President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) won the presidential election by playing the economy card. Many of his promises, such as increasing economic growth to 6 percent, or cutting the rate of unemployment to 3 percent, were criticized as impossibilities during the campaign since Taiwan has little chance of beating the odds when the international economy is sluggish. Ma’s government also faces challenges from inflation and soaring commodity prices. However, the Achilles’ heel of his government is not his impossible economic promises, but the fact that the direction of his economic policy is mistaken.
If the government pursues these policies, it will increase deindustrialization and unemployment, reduce consumers’ real income, erode the middle class and increase the number of poor. Civil unrest and public discontentment will follow.
Ma’s thinking follows typical neoliberal economic and globalization ideas: the government should intervene in and administer markets as little as possible in order to create a single globalized free market to facilitate global pillaging by trans-national corporations. His so-called “opening” is really privatization and deregulation aimed at allowing markets to operate freely.
Neoliberalism has always insisted that the government must not intervene in markets because markets are all-powerful, and can automatically resolve their own problems.
Ma believes that all market intervention by the government is a form of containment. However, Ma’s theory is immoral: he considers all governmental policies regulating markets in order to care for the welfare of the lower and middle class as a form of “containment,” “isolationist” and not “open.”
This purposeful misleading by sleight-of-word is not presidential behavior.
Many top economists have long claimed that there are a multitude of problems connected to neoliberal economic globalization. The theory has been in practice since the early 1980s, and its mainstays are deregulation, completely liberalized markets, privatization of all industries — including government-owned firms — and the reduction or cancellation of social welfare payments.
Argentina’s painful experiences serve as an example. In the 1990s, the IMF and the World Bank named Argentina the paragon of developing nations. To accede to the demands of those two institutions, Argentina greatly deregulated its economy, lowered tariffs, privatized government enterprises and cancelled many social welfare measures. Initially, the economy did indeed improve.
However, after more demands from the IMF in 2000, Argentina’s economy quickly collapsed. This, along with social unrest, led the Argentine president to declare national bankruptcy and admit that neoliberal economic globalization had destroyed his country.
A M-shaped society is emerging around the world, including in Europe and North America. Many academics believe this is the result of globalization. Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) has admitted the beginning of a M-shaped society in Taiwan and listed the strengthening of the middle class as a priority.
Solving the problems caused by a M-shaped society and strengthening the middle class are not goals that can be achieved through more globalization, but by more comprehensive regulations to curb trans-national corporations’ plundering.
Ma and Liu obviously do not get this point. Massive deregulation will not invigorate the public, but corporations. Is Ma’s public made up entirely of corporations?
If the government truly wants to strengthen the middle class, then it shouldn’t deregulate. It must focus on how to keep industries and their investments in Taiwan, rather than hollowing out the country.
Allen Houng is a professor at National Yang Ming University.
TRANSLATED BY ANGELA HONG
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