Policies
Programs supported by the DPP include social welfare policies involving the rights of women, senior citizens, children, young people, labour, indigenous peoples, farmers, and other disadvantaged sectors of the society. Furthermore its platform includes a legal and political order based on human rights and democracy; balanced economic and financial administration; fair and open social welfare; educational and cultural reform; independent defence and peaceful foreign policy. For these reasons, it is often considered a party of the centre-left and its base consists largely of the working class.
The primary political axis in Taiwan involves the issue of Taiwan independence versus eventual unification with China. Although the differences tend to be portrayed in polarized terms, both major coalitions have developed modified, nuanced and often complex positions. Though opposed in the philosophical origins, the practical differences between such positions can sometimes be subtle.
The current official position of the party is that the "Republic of China (Taiwan)" is an independent and sovereign country whose territory consists of Taiwan and its surrounding smaller islands and whose sovereignty derives only from the ROC citizens living in Taiwan (similar philosophy of self-determination), based on the "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" in 1999. It considers Taiwan independence to be a current fact making a formal declaration of independence unnecessary. The DPP rejects the so-called "one China principle" as the basis for official diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China (PRC) and advocates a Taiwanese national identity which is separate from mainland China. The DPP argues that its efforts to promote a Taiwanese national identity are merely an effort to normalize a Taiwanese identity repressed during years of authoritarian Kuomintang rule. Democratic Progressive Party also differs from KMT on foreign and defense policies that DPP considers the relations with the United States, Japan, European states among other democratic countries are crucial for Taiwan security.
In contrast, the KMT or pan-blue coalition agrees that the Republic of China is an independent and sovereign country that is not part of the PRC, but argues that a one China principle (with different definitions across the strait) can be used as the basis for talks with the PRC. The KMT also opposes Taiwan independence and argues that efforts to establish a Taiwanese national identity separated from the Chinese national identity are unnecessary and needlessly provocative. Some KMT officials have called efforts from DPP "fascist" (a charge for which they later apologised) and "racist". At the other end of the political spectrum, the acceptance by the DPP of the symbols of the Republic of China is opposed by the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
The first years of the DPP as the ruling party drew accusations from the opposition that, as a self-styled Taiwanese nationalist party, the DPP was itself inadequately sensitive to the ethnographic diversity of Taiwan's population. Where the KMT had been guilty of Chinese chauvinism, the critics charged, the DPP might offer nothing more as a remedy than Hoklo chauvinism.
The PRC has maintained a hostile position toward the DPP. It has made some efforts to moderate its tone since passing its Anti-Secession Law in 2005 to prevent a popular backlash from Taiwan's voters. In 2008 the PRC stated it was willing to negotiate with any party in Taiwan that "accepts the so-called 1992 consensus".
Read more about this topic: Democratic Progressive Party
Famous quotes containing the word policies:
“We urgently need a debate about the best ways of supporting families in modern America, without blinders that prevent us from seeing the full extent of dependence and interdependence in American life. As long as we pretend that only poor or abnormal families need outside assistance, we will shortchange poor families, overcompensate rich ones, and fail to come up with effective policies for helping families in the middle.”
—Stephanie Coontz (20th century)
“To deny the need for comprehensive child care policies is to deny a reality—that there’s been a revolution in American life. Grandma doesn’t live next door anymore, Mom doesn’t work just because she’d like a few bucks for the sugar bowl.”
—Editorial, The New York Times (September 6, 1983)
“Unfortunately, we cannot rely solely on employers seeing that it is in their self-interest to change the workplace. Since the benefits of family-friendly policies are long-term, they may not be immediately visible or quantifiable; companies tend to look for success in the bottom line. On a deeper level, we are asking those in power to change the rules by which they themselves succeeded and with which they identify.”
—Anne C. Weisberg (20th century)