Milton Friedman, who died on Thursday in San Francisco of heart failure at age 94, was considered one of the 20th century's most influential economists. Although advocates of his policies seem to have diminished, Friedman's free-market and anti-government philosophies will always retain their appeal.
Friedman, a 1976 Nobel laureate for economics, visited Taiwan three times and was well known here -- as elsewhere -- for his famous quote: "There is no such thing as a free lunch."
During his visits, Friedman had tried to inspire the government to move toward a more liberalized, free market system, despite the era's prevailing economic philosophy -- inspired by John Maynard Keynes -- that called for greater government involvement in addressing the economy.
Friedman advised establishing a floating foreign exchange rate system, improving control of the money supply, privatizing state-owned enterprises and getting rid of government red tape.
Although his advice was not widely accepted by the nation's conservative leaders at the time, his principles have come to be widely accepted now.
Friedman was an approachable man who loved to argue. One legacy Friedman left for Taiwan was the debate he engaged in with Chao Yao-tung (
In that debate, Friedman said that government should take a hands-off approach to private businesses and that regulations were unnecessary or even harmful to market efficiency.
But Chao, who later served as economics minister, argued that the government played a pivotal role in protecting consumers and workers from the excesses of the capitalist marketplace.
Lauded as a great economist who invented modern monetarism, Friedman's idea of maintaining a steady growth in money supply to keep inflation at bay has influenced the formulation of monetary policies in many countries around the world, including Taiwan.
But there is another Friedman tenet that has come under attack these days: he believed that man's essentially humane nature would find its full expression under free-market capitalism.
In his 1962 book Capitalism and Freedom, Friedman wrote: "Few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundations of our free society as the acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible."
The main social responsibility of a company, as Friedman saw it, is to maximize profit. By doing so, a company allows its employees to keep their jobs, benefits its suppliers, gives customers the products they need and reimburses its investors.
But Friedman's beliefs -- that success in business is a virtue and that by serving their own interests, companies also fulfill their social responsibilities -- apparently carry little weight in today's society.
Following a series of greed-driven corporate scandals, societies are demanding a new type of corporation that not only makes profits for investors, but also conducts itself in a morally acceptable way to benefit stakeholders and the communities in which they are embedded.
Some may find Friedman's views too narrow for today's business environment. But the debate about corporate social responsibility also raged in his day, and the late economist remained firm in his beliefs and didn't really care whether others liked them.
To many in Taiwan, Friedman's legacy not only stems from that landmark debate in 1981, but also from the straightforward way he expressed his economic views.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
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
RSS