How the Recall Failure Affected Pro-Recall Taiwanese

by Aleksandrs Gross

語言:
English
Photo Credit: Brian Hioe

THE GREAT RECALL MOVEMENT has been described by some as the beginning of a new wave of Taiwanese activism—the greatest since the Sunflower Movement. The first wave of recall elections failed to recall even one of the 24 targeted KMT politicians from office, dealing a heavy blow to the pro-recall movement. Such a turn of events raises the question: how have the recall results affected pro-recall Taiwanese? And more importantly, what does this mean for the future of Taiwanese activism?

To assess how the results of the recall campaign affected Taiwanese citizens, I conducted an anonymous online survey. After determining the relevant background information of respondents—whether they were for or against the recalls, their political leaning (DPP, KMT, TPP, or neither/neutral), approximate age, county of registration—I asked participants some open questions to determine the effect the recalls have had on them.

More specifically, I asked how the recall results affected their sense of future security, their confidence in the current government, their confidence in the current state of democracy, and their sense of social solidarity.

Participants were recruited mainly through convenience sampling via Taiwanese friend networks of the author and through the Facebook group 台灣人在荷蘭, followed by snowball sampling as respondents and their contacts shared the survey link. Responses for the survey were collected between the 7th of July and the 5th of August 2025.

The original survey and respondent answers were in Mandarin Chinese, but were translated into English for this article.

The results of the form revealed that it was mostly pro-DPP Taiwanese who supported the Great Recall campaign. For this reason, it will be the answers of pro-DPP respondents (83 in total) that will be analysed in this article. The article follows the same structure of the questionnaire in that each section corresponds to one open question of the survey.

How Did You Feel When You First Saw the Results?

THE EMOTIONAL RESPONSE to the results was quite predictable: the most frequent emotions (in descending order) mentioned in response to the recall results are 1) disappointment / sadness, 2) shock / surprise, 3) frustration / anger, and 4) concern / fear.

Surprisingly, a small minority reported positive emotions—but this was mainly towards how the Great Recall fostered a greater sense of solidarity among pro-recallers. Still the overwhelming emotional response has been very negative.

From a psychological point of view, anger and fear are likely to stimulate resistance, while disappointment (and in its extreme form depression) are paralysing, demotivating emotions. For as long as feelings of disappointment/disillusionment do not outweigh the other emotions respondents mentioned, activism can be expected to continue.

Below is a selection of some of the responses—discussing what inspired feelings of anger, shock, fear, and sadness.

So many Taiwanese around me actually support pro-China forces! And why do people think supporting the recall automatically means supporting the DPP, but don’t see that the KMT and TPP’s chaotic proposals and secretive lawmaking in the Legislative Yuan equate to being pro-China? I feel extremely frustrated.

Quite shocked. Turns out I was in a thick echo chamber. I thought it would pass.

Not very surprised, but it made me realize that in KMT strongholds, people don’t care about the international situation at all.

I was a little surprised that not a single one passed, but these were blue-leaning districts, so flipping them wasn’t going to be easy. I feel for the volunteers who fought for this. But this recall campaign increased voter participation, which is a good thing for society overall.

Disappointed, shocked, in disbelief. I feel regret for the volunteers who worked so hard for over a year. At the same time, I feel some Taiwanese people have such a deeply rooted slave mentality, completely unaware of their ignorance, thinking they’re standing on the moral high ground when in fact they don’t realize how low their position really is.

More sad than anything else, but it feels like this was bound to happen. At least I voted and did what I could.

Has the Result Affected How Secure You Feel About the Future of Taiwan? If Yes, How?

REGARDING A SENSE of future safety, the overwhelming response was one of concern expressing itself through several issues. The issue that attracted most attention was the China threat. Respondents mentioned strong concern over increasing CCP influence in Taiwan and the KMT’s perceived role as an agent of the CCP.

The second most frequent theme of concern was the international perception of Taiwan. Namely, respondents worried about how other countries (with the US in particular) may change their understanding of Taiwan as being more pro-China than before. As a result, Taiwan would lose more of the little support it has internationally. This would make it even easier for China to take over Taiwan with minimal International backlash. The responses below demonstrate these concerns.

Although some inside Taiwan say we shouldn’t recall legislators indiscriminately, the international community will only see that we are not rejecting pro-China forces. When interpreting the result, they won’t consider the original stance of these districts but will use their votes to represent all of Taiwan. Taiwan is not helping itself; why should the U.S. or others?

From other countries’ viewpoint, Taiwan appears to be choosing pro-China. From the CCP’s perspective, the pro-China politicians completed their mission. This makes me very uneasy. The KMT and CCP will continue to collaborate to divide Taiwan and its people, causing more internal conflict.

The third and fourth most frequent theme was a general sense of insecurity about the future and the loss of Taiwanese autonomy and identity.

Pro-China legislators in the Legislative Yuan keep destroying Taiwan’s political, military, and livelihood situations, weakening national strength. I don’t know what the next chapter will be—will we become like Hong Kong or Ukraine? I’m very scared.

Has the Result Affected Your Trust in Public Institutions (the Government and Political Parties)? If Yes, How?

REGARDING RESPONDENTS’ views of democracy in Taiwan, most responses focused on negatives—meaning that, in general, the recall movement has reduced the existing trust in the current political situation (government, political parties). The most frequent topics were the shortfalls of all three parties—KMT, DPP, and TPP, with the KMT and the DPP being criticised in equal amounts, and the TPP being criticised less than the other two.

Here follows some critiques of the DPP:

In the recall, the DPP and recall groups had some extreme remarks and poor communication skills (framing) that made it impossible for opponents to rationally accept the message, causing it to lose focus.

I think the DPP should stop relying solely on “resist China, protect Taiwan” to win votes, and stop labelling every opinion different from the party’s as pro-communist. They should face all kinds of issues seriously.

As for the DPP, promoting the recall in the party’s name was disrespectful to civic groups.

Yes—I have completely lost trust in the blue and white parties. But I can’t deny that the DPP also took the opportunity to eliminate political opponents.

Here follows some critiques of the KMT and TPP:

I trust opposition parties even less, as they push bills not to supervise the ruling party but to sabotage from within, making it impossible to pass policies smoothly.

Yes—I’m shocked that in 2025, there are still so many bizarre things happening at polling stations. I thought we were far removed from the era of dirty election tricks. I guess I was naive. While things like overly wet ink causing invalid ballots, tables covered in ink smudging ballots, or receiving pre-stamped ballots may be rare and unlikely to change the results, the fact that local election commissions can’t ensure polling stations follow correct procedures has lowered my trust in those local governments.

(..) the KMT’s systemic cheating during the election and irresponsible attitude made me feel ashamed and disappointed in the controlling power of Taiwan’s parliamentary majority—I have absolutely no trust in them. The so-called “third force” that should be holding both major parties accountable also failed to unanimously condemn such behavior, regardless of political camp, which is regrettable.

Has the Result Affected How Connected You Feel to Taiwanese Society More Generally? If Yes, How?

DPP SUPPORTERS HAD very mixed responses regarding the recall’s effect on Taiwanese society. An equal number of people report feeling more united as more divided. Most point to the fact that while the pro-DPP and pro-KMT camps seem to be more united within themselves, they seem to be more divided between themselves, leading to greater social polarisation more generally.

People on both ends of the political spectrum have grown more united—but I feel the pan-Green side has a stronger sense of national identity.

Given the increased polarisation, it is to be seen to what degree both sides can find common ground and work together on issues of bilateral importance. The alternative would be reducing each topic to a DPP versus KMT loyalty test—putting party loyalty before finding helpful solutions.

Definitely more united. On the other hand, I wonder—if those who opposed the recall weren’t just blindly contrarian or focused on money, maybe they were just afraid the recall would become a tool for political strife.

I used to think Taiwanese people were united and focused on external threats—but it turns out we’re not.

Has the Result Affected How You Feel About the State of Democracy in Taiwan? If Yes, How?

WHILE MANY RESPONDENTS report little or no change of view regarding the state of democracy in Taiwan, several topics were prominent in many responses. Many are concerned about the quality of the votes—suspecting that many voters were brainwashed by CPP propaganda or voted mindlessly. Another topic of concern is how the recalls seemed to be hijacked by individual party interests, pushing self-serving agendas at the cost of social unity and democracy.

(..) I already thought Taiwan’s democracy was like this—many people don’t vote based on issues, but on party affiliation or personal grudges.

Many Taiwanese fail to recognize Taiwan’s international situation, seeing this activity as mere partisan struggle, without realizing that the current reality is like a frog in slowly boiling water—we are being infiltrated bit by bit, until one day we lose without a war.

I still firmly believe democracy is the only correct path, but (the government and we citizens) need to think about how to win over middle voters who don’t fully understand the issues—after all, the voting results show that most people don’t see the CCP as a threat.

Why Do You Think the Recalls Failed?

WHEN ASKED WHY the recalls failed, respondents mainly ascribed the failure to a lack of political literacy in voters and to ineffective campaign messaging. More specifically, many respondents believed that many voters had low political awareness, a lack of critical thinking, were stuck in echo chambers, or were too easily swayed by short-term benefits (such as the KMT’s promise of 10,000 NTD). Regarding campaign messaging, many thought that much of it was too complex, too ideological, didn’t focus enough on livelihood issues, and failed to engage swing voters. A third concern that was often mentioned was the role of the CCP-led media manipulation, and KMT misinformation.

On the problems of campaign messaging:

There were too many—and too complex—issues that were far removed from ordinary people’s lives; the brainwashing techniques of the pan‑blue and pan‑white camps were extremely effective.

The recall organizers and the DPP couldn’t aim effectively. They couldn’t present persuasive arguments to convince other voters of the legitimacy of the recalls—there was no hard evidence and no simple, clear reasons across districts why each legislator was unfit. (..) Also, multiple simultaneous recall votes blurred focus—media couldn’t keep voters targeting individual unfit legislators. The president and senior DPP leaders didn’t reach necessary political heights, failed to find common ground, communicate patiently, or coolly handle social polarization; choosing confrontation pushed ordinary voters away.

The recall was a spontaneous, citizen‑led effort but was co-opted by the DPP—leading people dissatisfied with the DPP to vote ‘no.’ Meanwhile, recall organizers got mistakenly labeled as DPP. Both pro‑ and anti‑recall sides used extremist, insulting, demeaning terms, pushing centrist voters to the other side.

Each legislator’s lack of performance wasn’t communicated clearly—bundling it all into ‘voting no’ equals not anti‑communist comes across as emotional manipulation and assumes the other side isn’t anti‑communist, which discourages communication and makes politically uninterested people think it’s just more talk about anti‑China. The messaging didn’t really step outside echo chambers. Holding a recall before half a term makes it seem like revenge, not mass persuasion of apolitical people, and it ended being pulled back into a blue‑green battle. Vote results show that the deep‑blue base can’t be moved.

On what made voters resist the recall:

Originally getting more ‘yes’ votes than ‘no’ in long‑time blue strongholds wasn’t going to be easy—but thanks to many centrist voters who didn’t really understand or refused to understand what Taiwan is going through.

Taiwanese lack national consciousness (Are we Taiwanese or Chinese?). They don’t feel that safeguarding national dignity matters, tend to focus on short‑term, narrow issues. This stems from the KMT’s long history; Taiwan’s democracy remains immature, and too many lack critical thinking—instead being captive to party colors.

Our democratic system has only been around for thirty‑odd years, meaning most people lack the critical thinking skills necessary for a democratic society. This makes it easier for opponents to manipulate with information warfare.

Conclusion

THE RESPONSES OF many pro-DPP citizens, i.e., those behind the recall movement, indicate a growing sense of dissatisfaction with not just the KMT and TPP, but also the DPP. There is also a growing sense of frustration towards those who voted against the recall. A growing sense of future insecurity and social polarisation is also present.

While there a variety of reasons behind these sentiments, a few common themes emerge. These are:

1. A growing anxiety of China’s influence over Taiwan—via the actions of KMT legislators within Taiwan, CCP media manipulation, and Taiwan’s international perception as being pro-China.
2. An increased lack of trust in Taiwan’s political institutions—i.e., how poorly voting procedures were handled, DPP’s identification with the recall movement, and the use of the recall’s to get rid of political opponents rather than focusing on national interests.
3. An increased sense of frustration and hopelessness towards anti-recall voters—due to many people voting based on party colours, lack of awareness of the China threat and international perception, and how easily many Taiwanese are swayed by short term benefits.

What do these sentiments mean for the future of Taiwanese activism? For one, activists may desire to distance themselves from the DPP more clearly to resist being associated with party battles. Doing so will inevitably reduce the funding and logistical support for such movements.

Secondly, the growing fear associated with the China threat may add a sense of urgency to future activism. To the degree that such a fear is triggered by international or domestic developments, it may compel a larger number of Taiwanese to take up activism.

Thirdly, the growing frustration pro-recallers harbour towards anti-recallers may cause a sharper social split, pushing those in between both camps to take a side. Strong sentiments and more radical language run the risk of alienating more swing voters.