Having secured a deal to invest US$10 billion in Wisconsin, Hon Hai Precision Industry Co chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘) said: “Many people say that businesspeople have no nation.”
That might make sense in capitalism, and it is an accusation often leveled at businesspeople, although rarely explicitly uttered by businesspeople themselves.
Clearly satisfied with himself, Gou added: “But the market is my nation.”
Since Taiwan became a democracy, the government no longer has absolute control as it did through the monopoly of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). During the Martial Law era under the Chiang (蔣) regime, many business decisions were conducted by the party state. Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) would meet with business leaders over coffee, giving them the opportunity to avoid pesky visits by the tax authorities, all for the price of a small donation to the KMT.
Is that not how the Linkou Gymnasium came to be built? Not to mention the Tenth Credit Cooperative in the 1980s. Back then, business knew its place.
The National Women’s League, founded by Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) wife Soong Mayling (宋美齡), attracted the wives of many government officials, and made countless millions through generous donations.
Now it finds itself caught up in an investigation into organizations affiliated with the KMT by the Ill-gotten Party Assets Settlement Committee and the Ministry of the Interior. Is this not comeuppance for the indulgence of the powers that be during the extended Martial Law era?
Now that Taiwan is a democracy, the power is in the hands of businesspeople, more so than in those of elected politicians. If the government is found wanting in any way, the business community can berate it for not doing enough to stimulate the economy.
However, society involves so much more than economics and if businesses are to thrive they need more than reasonable economic conditions: They need political legitimacy and cultural propriety. Where has social responsibility gone? Too many heads of companies think far too much of themselves.
People should bear in mind that President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has just taken over the reins of political power from former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), and the KMT is already rooting for Gou to run as its candidate in the presidential election in 2020, seemingly with public support if polls are to be believed. That would mean a presidential candidate who sees the market as his nation leading the KMT back to power. Would this be a return of the party state?
During World War II, arriving in exile in the US, German writer Thomas Mann said: “Where I am, there is Germany.”
Mann was not referring to the market: He was referring to his culture. Many Armenians have been forced into exile around the world. For their poets, language is their nation.
Compare this with Gou, born and raised in Taiwan, but who views the market as his nation. Is this supposed to be some form of opening salvo against Tsai and the Democratic Progressive Party? Or has it got to the point in Taiwan where money trumps all?
The KMT has lost political power in Taiwan. The nation is in the process of rebuilding itself and people need to develop a nation that belongs to Taiwanese, separate from China. In this democratic era, the government cannot control business conditions from outside. Taiwan needs to be an emerging nation with people who cherish freedom.
However, Taiwanese also need businesspeople with a moral compass, who know that their country is Taiwan.
Of course, poets and novelists might also say that they have no nation, especially when they have no freedoms in their home countries.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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