The last televised debate among the three candidates for the upcoming Taiwanese leadership elections was held on Saturday in Taipei.
Since shedding one-party rule, Taiwan has achieved commendable democratic progress. It experienced political struggle during the long process of democratization between 1986 and 1995.
Taiwan's first direct leadership elections took place in 1996, and the television debates among candidates have inspired people's democratic enthusiasm.
I would say Taiwan's democratic development resulted from its own situation and can't be copied. Both Taiwanese society's pursuit of liberalism and its enlightened education system which focuses on democratic ideas have contributed to this.
Taiwan's "constitution" played a very important role in this process. The "constitution" has been revised many times and is still not perfect. However, it provided a foundation for Taiwan's democratization.
Both the pro-Green camp, which favors Taiwan having an identity separate from that of the Chinese mainland, and the pro-Blue group, who is supportive of the concept of the "Republic of China," all adhere to the "constitution."
Taiwan is praised for its efforts to create a democratic society. Taiwan can't compete with the Chinese mainland in economic scale, but it can have its say through soft power, which includes democracy.
In Taiwan, after each election, no matter which party takes power, people hold a positive view of the election results as they believe they have chosen their own leader. Election results are very difficult to predict. Therefore, the candidates have to show they care about people and try to sell their political achievements.
Any political party, when established, has its ideals and will reinforce its position when taking power. The Constitution of the People's Republic of China also involves democratic principles. But how effectively has it been carried out?
Many are beguiled by the open debates, as political figures are placed in the spotlight and inform the public about their policies.
However, televised debates should not be used as a standard to judge whether democratic politics in Taiwan are good or bad. The US held its first presidential TV debates in 1960. Should its democratic model be appreciated by the world? If yes, why has the US caused so many controversies in the world?
The Western way of democracy means that while democracy continues to function, a number of serious concerns are arising that threaten to shake public confidence in the country's democratic institutions.
Televised debates have become a show piece for candidates in the US. A politician's achievements have nothing to do with his televisual skills. There's no need to dramatize Taiwan's democratic policies and the form of democracy needs to be understood sensibly.
Some say democracy is necessary for re-unification between Taiwan and the mainland. However, I take it as a false proposition.
The core issue in this relationship is a consensus on unity shared by the two. If both sides can't agree on this, there's no need to talk about democracy as a premise.
East Germany and West Germany united in 1990, based on a common understanding of their shared identity, and then tackled other barriers. Before the 1980s, the Chinese mainland and Taiwan were hostile for decades.
Ordinary people are more concerned with living a decent life than with the forms of political systems. People's livelihoods always come first, no matter the political system.
Taiwanese leader Ma Ying-jeou has pushed for communication between the two sides, and I believe it will help them reach a final consensus. What both sides need is patience and time.
The article was compiled by Global Times reporter Wang Wenwen based on an interview with Sui Duqing, associate professor of Ching Kuo Institute of Management and Health. wangwenwen@globaltimes.com.cn