Religion and Democracy in Taiwan by Cheng-Tian Kuo (review)

Abstract

Book Reviews 155 masters as an important part of their direct spiritual heritage. Such claims may have more merit than one may think. STEPHEN ESKILDSEN, The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Religion and Democracy in Taiwan CHENG-TIAN KUO. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2008. x, 161 pages. ISBN 978-0-7914-7445-7. US$35.00 hardcover. Around the world religious beliefs and practices are shaping modern political processes in ways never dreamed of by secular modernization theorists, and these inconvenient facts are forcing revisions in core theories and methods of political science. Modern Taiwan is no exception. Taiwan’s vibrant religious landscape has provided the language and the concepts for bestowing or withholding legitimacy at various stages in its transition to democracy. Political discourse in Taiwan continues to be suffused with religious symbolism and some religious organizations have provided important resources for politicians seeking elections. For example, it is incumbent on politicians of all parties and all manner of religious affiliation to take part in Mazu 媽祖 parades, to have moral dialogues with prominent Buddhist leaders, and to attend Christian prayer breakfasts. This book on religion and democracy in Taiwan is an important and timely contribution not only to the study of politics in Taiwan but to comparative politics in general. Unlike other studies on this subject, this book combines qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Using historical records and personal interviews, the author gives an excellent overview of the religious scene in Taiwan. I know of no other work that gives such a comprehensive yet concise picture. The author organizes his account of each major religious group in Taiwan around that group’s “political theology” and “ecclesiology.” He wants to assess the extent to which such religious beliefs and values support democratic institutions and the influence they might have on contemporary partisan politics. He then presents statistical analyses of the partisan preferences among Taiwan’s major religious groups and their support for democratic values. His statistics show that Daoists and folk-religion believers tend to support the Democratic Progressive Party (民進黨; DPP) coalition (the “pan-green”) and Christians and Buddhists were divided between the DPP and the Kuomintang (國民黨; KMT) coalition (“pan-blue”). Among Christians, the Presbyterians were strong supporters of pan-green, as were members of the Buddhist Dharma Drum Mountain 法鼓山. Other Christians and Buddhists supported pan-blue, with a surprising level of support coming from the Buddhist Compassion Relief Association (commonly known as Ciji 慈濟). However, after controlling for socio-economic 156 Journal of Chinese Religions status and ethnicity, the statistical co-efficients that support most of these trends are rather low, indeed below the threshold of statistical significance. The numbers are suggestive of trends, but do not constitute solid evidence. As for support for democratic values and democratic behavior, Christians rank first, Buddhists second, Daoists third, and folk religious believers last. Within each of these broad groups, there are significant differences. For example, Presbyterians rank higher on support for democratic values (and also for the DPP) than other Christians; Buddha’s Light Mountain (Foguang shan 佛光山) and the Zhong Tai Temple (Zhongtai chansi 中台禪寺) rank higher than other Buddhist groups on support for democratic values. Again, however, the level of statistical significance for such conclusions is low. The author explains these trends in terms of the theologies and ecclesiologies that he has derived from his qualitative studies. Thus, the Calvinist theology and ecclesiology of the Presbyterian Church supports individualism and self-governance. Buddhist “theology” (a Christian concept applied inappropriately to Buddhist cosmology?) and “ecclesiology” engender communitarian identities and stress obedience in religious matters to monastic authorities—and therefore do not support a commitment to democracy. The same is true for Daoist and Confucian traditions and for folk religious beliefs. This explanation is a useful first attempt to suggest answers to suggestive statistical trends. It will provoke fruitful further thinking and debate. But there is obviously still a lot of theoretical and methodological work to be done before we can reach any adequate account of the influence of Taiwanese religion on Taiwanese politics. For one thing, as Kuo recognizes, there are empirical anomalies within his explanatory scheme. Some Buddhists score fairly high on his indicators of commitment to democracy. He...