observer network, the content of the article is purely the author's personal views, does not represent the platform views, unauthorized, may not be reproduced, otherwise will be investigated for legal responsibility. Pay attention to the observer network WeChat guanchacn, read interesting articles every day.