This government is strange?!
This is what a Taiwanese female television talk show guest said November 1, 2016.
Former president Ma Ying-jeou described the new government’s “improper party assets commission” as fascist.
On November 2, 2016, a freelance writer named Huang Chi-hsien said that Kaohsiung mayor, the rotund female mayor Chen Chu and her political party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) now in government, has made the whole of Taiwan into a fascist prison that only allows worship of the DPP and its political platform of Taiwan independence. The democracy fought so hard for by previous democracy fighters has brought about a frightening new world [of bureaucratic terror]. [Note: This is in reference to the swift political vendetta against a young baker who took a picture of a physically recovered former president Chen Shui-bian, imprisoned for 7 years after being convicted of graft and embezzlement].
Also on November 2, 2016, another commentary without byline said that Kaohsiung’s rotund female mayor’s swift political vendetta against the baker is political persecution, that political wisdom should not increase inversely with the increase in political power, that such political hubris constitutes political molestation, and officials such as the fat lady mayor of Kaohsiung constitutes bureaucratic oppression that will only force the people to revolt.
On November 2, 2016, a Taiwanese television talk show guest used the expression “arrogance of power” to describe the fat female mayor of Kaohsiung Chen Chu.
Another comment says that populism of Taiwanese society is concerned only with [political] “position” without being concerned about “right or wrong”.
I have been pondering these observations. Some thoughts came to me after Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg of the Mannheim Central Institute of Mental Health says he wants to scan the brains of refugees to study their risk of developing mental illness such as psychosis, and how does the brain process social stress.
My question is: Does a politically charged environment such as that during a political campaign season contribute to out of the ordinary personal behavior, and what social stress factors contribute to out of the ordinary personal behavior?
Exposure to a politically charged environment causes emotional stress. Does a shift in one’s psychological disposition and one’s psychosocial response and personal behavior occur due to this exposure? People respond to sociopolitical stress very differently. Some respond with anger, others with violence. Is violence the result of this shift in personal psychological disposition and psychosocial response? Does this shift induce an otherwise ordinarily rational person to behave irrationally and violently?
We can begin with political campaign rhetoric, political propaganda and hate speech, religious dogma, fanatical rhetoric, accusations and dogmatic claims for political purposes. Rationality and good common sense are replaced by irrationality, fanatical ideas, and radical thought. They are internalized mentally and psychologically and become deep rooted beliefs. During the fight between the Chinese Communists and the Chinese nationalists in the 1930s and early 1940s, brothers executed their own brothers for opposing political ideologies.
This mental and psychological internalization depends on the intensity of the newly acquired political ideology and belief. The intensification of this new belief leads to fanaticism and radicalization.
Political radicalization and political fanaticism intensify as sociopolitical issues become politicized. The typical political radicalization results in political intolerance, demonization of political figures and entire segments of the population, political purges, and vicious cycles of political vendetta.
Intense enthusiasm for political party politics becomes irrational when the minority political party suddenly wins a general election and becomes the majority party in government and in leadership. Majoritarianism sets in, giving the newly elected president and new government officials a sense of omnipotence, a feeling that they can do whatever they please against the people’s wishes and the hopes of those who elected them into office. They acquire the “hubris syndrome” and become “intoxicated with power”. They become fascist.
This “hubris syndrome” and intoxication with power and by power do remarkably describe the Taiwanese television talk show guest’s use of the phrase “arrogance of power”.
This is my answer to the question: This new Democratic progressive Party government is strange?! But why?