Academics are misguided
The petition initiated by Lin Thung-hong (林宗弘) and Daniel Yang (楊友仁) and publicized on Monday’s front page left me stunned with astonishment and disbelief (“Academics call on government to curb Foxconn,” June 14, page 1).
Lin and Yang accuse Foxconn of exploiting its workers in China and, in the very same breath, condemn the government in Taipei for offering subsidies and “favorable policies” for them to relocate to Taiwan — along with all of the “associated social problems.”
First, exploitation is exactly what every single company worth its stock value ought to be doing to its workers, ie, making efficient use of their freely contracted labor to produce goods highly prized — and freely so — by millions of people right across the entire planet. Such tremendous exploits are deserving of an exalted place in human history.
Second, Chinese workers are suffering because of the government in Beijing, not because of Foxconn.
Does Foxconn fiddle the currency thus wreaking havoc on market prices?
Does Foxconn forcibly prevent Chinese people from creating alternative, trustworthy currencies with which to conduct market exchange?
Does Foxconn apply the threat of imprisonment in order to extract income from the workers in a myriad forms of taxation?
Does Foxconn threaten to imprison them or even kill them and/or their families for expressing pro-freedom views?
Does Foxconn restrict their access to the Internet on pain of imprisonment?
Does Foxconn try to steal their land and wrongfully evict them from their homes?
Third, although Lin and Yang are right to criticize the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) for offering subsidies to Foxconn to relocate back to Taiwan, they do so for entirely the wrong reasons. Perhaps they could ask around and find out where Foxconn obtained its tainted Chinese subsidies in the first place — and the manner in which these funds were themselves “obtained.”
On reading such an astonishing example of moral and economic illiteracy, I reflect on the desperate need to cut the number of universities and colleges in Taiwan. In waiting for this to happen I can only hope that students will stand up and walk out of Lin and Yang’s classes if only to save their souls from any further contamination with such obdurate nonsense.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective