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
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS