Marx got it wrong
In his article ("What we need is a dose of Marxism," July 11, page 8) Chu Yen-ming (
The social equality and justice that Marxism promises does not come naturally, but only through the oppressive and iron-fisted force of government. History has proven that the forced equalization of social classes that is produced by Marxism only equalizes the population to the lowest possible level. This may be just, in the minds of those at the very lowest levels, but what justice does it serve to the overall population? Marxism is the subversion of free will; the very will that has the potential for wealth generation!
Marx was like the frog at the bottom of the well, the sky for him was just a circle of light above. As he wrote the papers that constitute the Communist Manifesto, his disgust for society increased. He predicted that for communism to succeed, the entire fabric of society would have to change, for in his mind, every interaction between individuals was dominated by the struggle of the proletariat under the bourgeoisie. Families would be disbanded, all property would become that of the state, women would cease to be slaves to their husbands, and "free love" would prevail. The problem here, is that none of this is natural to humans! A totalitarian government to force such an unnatural contrivance becomes inevitable.
The solution to the human condition is freedom! Freedom to pursue dreams of wealth, personal satisfaction, propagation of family, contribution to mankind, and yes, even gluttony. Such freedom is found only if a minimum of government regulation stands in an individual's way. Such a minimum government would be charged solely with promoting freedom by defending the population against foreign invasion and within it's borders, coercion.
Taiwan would not be the successful nation it is today if its inhabitants were simple farmers. It is the plastics factories and the semiconductor fabs and the equipment manufacturers that provide jobs, income and a high quality of life, all driven by individuals and investors that were interested in making money, to pull themselves up to a higher social level. It is this that drives a nation forward, and provides for those at lower social levels. If any dispute exists as to how much one is paid for his labor in these factories, it is a dispute between workers, as their value is relative to their numbers and their individual productivity.
The keys to a successful society are freedom and social mobility. Marx saw a bourgeoisie that intentionally suppressed newcomers, a situation that barely exists today. The honors and privileges bestowed on the noble families of London in the mid 1800s must have been a strong influence on his political madness, but today, such limitations to social mobility are virtually gone. The only vestige lies in government, and one's "connections" in pursuit of large civic projects; what irony! the very government Marx would have needed so desperately, he would consider the bourgeois enemy!
If the people of Taiwan desperately want their society to look like North Korea, then so be it, but I surely hope they do not.
Keith Barr
Taipei
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers