Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:17:44.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Democratizing the Quasi-Leninist Regime in Taiwan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Tun-jen Cheng
Affiliation:
University of California
Get access

Abstract

Analysis of the process of democratization should focus not on socioeconomic change, but on the origin and development of political opposition and on the structure of political bargaining between the regime and its challengers. The recent democratic breakthrough in Taiwan is attributable to the capabilities of the political opposition in agenda setting, the shifting of bargaining arenas, and the creation of incentives for the reformist leaders of the regime to play the game. Democratization in Taiwan will continue because the ruling party has been able to maintain its dominant position in new political frameworks.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Stepan, , Rethinking Military Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), 34Google Scholar.

2 Lipset, Seymour Martin, Political Man, expanded ed. (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Cutright, Phillips, “National Political Development: Measurement and Analysis,” American Sociological Review 28 (April 1963), 253–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Pye, , Asian Power and Politics (Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1985), 233Google Scholar.

4 Huntington, Samuel P., “Will More Countries Become Democratic?” Political Science Quarterly 9 (Summer 1984), 201Google Scholar.

5 Winckler, Edwin A., “Institutionalization and Participation on Taiwan: From Hard to Soft Authoritarianism?” China Quarterly 99 (September 1984), 481–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Rustow, , “Transition to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model,” Comparative Politics 2 (April 1970), 337–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Przeworski, Adam, “Some Problems in the Study of the Transition to Democracy,” in O'Donnell, Guillermo and Schmitter, Philippe C., eds., Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Comparative Perspective (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1986)Google Scholar.

7 Schapiro, Leonard, “Introduction,” in Schapiro, , ed., Political Opposition in One-Party States (New York: John Wiley, 1972)Google Scholar; Dahl, Robert A., “Introduction,” in Dahl, , ed., Regimes and Oppositions (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973)Google Scholar.

8 Chen, Edward I-te, “Japanese Colonialism in Korea and Formosa: A Comparison of the Systems of Political Control,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 30 (1970), 126–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Kerr, George H., Formosa Betrayed (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1965)Google Scholar.

10 Tzu Yu Chung Kuo 1 (Taipei, 1961), 1Google Scholar.

11 Coble, Parks M. Jr., “The Kuomintang Regime and the Shanghai Capitalists, 1927–1929,” China Quarterly 77 (March 1979), 124CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fewsmith, Joseph, Party, State, and Local Elites in Republican China (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Bush, Richard C., “Industry and Politics in Kuomintang China: The Nationalist Regime and Lower Yangtze Chinese Cotton Mill Owners, 1927–1937,” Ph.D. diss. (Columbia University, 1978)Google Scholar; Tun-jen Cheng, “Political Regimes and Development Strategies: South Korea and Taiwan,” in Gary Gereffi and Donald Wyman, eds. Manufactured Miracles: Patterns of Development in Latin America and East Asia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, forthcoming).

12 Hung-chao-Tai, , “The Kuomintang and Modernization in Taiwan,” in Huntington, Samuel P. and Moore, Clement, eds., Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society (New York: Basic Books, 1970)Google Scholar; Na-teh Wu, “Emergence of the Opposition within an Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Taiwan,” mimeo (University of Chicago, 1980); Winckler (fn. 5); Domes, Jürgen, “Political Differentiation in Taiwan: Group Formation within the Ruling Party and the Opposition Circles, 1979–1980,” Asian Survey 21 (October 1981), 1023–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gold, Thomas B., State and Society in the Taiwan Miracle (New York: Sharp, 1986)Google Scholar; Johnson, Chalmers, “Political Institutions and Economic Performance: The Government-Business Relationship in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan,” in Scalapino, Robert et al. , Asian Economic Development — Present and Future (Berkeley, CA: Institute of East Asian Studies, 1987)Google Scholar.

13 Mancall, Mark, “Introduction,” in Mancall, , ed., Formosa Today (New York: Praeger, 1963)Google Scholar: Chou, Yangsan and Nathan, Andrew J., “Democratizing Transition in Taiwan,” Asian Survey 27 (March 1987), 277–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Jowitt, Kenneth, “An Organizational Approach to the Study of Political Culture in Marxist-Leninist Systems,” American Political Science Review 68 (January-March 1974), 8998CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Jacobs, Bruce J., “Paradoxes in the Politics of Taiwan: Lessons for Comparative Politics,” The Journal of the Australian Political Science Association 13 (November 1978), 239–47Google Scholar; Lerman, Arthur J., Taiwan's Politics: The Provincial Assemblyman's World (Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1978)Google Scholar.

16 Johnson, Chalmers, “Comparing Communist Nations,” in Johnson, , ed., Change in Communist Systems (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1970)Google Scholar.

17 Juan J. Linz, “Opposition In and Under an Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Spain,” inDahl (fn. 7), 191.

18 Gurtov, Mervin, “Taiwan: Looking to the Mainland,” Asian Survey 8 (January 1968), 1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Ho, Samuel P. S., “Economics, Economic Bureaucracy, and Taiwan's Economic Development,” Pacific Affairs 60 (Summer 1987), 226–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Computed from Taiwan Statistics Dada Book (Taipei: Council for Economic Development and Planning), various issues.

21 Cheng, Tun-jen, “Politics of Industrial Transformation,” Ph.D. diss. (University of California, Berkeley, 1987)Google Scholar, chap. 3.

22 Cole, Alan, “The Political Roles of Taiwanese Entrepreneurs,” Asian Survey 8 (September 1968), 645–54Google Scholar.

23 Shirley Kuo, “Wo kuo ching chi fa chan tui min chu hua ti ying hsiang” [The Impact of Economic Development on Democratization in Taiwan], Chung yang jih pao, August 5, 1986, p. 1.

24 Kurth, James R., “Industrial Change and Political Change: A European Perspective,” in Collier, David, ed., The New Authoritarianism in Latin America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979), 318–62Google Scholar.

25 Bendix, , Kings or People (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), 12–13Google ScholarPubMed, 292.

26 Almond, Gabriel A. and Powell, G. Bingham, Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach (Boston: Little, Brown, 1966), 65Google Scholar.

27 Huang, Mab, Intellectual Ferment for Political Reforms in Taiwan, 1971–73 (Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, 1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Copper, John F. with Chen, George P., Taiwan's Elections: Political Development and Democratization in the Republic of China (Occasional Papers/Reprint Series in Contemporary Asian Studies, University of Maryland, 1986)Google Scholar.

29 Berger, , Opposition in a Dominant-Party System (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969), 14Google Scholar.

30 Chiou, C. L., “Politics of Alienation and Polarization: Taiwan's Tangwai in the 1980s,” Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars 18 (July-September 1986), 1628Google Scholar.

31 Chou and Nathan (fn. 13).

32 Kingdon, John W., Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (Boston: Little, Brown, 1984)Google Scholar.

33 O'Donnell and Schmitter (fn. 6); Stepan (fn. 1), 6.

34 Pempel, T. J., “The Dilemma of Parliamentary Opposition in Japan,” Polity 8 (Fall 1975), 6379CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Asian-American Times, November 9, 1987, p. 1.

36 Min chi chou k'an, June 11, 1987, p. 1; Ching Yu, “Chu tang shih yu chi hua ti hsing tung” [Establishing a new party was a deliberate and planned action], Shih pao chou k'an, October 4, 1986, p. 11.

37 Kirchheimer, , “The Waning of Opposition in Parliamentary Regimes,” Social Research 24 (Summer 1957), 127–56Google Scholar.

38 Lijphart, Arend et al. , “The Limited Vote and the Single Nontransferable Vote: Lessons from the Japanese and Spanish Examples,” in Grofman, Bernard and Lijphart, Arend, eds., Electoral Laws and Their Political Consequences (New York: Agathon Press, 1986), 154–69Google Scholar.

39 Dahl (fn. 7).

40 Chung yangjih pao, December 25, 1984, p. 3.

41 ibid., August 4, 1987, p. 2.

42 Gates, Hill, “Dependency and the Part-Time Proletariat in Taiwan,” Modern China 5 (July 1979), 381408CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Yung Wei, “Hsiang tuan chi ho hsieh min chu ti tau lu mai chin” [Make headway to unity, harmony, and democracy], Chung yangjih pao, October 7, 1982, p. 3.

44 The Secretariat, The Party Constitution of the KMT (Taipei, 1988)Google Scholar; The Secretariat, The Party Constitution of the DPP (Taipei, 1987)Google Scholar.

45 Fu Hu and Ying-long Yu, “Hsuan min ti tou pieh chu hsiang: chieh k'ou yu lei hsing ti fen hsi” [Voting orientation of the electorates: A structural and typological analysis], paper presented to the Chinese Political Science Association, Taipei, September 9, 1983.