Talk:Taiwan People's Party

Discussion at Talk:Democratic Progressive Party#RfC on replacing left–right position with cross-Strait position

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Democratic Progressive Party#RfC on replacing left–right position with cross-Strait position. Ythlev (talk) 11:53, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Stance on Taiwanese independence/Chinese unification?

Someone with knowledge about Taiwanese politics please add information about this. This being the English Wikipedia the information given is intended for outside observers and this topic is far more important for outside observers then their domestic politics. 2A02:8109:9B80:3CDC:25B1:13EF:5E86:A917 (talk) 18:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Is the TPP appropriately characterized as populist?

According to political scientist Jan-Werner Müller's (2016) definition, a populist political figure is based on three main elements-anti-pluralism, criticizing the elite and the existing political system, and distinguishing the boundaries of real people. However, it is clear from the statements made by the party's chairman, Ko Wen-je, that he and the party he created support pluralism, respect professionals (and even lean somewhat towards elitism), and advocate unity and tolerance. This clearly does not fit the general definition of populism.

Describing a political party as populist is a common attack, and we should be more careful in our analysis when writing the description populist. 星枢 (talk) 01:47, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

In addition, the Chinese Wikipedia has a discussion on this issue, which is worth referring to. 星枢 (talk) 02:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

For the last time, this is your original conclusion. There had already been multiple academic sources backing the claim up-AINH (talk) 10:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Is the Taiwan People's Party appropriately characterized as populist?(RfC)

Is the Taiwan People's Party appropriately characterized as populist? 星枢 (talk) 17:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

There is an editor who strongly supports the Democratic Progressive Party(Opponents of the Taiwan People's Party) on his Chinese Wikipedia user page and persistently believes that the Taiwan People's Party is populist. He have cited numerous articles by Western observers, including some from academic sources, to support their viewpoint. However, I believe that these articles exhibit clear bias or lack adequate understanding on this issue. It is well known that the United States and the United Kingdom generally support Taiwan's distancing from China and tend to favor the DPP. In my view, these articles carry evident biases. 星枢 (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Just as we should not use articles from Chinese institutions to define the DPP, I find the referencing value of these articles highly questionable. When determining whether a political party is populist, perhaps we should primarily assess it based on the key characteristics of populism: According to political scholar Jan-Werner Müller (2016), a populist political figure possesses three main elements: anti-pluralism, criticism of elites and existing political systems, and drawing boundaries to distinguish the "true people" (i.e., considering a certain group as "purer" or "better"). However, it is evident from the statements made by the party's chairman, Ko Wen-je, and the party he founded, that they support diversity, respect professionals (even leaning towards elitism to some extent), and advocate unity and tolerance. This clearly does not align with the general definition of populism. Here are some articles that describe the definition of populism: https://www.britannica.com/topic/populism https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43301423.amp 星枢 (talk) 06:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

As I said in zh, there are lots of different sources referencing it. Even if there is dispute to the definition (which, for the billionth times, using YOUR own judgement in the first place is textbook WP:OR), it is Wikipedia's job to report all significant viewpoints-AINH (talk) 01:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

(Copying my response from the Chinese Wikipedia.) I believe that if a consensus can be reached within the community regarding facts that can be derived through simple logical reasoning, there is no need to retain such a description. Logical reasoning process: ① [Major premise] It is necessary to have evidence indicating that a political party exhibits the three core characteristics of "anti-pluralism, anti-elitism, and distinguishing the boundaries of the true people" to judge that a certain political party is populist. ② [Minor premise] There is no evidence indicating that the Taiwan People's Party possesses these characteristics. ③ [Conclusion] The Taiwan People's Party should not be described as populist. 星枢 (talk) 08:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Another: (1)How to define populism is a social science question, so non-mainstream viewpoints should be classified as fringe theories. If these fringe theories do not have a certain level of recognition in society, there is no need to include them. However, if they have a certain level of recognition, they should be listed separately, like the Flat Earth theory. (2)You can search using the keywords "Democratic Progressive Party" and "populism," and you will find numerous references (including academic sources) that discuss the connection between the Democratic Progressive Party and populism. However, this does not mean that it is necessary to list the Democratic Progressive Party as populism in the list. (3)We are currently discussing the entry rather than editing it. I am using a simple syllogistic reasoning to explain that my viewpoint is not original research. (4)"Assert facts, including facts about opinions, but do not assert the opinions themselves. The term 'fact' refers to 'a piece of information about which there is no serious dispute.'" In my assertion, there are three pieces of information: ①the major premise, ②the minor premise, and ③the reliability of syllogistic reasoning. All of these are pieces of information that do not involve serious disputes, so there is no problem with the conclusion I have drawn. 星枢 (talk) 08:31, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Survey

• (Note: RFC Submitter) No. Please refer to the previous text and the discussion on Chinese Wikipedia for more information. --星枢 (talk) 08:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)