The arrogance of power makes clever people become autistic, while the myths of power makes the knowledge of a society paralytic and useless. Two recent government policies show that Taiwanese society is full of arrogance and the myths of power.
The first policy is the Ministry of Finance's tight controls aimed at avoiding a continued decline of credit grants at financial institutions, as a result of the banks' credit squeeze. The contraction of credit is indeed a major factor in the slowing of the economy, but there is a reason for it. Credit in Taiwanese financial institutions relies on hypothecation [pledging of something as security without delivery of title or possession] and not corporate profitability. Granting credit in this way is really stupid. It is also the reason why a lot of capital is tied down in real estate.
In the last year, the political situation has been unstable and we have seen a global economic slowdown, deepening the cautiousness and restraint of investors. The level of knowledge in the capital markets is still low. This lack of knowledge results in low capital investments. In other words, the decline of credit in Taiwan today is due to the finance industry being completely stupid as well as it tying up or scaring away capital. What use can the ministry's measures be in such a situation?
The second regrettable policy is Taipei City Government's recent regulation of Internet cafes, including a ban on admitting children under the age of 15 without an adult and a ban on locating cafes within 200 meters of a school. Despite strong resistance, the mayor insists on implementing the regulation, saying that opinion polls show large numbers of parents back the move. Even though polls are conducted scientifically, it doesn't mean that the results are wise. Just think of the picture of Internet cafes painted in the media over the last year or so -- criminal youth gone astray -- and it's not so difficult to understand why parents want to regulate them. But are Internet cafes really overflowing with evil? Even if they are, are they the source of all this evil?
A recent study from National Sun Yat-sen University states a close relationship between someone losing him/herself in the Internet and him/her having disturbed social relations. In other words, unsound relations with family, school and peers may be the reason for students going to Internet cafes. If parents and teachers do not improve their relationship with their children or students, then what will be the use of regulating Internet cafes? With Taipei's vision of becoming a cyber-city, IT represents the integration of knowledge and technology. How come knowledge is abandoned when IT makes an impact on society?
Knowledge could make a great contribution to the two cases described above. For example, in targeting the credit problem, the finance ministry could make banks share the experience of their methods, successes and failures. Such a sharing of knowledge should be helpful in making the use of capital more efficient and would achieve the ministry's goals. In the same vein, the Taipei City Government should study in detail the family, school and Internet cafe environment to understand why these cafes are so popular and go on from there instead of blindly falling back on opinion polls to ingratiate themselves with the electorate.
Taiwan is a society with a lot of superstitions regarding power, but power without the support of knowledge is very often destructive. The government that repeatedly declares that an educated society is its goal has to avoid the self-conceit and arrogance coming from holding power. Blind power is the greatest enemy of knowledge!
Bob Kuo is a professor of information systems at National Sun Yat-sen University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
RSS