社會觀察 . 獨立評論 . 多元觀點 . 公共書寫 . 世代翻轉

  • Home
  • English
  • 評論
  • 民意
  • 時事
  • 生活
  • 國際
  • 歷史
  • 世代
  • 轉載
  • 投稿須知

Can Taiwan Handle a Trump-like Tycoon as President?

  • English Article
  • 時事
  • 民意

It’s true that Gou is still an unknown political entity, and – if elected – he may end up shocking the pundits and fighting China until his last breath in the name of Taiwan’s independence.

Terry Gou, a straight-talking businessman with a mercurial temper, no political experience, a disdain for the government of his country, and a vast personal fortune at his disposal is running for president. Sound familiar?

Gou and Trump. Image source: Yahoo News
Gou and Trump. Image source: Yahoo News

Just like current US prez Donald Trump – whose successful 2016 run is said to be his inspiration for entering the political fray – Gou is one the wealthiest people in his nation, Taiwan, with his net worth estimated at US$8 billion. Putting aside the issue of where exactly Gou’s loyalties lie (his company, Foxconn, is an integral part of the economic landscape of China, employing over a million workers there, while he himself has met with the upper echelons of the CCP, including Xi Jinping), a more pertinent question is whether or not Taiwan really needs a businessman running the show.

While some voters dissatisfied with the current political situation there – like many who voted for Trump in 2016 – may jump at the chance of electing a businessman to shake up the system, if we’ve learned anything from Trump’s term in office, it’s that electing a headstrong billionaire with no experience will certainly shake things up, but not necessarily in a good way …

So far, the US mogul’s presidency has been characterized by unprecedented chaos and confusion, as Trump “has the record for White House staff turnover, for cabinet turnover and … for the highest turnover within a single department,” according to scholar Kathryn Dunn Tenpas. Pick up a newspaper on any given day, and you’re sure to read about the latest scandal or controversy unfolding in the administration. So while it may sound like a good idea to elect a political outsider to drain ‘the swap’, the reality is much more complex than that. In the case of Trump, at least, it’s seems as though his hardnosed corporate leadership style has not translated all that well into the government realm, resulting in serious instability at the top.

Additionally – if Trump’s actions are in any way indicative – a profit-first (principles-second) CEO-type leader may not always obey the ethical rules and guidelines of an advanced democracy, which exist to keep the various governing powers in balance. To mention only a few examples: Trump’s dubious firing of the Director of the FBI, James Comey, when he wasn’t happy with the direction the Russia investigation against his campaign was taking; his continual lambasting of the press when they produce stories he doesn’t like; and his administration’s blanket refusal to cooperate with the investigations of the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives, whose traditional function is to provide oversight of the executive branch. Basically, the attitude of a hardcore businessman towards to the well-honed machinery of government seems to be, “It’s my way or the highway, bub,” and – regardless of which side of the political spectrum you’re on – that can’t be a good thing for democracy.

Finally, just like Trump, who refused to fully separate himself from his business operations upon assuming the presidency, it’s not clear Gou would completely distance himself from Foxconn if elected. In the words of Taiwan political expert Lev Nachman, “In the same way Trump only marginally divested from his assets when he became president, I would not expect Gou to truly move away from his [company]”. Obviously, this creates a major conflict of interest, as the person in charge may be tempted to put his own good above that of the whole. To take just one example of this from Trump’s presidency, many people wonder if there’s a simple – and disturbing – reason he didn’t take a hard line against the Saudi government after the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Could it be because, as he’s said in the past, “I get along great with all of [the Saudis]. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”? Essentially, if you have a wealthy tycoon in office, it may be hard for him to remove himself from his business interests, as politics and commerce are often intertwined. As Nachman says, “I would be greatly concerned with Gou’s ability to separate his business from his political endeavors. Given Foxconn’s position within the Chinese economy and Gou’s political ideals, I’m not sure he even can or wants to.”

It’s true that Gou is still an unknown political entity, and – if elected – he may end up shocking the pundits and fighting China until his last breath in the name of Taiwan’s independence. But then again, Trump was an unknown entity in 2016, and although he claimed to be a populist, so far he’s: (1) signed a tax bill that benefits corporations and upper-income earners over others; (2) obsessively attempted to repeal Obamacare, which mainly aids the poor and uninsured; and (3) led an ongoing campaign of deregulation that’s left more US workers vulnerable to exploitation and injury. But maybe that just proves the truth of the old adage that ‘a leopard never changes its spots’?

Gou, like Trump, is known for attacking the press and charging it with disseminating ‘fake news’, as well as having a harsh personal style – one that recently led him to walk out of a public forum when a DPP lawmaker didn’t look at him while he was speaking. He also seems to have a penchant for controversial quotes, as he once stated that “the harem should not meddle in politics” in reference to his wife’s objections to him running for office (the obvious implication being that a president isn’t so much a servant of the people as an emperor), and has dropped the bombshell that “democracy alone does not provide food to eat.” While this latter statement may technically be true, every voter in Taiwan should be asking themselves: ‘But then what exactly is the alternative?’

Author / Peter K. Thompson

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • More
  • Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

Related

川普 政治 總統大選 郭台銘
2019-05-16 Peter K. Thompson

Post navigation

破解柯文哲的兩岸話術 → ← 民調與初選,鹿死誰手還不一定

Related Posts

《世紀血案》未獲授權改編林宅血案引爆炎上:台灣社會對歷史創傷、影視倫理與程序正義的集體回應

改編自「林宅血案」的影視作品《世紀血案》在尚未上映前即遭遇大規模炎上,爭議核心集中在「未取得當事人與家屬同意即拍攝」以及對受難者與家屬可能造成的二度傷害。製作單位在2月7日公開致歉,承認未能第一時間請教當事人並表示將負起責任,且多位演員也陸續發聲致歉,並表態不參與後續宣傳與活動。 其後,導演亦公開道歉並宣布即刻暫停參與後製工作,使事件從單純的公關危機升級為整個產業鏈的信任危機。 公視報導亦指出,演職人員發布聯合聲明,主張製作方蓄意隱瞞未獲授權事實,並將阻止該片任何製作、上映及素材露出,顯示爭議已進入法律與權利切割的階段。 這起炎上對台灣社會的第一個直接影響,是把「歷史創傷題材」從一般娛樂消費,重新拉回到公共倫理與社會記憶的層級。林宅血案不只是懸案敘事,而是與威權年代政治暴力、受難者處境與社會轉型正義經驗緊密相連;當影視作品以此為題材卻缺乏充分的當事人溝通與授權,社會反彈不再只是對作品好壞的評價,而是對「誰有權利使用他人的悲劇」的界線重畫。這使台灣的公共討論從「藝術自由」快速轉向「程序正義」:創作能否成立,不只看表達內容,也看取得素材與處理當事人的方式是否正當。 第二個影響,是強化了台灣社會對「二度傷害」的敏感度,並把它制度化成可追究的產業風險。過去二度傷害常被視為道德問題或情緒問題,但本案中,演員與工作人員以「未獲授權」為前提提出聯合聲明、要求阻止素材露出,等同把二度傷害視為可被主張權利、可被切割責任的事件。 這會迫使未來類似題材的製作,在立項、簽約、顧問審查、法務查核、家屬溝通紀錄等環節建立可稽核流程,否則任何一個缺口都可能導致上映前崩盤,連帶傷及演員、投資、發行與平台合作。 第三個影響,是讓台灣社會更清楚辨識「敘事主導權」與「歷史解釋權」的權力結構。當重大事件仍有未解、仍牽涉政治與社會傷口時,影視文本不只是再現,而是會反向塑造大眾對事件的理解。爭議之所以快速擴散,正反映社會對「被改寫」「被消費」「被簡化成娛樂敘事」的警惕。這種警惕會推動更高強度的事實查核期待:史料引用是否透明、虛構與真實的邊界是否清楚、是否存在扭曲或暗示性定罪等,進而影響台灣未來拍攝政治懸案、轉型正義題材的創作方法與對外溝通策略。 第四個影響,是短期內對台灣影視產業形成「高敏感題材的資本折價」。投資方與平台在面對政治創傷或重大社會案件時,會更在意授權、風險控管與輿情成本,進而提高法務與顧問成本、拉長前期開發期、降低某些題材的可行性。這不必然導致題材消失,但會讓「有能力承擔流程成本」的團隊更具優勢,產業門檻上升,粗糙或投機的開發方式更難存活。 總結而言,《世紀血案》炎上事件對台灣社會的影響,不在於單一作品能否上映,而在於它把「歷史創傷題材的創作倫理」從模糊的價值辯論,推進到可操作的程序要求;把「尊重當事人」從口號轉成授權、查核、溝通、責任切割的制度化成本;也讓社會更明確地要求創作在處理國家級傷口時,必須同時承擔記憶政治的重量與程序正義的底線。 作者:新公民議會

為什麼韓國流行文化能全球輸出成功:K-Pop、韓劇、綜藝與品牌化的系統性打法

韓國流行文化(K-Pop、韓劇、綜藝、電影、網漫與遊戲)能在全球市場形成長期影響力,不是單靠某幾個爆紅作品,而是由「產業化內容生產+平台分發+粉絲經濟+國家與企業協同」組成的輸出系統。其成功原因可拆成七個可驗證的結構因素。 韓國娛樂產業把內容製作變成「可管理的供應鏈」:從選角、訓練、編舞、造型、企劃、宣發到巡演與授權,都有高度標準化分工。結果是:作品品質更穩定、更新速度更快、可以連續輸出多組藝人與多部劇集,形成長期供給。 K-Pop歌曲常見的結構是高記憶點副歌、舞蹈鉤子、短影音可切片段落;韓劇常見的是高密度情緒曲線、強懸念結構、明確的人設與關係張力。這些設計不是偶然,核心是提高跨語言理解成本的可承受度:即使不懂韓文,也能靠旋律、影像節奏、角色衝突進入內容。 韓流與YouTube、Spotify、Netflix、TikTok等全球平台高度耦合。韓國內容擅長: 把作品切成可擴散的片段(舞台、直拍、花絮、名場面) 以字幕與多語社群加速跨國傳播 用平台演算法放大「可重播、可分享」的內容型態分發的成功,讓內容從一開始就具備跨境觸達能力,而不是先在本地走紅再外銷。 韓國娛樂的粉絲運營不是附加功能,而是商業模型核心。典型手法包括會員制、應援機制、粉絲互動內容、限定周邊、線上線下活動、投票與榜單策略。粉絲在這套系統裡同時扮演三種角色: 行銷分發者(自發剪輯、翻譯、二創、宣傳) 數據推進者(衝榜、刷播放、社群擴散) 穩定付費者(專輯、周邊、演唱會、訂閱) 韓流不是只賣音樂或影集,而是把「人設、造型、美妝、穿搭、飲食、旅遊」做成整體品牌。因此K-Pop與韓劇能帶動:美妝(K-Beauty)、時尚、食品、觀光與電商。跨界變現提高產業總收益,反過來再投資內容製作,形成正循環。 韓國的文化輸出有明顯的系統協同:娛樂公司、電視台、製作公司、經紀與訓練體系、品牌與廣告代理、以及文化相關政策與基金,形成「供給端整合」。關鍵不在單點補貼,而在長期可預期的產業環境:投資願意進來、人才願意投入、公司願意長期培養,降低了內容產業的結構風險。 韓國娛樂產業的迭代速度快:曲風、概念、造型、宣發路徑、社群互動形式都能快速更新。失敗不會讓系統崩壞,因為作品供給是連續的。這種高頻試錯讓「命中全球市場的作品」出現機率更高,且一旦命中,就能用成熟的商業機制放大。 韓國流行文化的核心優勢,是把內容做成可複製的產業流程,並用全球平台與粉絲組織把分發與變現外包到全球網路節點,再用跨界品牌化把內容延伸到生活消費。這是一套能持續輸出的系統,而不是一時潮流。 作者:新公民議會

台灣垃圾車「極樂掃」與分類文化解析:為何這套制度能運轉、也為何爭議不斷

台灣的垃圾車文化在全球辨識度極高:固定時間、音樂提示(俗稱「極樂掃」)、居民提袋下樓、現場丟垃圾與回收分類。這不是單一習慣,而是一套把「收運、付費、分類、社區互動」綁在一起的制度設計,長期形塑了台灣的生活節奏與環境治理邏輯。 一、什麼是「極樂掃」:聲音作為收運的行為觸發器 垃圾車播放音樂的核心功能不是裝飾,而是「低成本、可穿透、跨年齡」的通知機制。 對行人、住戶:用聲音取代看公告與查時間表的認知負擔 對社區:把收運變成可預期的日常儀式,降低亂丟與堆置 對制度:把「出來丟」這個動作集中化,讓後續的分類與稽查更可控 結果是:台灣把原本分散且容易失控的垃圾處理,轉成「準時、集中、可監督」的流程。 二、為何台灣形成「定點定時、人人下樓」的收運模式 台灣多數城市採用「垃圾不落地」或接近不落地的邏輯:避免垃圾長時間堆放在街角或公共桶,降低異味、病媒、翻找與外溢。這種模式成立的前提是: 城市密度高、社區巷弄多:路邊大桶管理成本高 氣候偏溫濕:垃圾堆置外露的衛生風險更高 收運與稽查一體化:集中收運讓分類與付費更好落實 簡單說:垃圾車制度把公共衛生成本,轉移成居民的時間成本,再用「乾淨街景」作為交換。 三、分類文化怎麼被「制度化」:不是道德勸說,而是流程設計 台灣的分類之所以能落地,靠的不是口號,而是三個可執行的設計: 分類與丟棄在同一個時間點完成居民在垃圾車前分流(一般垃圾、回收、廚餘等),減少「回家再分類」的失敗率。 丟垃圾變成半公開行為在鄰里空間進行的丟棄行為天然有社會監督效果:亂丟、混丟更容易被指出或拒收。 可量測、可稽核集中收運讓清潔隊可直接看到分類品質,必要時可提醒、退件或加強宣導。 這些機制把分類從「個人良心」變成「流程必經」。 四、為何會被稱作「極樂掃」:情緒、節奏與集體記憶 「極樂掃」這個稱呼反映的是感受層:音樂帶來的不是宗教意涵,而是生活節奏的訊號。 對某些人:是下班後的「一天結束」 對某些人:是被制度綁住的「準時出門壓力」 對社區:是鄰里互動與資訊交換的微型場景 同一套制度可以同時被視為「秩序」與「束縛」,這正是文化化的特徵:它進入情緒與記憶。 五、這套制度的效益與代價 效益(制度收益): 街景乾淨、垃圾外露時間短 分類與回收較可控 減少公共桶帶來的溢出、翻找、髒亂 […]

Why Taiwan’s Stock Market Hit 30,000 Despite China’s Military Drills: AI Boom, Pricing-In Risk, and Domestic Liquidity

Taiwan’s TAIEX broke the 30,000-point mark even as China staged major drills around the island. Here’s the market logic: semiconductors and AI demand, geopolitical risk already priced in, and domestic […]

Recent Posts

《世紀血案》未獲授權改編林宅血案引爆炎上:台灣社會對歷史創傷、影視倫理與程序正義的集體回應

《世紀血案》未獲授權改編林宅血案引爆炎上:台灣社會對歷史創傷、影視倫理與程序正義的集體回應

改編自「林宅血案」的影視作品《世紀血案》在尚未上映前即遭遇大規模炎上,爭議核心集中在「未取得當事人與家屬同意即拍攝」以及對受難者與家屬可能造成的二度傷害。製作單位在2月7日公開致歉,承認未能第一時間請教當事人並表示將負起責任,且多位演員也陸續發聲致歉,並表態不參與後續宣傳與活動。 其後,導演亦公開道歉並宣布即刻暫停參與後製工作,使事件從單純的公關危機升級為整個產業鏈的信任危機。 [...]

More Info
為什麼韓國流行文化能全球輸出成功:K-Pop、韓劇、綜藝與品牌化的系統性打法

為什麼韓國流行文化能全球輸出成功:K-Pop、韓劇、綜藝與品牌化的系統性打法

韓國流行文化(K-Pop、韓劇、綜藝、電影、網漫與遊戲)能在全球市場形成長期影響力,不是單靠某幾個爆紅作品,而是由「產業化內容生產+平台分發+粉絲經濟+國家與企業協同」組成的輸出系統。其成功原因可拆成七個可驗證的結構因素。 [...]

More Info
台灣垃圾車「極樂掃」與分類文化解析:為何這套制度能運轉、也為何爭議不斷

台灣垃圾車「極樂掃」與分類文化解析:為何這套制度能運轉、也為何爭議不斷

台灣的垃圾車文化在全球辨識度極高:固定時間、音樂提示(俗稱「極樂掃」)、居民提袋下樓、現場丟垃圾與回收分類。這不是單一習慣,而是一套把「收運、付費、分類、社區互動」綁在一起的制度設計,長期形塑了台灣的生活節奏與環境治理邏輯。 一、什麼是「極樂掃」:聲音作為收運的行為觸發器 垃圾車播放音樂的核心功能不是裝飾,而是「低成本、可穿透、跨年齡」的通知機制。 [...]

More Info
Why Taiwan’s Stock Market Hit 30,000 Despite China’s Military Drills: AI Boom, Pricing-In Risk, and Domestic Liquidity

Why Taiwan’s Stock Market Hit 30,000 Despite China’s Military Drills: AI Boom, Pricing-In Risk, and Domestic Liquidity

Taiwan’s TAIEX broke the 30,000-point mark even as China staged major drills around the island. Here’s the market logic: semiconductors and AI demand, geopolitical risk already priced in, and [...]

More Info

搜尋

精選文章

川習會的中美矛盾是戰略,不是貿易!

2017-04-08 韓非

八仙樂園爆炸案:缺乏常識造成的災難

2015-06-28 異想

彰化縣民輪替後的哀與愁

2016-03-06 許家瑋

新文明病:儲物症(Hoarding disorder)似正在增加

2015-04-13 楊庸一

訂閱本站

輸入你的電子郵件訂閱新文章並接收新通知。

Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way
Powered by WordPress | theme Dream Way