Government has blinders on
Some 50 years ago, my boss assigned me to a team to work for a client whose organization had control of nuclear power stations. The case involved a proposal to license a new method of producing nuclear power that was, in the client’s view, better than existing methods. The major advantage was that the decay products had lower potential to damage health by radiation.
There was, in my mind, a substantial problem: One of the non-radioactive products was a metal whose toxicity was not known, but similar metals have clear health effects, some good, some bad.
The client’s estimate of the number and size of plants that would use the new process would increase the amount of this metal in the Earth’s outer layer more than 20-fold in the next 100 years.
The client did not care; his concern was damage by radioactive materials; other agencies were in charge of toxic materials. His blinders prevented him from realizing that those agencies could not pass rules to change the laws of physics once new plants were licensed.
Fortunately I managed to convince my boss to replace me on the team.
That episode came to mind on reading “Minister sparks legal driving age debate” (Taipei Times, July 10, page 4). From that piece it seems clear that the blinders are firmly on.
The concern is focused on two considerations: First, what would be the effect on the number of unlicensed drivers and second, what effect would it have on the deaths and casualties caused by licensing people over 16 years of age (with no statement of which of the three methods of reckoning age used in Taiwan would be used).
A few other effects might be worth considering. Among them:
What would be the effect on people under 16 becoming unlicensed drivers?
What would be the effect on air pollution?
What would be the health effects due to teenagers walking less than they already do?
How would incentives to reduce exercise affect the nation’s ability to defend itself in an emergency?
What would be the effect of the additional vehicles used by the newly licensed (and newly unlicensed) driver on the availability of parking in the already overburdened streets?
I hope that the government will, at some time in the future, develop the ability to think more broadly about the issues.
If not, maybe they should ask five-year-olds how many of them think that five-year-olds would do a better job of governing than the current government officials.
Emilio Venezian
Taichung
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