This template is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan
This page is under the stewardship of WikiProject Conservatism; changes to it should reflect consensus. If you are planning to make any significant changes, please discuss them first.
Conservatism by definition is to conserve the values that are traditionally established. In Taiwan (ROC), there was never a communist party that had substantial influence let alone controlling the island. Therefore, being loyal to Beijing in not conservatism. Rather, it is breaking from the traditional conservatism values of Taiwan (ROC) and should be removed from this template. Guotaian (talk) 10:35, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was not the supporters of "values that are traditionally established" that founded American neoconservatism, but rather the Trotskyists and liberal hawks. In the traditional sense, American "conservatives" did not prefer aggressive interventions to spread liberal democracy abroad. American "conservatives" in the traditional sense cared more about American nationalism than about liberal democracy, as do current Trumpists. Germany's revolutionary conservatives are not traditional "conservatives," they are fascists close to the third position. Regardless of your claim, many pro-Beijing parties, such as the Chinese Unification Promotion Party and the New Party (Taiwan), are considered "conservative" in Taiwan. ProKMT (talk) 07:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Explain to me what conservatism means in a Taiwanese context then? I am sure that it isn't related to praising the CCP. note: neocons are "totally" founded by Trotskyists. Guotaian (talk) 10:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't include those who supporting joining the PRC, which is what the establishment (KMT) fought against. The main article also links to the KMT page, which suggest that conservatism is mainly based off the ideology in Taiwan constitutes the character and policies of the Kuomintang (KMT) party and that of the pan-Blue camp. Guotaian (talk) 14:44, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Substituting your arguments into American politics is as follows: In the 1960s and 1970s, neo-cons were not "conservatives" because they stood up to establishment conservatives; Donald Trump is not a "conservative" because he is a populist who stood up to establishment conservatives within the Republican Party. However, both neo-conservatism and Trumpism belong to Conservatism. The Chinese Unification Promotion Party or Patriot Alliance Association have stood up to established conservatism, but are considered Conservatism or Far-right within Taiwan. ProKMT (talk) 02:44, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the U.S., movements like neoconservatism and Trumpism have challenged establishment conservatives but are still considered part of the broader conservative movement (As they generally agree on most things with other conservatives including social and fiscal conservatism). Iin Taiwan, groups like the Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) or the Patriot Alliance Association may hold radical positions, but they are often classified as Pro-Prc and extemist rather than part of mainstream conservatism (Who are completely against the PRC).
However, unlike neoconservatives or Trumpists in the U.S., the CUPP and the Patriot Alliance Association do not align with Taiwan’s traditional conservative movement, represented by the Pan-Blue Camp. Instead of advocating for Taiwanese conservatism, which prioritizes maintaining the Republic of China’s sovereignty while resisting rapid liberalization, these groups directly support the PRC and promote unification under Beijing’s rule. This makes them fundamentally different from Pan-Blue conservatives, as their political goals align more with the PRC than with any established conservative tradition in Taiwan. Guotaian (talk) 12:01, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For example, the Chinese Unification Promotion Party is considered a conservative party in Wikipedia; the Imperial Rule Assistance Association is considered a conservative party in Wikipedia. ProKMT (talk) 11:35, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm against your continued attempts to change the title. Specifically, you attempt to delete the "Conservatism in China" template, so what template should pre-1949 mainland ROC conservatism be covered in? There are "conservative" elements in any region, but pre-1945 Taiwan was not part of the ROC. ProKMT (talk) 02:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pre 1949 mainland ROC should be covered in a history of Chinese conservatism template as it distinct from conservatism in post 1949 mainland Chinese PRC and post 1949 Taiwanese ROC. Post 1949 Taiwan (ROC) and mainland china (PRC) should have their own templates as templates tend to cover modern countries, not historical ones. Guotaian (talk) 11:54, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Taiwanese nationalists" is misleading and must be labeled "Taiwanese nationalists (limited to conservative factions)". Because not all Taiwanese nationalists are conservatives, and many are center-left. ProKMT (talk) 07:52, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are chinese nationalists who lean left, but im sure you wouldnt label : Chinese nationalists (limited to conservative factions). Guotaian (talk) 10:54, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest Chinese nationalists are represented by conservative KMT, and the biggest Taiwanese nationalists are represented by centre-left DPP ProKMT (talk) 11:21, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwanese conservatives, particularly those aligned with the Pan-Blue Camp, generally prefer the name Republic of China (Taiwan) rather than just Taiwan because they emphasize the continuity of the ROC as the legitimate government. This reflects their historical stance of maintaining the Republic of China’s identity and sovereignty, rather than recognizing Taiwan as a separate, independent state. The Kuomintang (KMT) and other Pan-Blue factions have traditionally upheld this view, distinguishing themselves from pro-independence movements that prefer to emphasize Taiwan as a distinct political entity.
Given this preference, the template should be named Conservatism in the Republic of China (Taiwan) rather than Conservatism in Taiwan. This ensures that the terminology accurately reflects the perspective of Taiwan’s conservatives, who see the ROC as the legitimate framework for governance. Using Taiwan alone would align more with the Pan-Green Camp's viewpoint, which conservatives in Taiwan do not support. Therefore, to maintain neutrality and properly represent the political positioning of Taiwanese conservatives, the template should use Republic of China (Taiwan) in its title. Guotaian (talk) 12:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bunnypranav I fully understand that moving the page went too far and did not do it again. However, can you please explain what content within the template I have removed that i haven't yet explained in talk yet. Guotaian (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are editing to remove a lot of content while trying to make radical changes to the template's structure without a smooth agreement between users. Please stop edit warring and keep the status quo. ProKMT (talk) 08:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The current title of the template is "Conservatism in Taiwan", and the title you are proposing is also "Conservatism in the Republic of China (Taiwan)"; the current title of the template is never "Taiwanese Conservatism" or "Republic of China Conservatism": Therefore, the anti-ROC conservatism against traditional Taiwanese/ROC Conservatism or can also be covered in the template. TSU or CUPP is not traditional Taiwanese/ROC Conservatism, but Conservatism in Taiwan/ROC is correct. ProKMT (talk) 08:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While the current title Conservatism in Taiwan is broad, the issue is not just the name but the scope of what is included. Traditional ROC conservatism, mainly represented by the Pan-Blue Camp, is distinct from groups like the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) or the Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP), which do not align with the ROC’s historical conservative tradition. TSU is pro-independence and progressive, while CUPP is pro-PRC, making them outliers rather than representatives of mainstream ROC conservatism. The template should focus on traditional ROC-aligned conservatism rather than grouping together ideologically opposing movements under a single framework. Guotaian (talk) 08:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please, the template you're dealing with now is "Conservatism in Taiwan" (or "Conservatism in ROC"), not "Taiwanese conservatism" or "ROC conservatism"; it's not TSU or CUPP traditional "ROC[-aligned] conservatism", but it's obviously "Conservatism in ROC". ProKMT (talk) 08:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pro-PRC factions in Taiwan, such as the Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP), should not be classified as part of conservatism in Taiwan because they do not align with the traditional ideological foundations of Taiwanese conservatism, which is primarily rooted in the Pan-Blue Camp’s defense of the Republic of China (ROC) and its historical opposition to communism.
Conservatism, by definition, seeks to preserve established traditions, institutions, and national identity. In Taiwan’s context, traditional conservatism is represented by the Pan-Blue Camp, which upholds the ROC’s legitimacy, supports the status quo or eventual unification under the ROC (not the PRC), and maintains an anti-communist stance. The Kuomintang (KMT), People First Party (PFP), and other Pan-Blue factions fall into this category because they prioritize maintaining the ROC’s sovereignty and governing system.
In contrast, pro-PRC factions advocate for Taiwan’s integration into the People’s Republic of China (PRC), an entity that has historically been in direct opposition to the ROC’s political and ideological framework. This position does not align with conservatism in Taiwan but rather represents a radical departure from it. Supporting Taiwan’s absorption into a communist-led state contradicts the core principles of traditional ROC-aligned conservatism, which has always been rooted in resistance to PRC influence and the preservation of the ROC’s institutions.
Therefore, while pro-PRC groups may share some authoritarian tendencies with certain conservative factions, their advocacy for Taiwan’s unification under the PRC is not a continuation of Taiwan’s conservative tradition but rather an entirely different political movement. Labeling pro-PRC groups as part of "conservatism in Taiwan" misrepresents the ideological divisions in Taiwanese politics and blurs the line between those who seek to preserve the ROC and those who aim to dismantle it in favor of PRC rule. Guotaian (talk) 09:00, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not all conservatives are pro-establishment. American Neoconservatism in the 1970s or Trumpism in today's world are anti-establishment but clearly conservative. CUPP and TSU are (at least socially and culturally) "conservative", they are "Conservative parties in Taiwan", if not "Taiwanese conservative parties". ProKMT (talk) 09:20, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, I would like to thank you for being civil and taking it to talk. I have mentioned this point before but here I go again. Not all conservatives are pro-establishment, conservatism is fundamentally about preserving certain traditions, institutions, and national identity. In Taiwan’s context, mainstream conservatism has historically been aligned with the Pan-Blue Camp, which upholds the Republic of China (ROC) and maintains an anti-communist stance. Comparing CUPP and TSU to movements like American neoconservatism or Trumpism overlooks the key ideological differences.
The Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) is not conservative in the Taiwanese context because it seeks to dismantle the ROC and integrate Taiwan into the People's Republic of China (PRC), which contradicts the foundational principles of ROC-aligned conservatism. Conservatism in Taiwan has long been defined by opposition to the PRC’s communist rule, making pro-PRC movements an ideological outlier rather than part of the conservative mainstream.
Similarly, the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), despite holding socially conservative views, is a staunchly pro-independence party, advocating for a fundamental restructuring of Taiwan’s national identity. This places it at odds with traditional ROC conservatism, which emphasizes maintaining the ROC as the legitimate government of China. Classifying them as part of "Conservatism in Taiwan" creates confusion, as they do not seek to preserve the institutions and national identity that define Taiwanese conservatism. Guotaian (talk) 09:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, CUPP is conservative in the context of Taiwan. Is it "conservative" for Benshengren that the ROC system was brought into Taiwan by the KMT in 1945? Of course, CUPP is not conservative for KMT and ROC-orthodox views. However, Wikipedia has to strictly observe NPOV. CUPP is referred to as "conservative" or "far right" in Taiwanese media. Even I, who is friendly to KMT, value NPOV when editing Wikipedia, but you don't. ProKMT (talk) 09:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, the fact that you mention you value NPOV is funny considering how the neoauthoritarianism article which was largely edited by you was considered for deletion due to it being written in your POV. Your argument selectively applies the concept of conservatism without acknowledging its ideological foundations in Taiwan. While some media may label CUPP as "conservative" or "far-right," conservatism is not simply about authoritarianism or nationalism—it is about preserving established institutions, traditions, and national identity. In Taiwan’s context, mainstream conservatism has been historically aligned with the Pan-Blue Camp, which defends the Republic of China (ROC), maintains an anti-communist stance, and opposes PRC influence. Just look at the main article.
CUPP, on the other hand, seeks to dismantle the ROC and integrate Taiwan into the People's Republic of China (PRC), a position that directly contradicts the core principles of ROC-aligned conservatism. Supporting unification under a communist-led state is not "conservative" in the Taiwanese historical context—it is a radical departure from it. Labeling CUPP as conservative blurs the ideological distinctions between those who seek to preserve the ROC and those who aim to dissolve it. Guotaian (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The CUPP is clearly (at least culturally or socially) "conservative" and is Taiwan's far-right party. There is no rule that only 'mainstream conservatism' should be covered in this template. ProKMT (talk) 09:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look for the source. At the very least, far-right parties that are not fascist parties are usually conservative, and Chinese Wikipedia categorizes CUPP as a conservative party. zh:中華統一促進黨ProKMT (talk) 10:01, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
