Forcing the King to abdicate is Nothing. Having No Sense of Shame is Everything

Forcing the King to abdicate is Nothing. Having No Sense of Shame is Everything
China Times editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
March 27, 2007

Comment: Among the many myths promulgated by democracies and other monopolistic states, is the myth that "public property" belongs to "The People."

The reality of course is that there is no such thing as "The People." There are only millions of sovereign and independent individuals, most of whom are strangers to each other, each of whom is understandably constrained by "rational ignorance."

The predictable consequence of this reality is that "public property" invariably ends up as the private property of powerful officials and their wealthy cronies.


TVBS "News Nightclub" expose of DPP political patronage in the form of endless sweetheart deals: Kaohsiung Mass Rapid Transit System scandal, Taiwan High Speed Rail Corporation scandal, China Airlines scandal, Electronic Toll Collection scandal, Mega Bank scandal


TVBS "News Nightclub" expose of DPP political patronage in the form of endless sweetheart deals: Waterland Financial Holdings scandal, Taiwan Development Bank scandal, Chung Hua Telecom scandal, Asia Pacific Broadband Telecom scandal, Taiwan Television Enterprise scandal

Anyone who expects the token safeguards incorporated into democracies and other monopolistic states to provide "checks and balances" on such officials within the nominally separate, but actually monolithic "branches of government," is hopelessly naive.

The harsh reality is that the Doctrine of the Separation of Powers, within the context of a monopolistic state, is a contradiction in terms.

No matter how hard one tries to divide a monopolistic state into "branches" the reality is that all such "branches" live off the same "tax revenues," better known as protection money, extracted by force from "taxpayers," better known as victims of extortion.

As long as a nation is ruled by a conventional monopolistic state rather than served by Private Defense Agencies (PDAs), any ostensibly "separate and independent branches" of government will always perceive themselves as inseparable parts of the same government, the one government, the only government.

And the outrages described in the following China Times editorial will play themselves out endlessly like a broken record.

See:
Economic Selections, not Democratic Elections
The Myth of Checks and Balances

Forcing the King to abdicate is Nothing. Having No Sense of Shame is Everything
China Times editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
March 27, 2007

Recently Premier Su Tseng-chang was ambushed on the road to the 2008 presidency. During the primary debates, Premier Su found himself surrounded and under attack by Yu Hsi-kuen and Deep Green organizations, who accused him of not being sufficiently Green, i.e., not being militantly pro-independence. They also accused him of "forcing the king to abdicate" when Chen Shui-bian was under attack by Red Shirt Army protesters. In order to clear the primary hurdles, Premier Su felt compelled to defend himself against accusations that he was pressuring Chen to step down, and attempted to clear himself through various channels. But frankly speaking, whether he pressured Chen to step down is merely a tempest in a teacup, a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) family affair. And if Premier Su used language that pressured a corrupt leader to step down, so what? That hardly constitutes a character defect. By contrast, the conduct of Su cabinet officials, publicly revealed yesterday by Fuji television network representative Sumio Hasegawa, truly was something to be ashamed of.

Yesterday, during a press conference convened by former Taiwan Television Enterprise Ltd (TTV) Chairman Lai Kuo-chou, the Fuji television network representative revealed an astonishing piece of inside information regarding the role of Executive Yuan cabinet members during the public auction of TTV shares. Hasegawa indicated that on January 17, he received a luncheon invitation from Government Information Office (GIO) Chief Cheng Wen-tsang. Present at the luncheon, in addition to Chief Cheng, were Minister of Economic Affairs Steven Chen, and the executive editor, chairman of the board, and deputy editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times Group. During the session, GIO Chief Cheng Wen-tsang declared that "Fuji is free to sell its shares to anyone it wishes, but it must sell its shares to the Liberty Times, which is in attendance today." After which he indicated through Steve Chen that he had already instructed the other Japanese companies to sell their shares to the Liberty Times. Following Sumio Hasegawa's press conference, neither of the two cabinet members, Cheng Wen-tsang or Steve Chen, denied having such conversations. They merely muttered terse evasions. Clearly what Hasegawa said was true. Shame on the Su cabinet and the ruling DPP government, whose attempt to influence the sale of TTV shares has been publicly exposed by Japanese reporters.


GIO Chief Cheng Wen-tsang: "Fuji is free to sell its shares to anyone it wishes ... "


GIO Chief Cheng Wen-tsang: " ... but it must sell its shares to the Liberty Times. The right to the shares must be sold to a media organization we can trust. "


GIO Chief Cheng Wen-tsang: "For the Liberty Times to control TTV is the best choice."

Seven years ago, when the DPP was an opposition party, it blasted the Kuomintang (KMT) for "Party-State Capitalism." But the behavior of the DPP since it assumed office has made the KMT look like a piker. The only difference between it and the KMT is its outer trappings. During its early years the KMT government took over a large number of Japanese state-owned enterprises and private enterprises. Some were turned over to the national government to become state-owned enterprises. Others were turned over to the KMT to become party-owned enterprises. Over time, these enterprises, through long-term investments and the transfer of capital, yielded a ponderous system in which no distinction was made between the party and the state. The DPP has been in power for seven years. Although it has not been able to turn these enterprises over to outsiders, it has been able to cite demands for the privatization of state-owned enterprises and calls for the public ownership of the media as pretexts to grant financial groups close to the DPP wave upon wave of benefits, resulting in an impressive Party-State Capitalist system of its own.

Beginning with the Orwellian-named "Second Financial Reform" program three years ago, which had an immediate impact on the ongoing public offering of TTV shares, the DPP blueprint for its own version of "Party-State Capitalism" has been clear for all to see. In 2006, the Chang Hua Bank was acquired by Taishin Financial Holdings. No matter what the details were, the transaction was certainly advantageous to the Wu family, otherwise they would not have submitted a bid. In 2004 the government kicked out former China Development Financial Holding Corporation (CDFH) Chairperson Chen Min-hsun. Then, working hand in glove with the Ku family, which owned shares for less than six months, allowed the latter to acquire an unlimited number of proxies, and allowed control of a company worth hundreds of billions in New Taiwan Dollars to be delivered into the hands of financial groups with close ties to the First Family. The shares of these financial groups, according to reports, are overvalued. The board of directors of Taishin and China Trust hold a pitifully small number of shares. Their hostile takeovers of Chang Hua Bank and CDFH were accomplished by means of financial subterfuge, using "other peoples' money." The actual investment of the financial groups was minuscule. Therefore, the DPP government's "Second Financial Reform" is in truth nothing more than an expedient means of transferring control of major corporations to financial groups friendly to the ruling regime.

The improprieties of the "Second Financial Reform" program are clear to see. But the TTV stock offering before us is even uglier. As everyone knows, the privatization of state-owned enterprises is motivated by considerations of efficiency rather than morality. But the withdrawal of political parties, the government, and the armed forces from the media is predicated upon the ideal of healthy political evolution, which does involve strong conceptions of right and wrong. Not only is the DPP incapable of implementing its original ideals concerning public ownership of the media, two of its cabinet members openly cajoled and threatened foreign media organizations, demanding that they sell their shares to the DPP-friendly Liberty Times. The GIO Chief went so far as to suggest that "As far as the ruling party is concerned, for the Liberty Times to assume control of TTV is the ideal choice." Is this something that anyone who has the faintest conception of what constitutes news ought to say?

As we pointed out in yesterday's editorial, government property and government franchises are public property, not the private property of the DPP, Chen Shui-bian, or Su Chen-chang. Executive Yuan officials, including the GIO chief, the minister of economic affairs, and the minister of finance, seem incapable of grasping the notion that their duty is to defend the rights of the public. The only thing they seem aware of, is how to toady up to their superiors. Seeing Japanese businessmen as easy marks, they resorted to naked coercion, attempting to intimidate them into selling their shares to designated buyers. Faced with financial group bullying, despite gross corporate mismanagement, all they dared to do was to go on the market and collect proxies. They didn't dare mention the debt the financial groups incurred three years ago. This kind of administration, this kind of ruling party, so outwardly fierce but so inwardly faint-hearted, leaves us speechless. We would like to ask Premier Su just one question: Does nothing else concern you except the accusation that you attempted to "force the king to abdicate?"

Original Chinese below:

有沒有逼宮事小 知不知羞恥事大
中時社論
2007.03.27

最 近數日，行政院長蘇貞昌在二○○八路上正身陷重圍。初選辯論，蘇揆受游錫?與黨內深綠團體圍剿，怪他獨派色彩不 夠鮮明，又指責他在紅衫軍攻扁之際「逼宮」。為了過初選這一關，蘇揆對於逼宮之說非常地在意，透過各種管道拚命澄清。但是坦白說，有沒有逼宮只是民進黨茶 壺內的風暴，而蘇揆即使真有逼退貪腐領導人之言語，也未必是什麼人格上的瑕疵。相對而言，昨日富士電視台代表長谷川澄男所公布的蘇內閣閣員作為，才是真正 的羞恥。

日本富士電視台代表日前在台視前董事長賴國洲陪同下召開記者會，公布行政 院閣員介入台視釋股案之驚人內幕。長谷川 表示，一月十七日他受新聞局長鄭文燦之邀赴午宴，席中除鄭局長之外，還有經濟部長陳瑞隆、自由時報社長、董事長、副總編等多人。在席間，新聞局長鄭文燦提 到：「富士（股份）要賣給誰，是富士的自由，但一定要賣給今天在座的自由時報。」而後，經長陳瑞隆亦表示，他已經與其他持有台視股票的日本公司說明，也要 求他們賣給自由時報。在長谷川澄男記者會後，鄭文燦、陳瑞隆兩位閣員都沒有否認有類似談話，只是支吾其詞地做些閃躲，可見長谷川所言大致不虛。對於兩位閣 員被日本記者公然爆料指責，揭穿民進黨政府多位閣員不當介入私人股票買賣、引導台視釋股方向的作為，我們真的為蘇內閣感到慚愧。

七 年前民進黨在野時，批評國民黨最力的，就是該黨的「黨國資本主義」。但是民進黨執政後的表現，卻大有後來居上之 勢，只是形式與國民黨略為不同而已。早年國民黨政府接收大量的日本國營與私營企業，有些由國家經營，有些則私相授予國民黨而成為黨營事業。這些事業再經過 長時間的投資與轉投資，遂形成黨國不分的龐大體系。民進黨執政七年期間，雖未能由外部接收企業而予以分配，卻藉著社會要求國營事業民營化與媒體公共化的呼 聲，將一波波利益轉讓給與民進黨友好的財團，一樣也形成可觀的黨國資本裙帶圈。

從 三年前推動的二次金改，與當下正在進行的台視公司釋股案，國人已能清楚看到民進黨版的「黨國資本主義」藍圖。二 ○○六年彰化銀行被併入台新金控，不論交易條件細節如何，該交易一定是對台新吳家有利，他們才會願意投標。二○○四年政府踢走中華開發金控原有團隊陳敏 薰，再與持股不足六個月的辜家聯手無限制徵求委託書，更是平白無故地將千億資產的公司經營拱手讓予勤走官邸的財團。這些財團據報載其股票設值比例奇高，台 新與中信董監持股佔資產比重都低得可憐，故併吞彰銀與開發都只是「用別人錢」的財務操作，財團真正投入的成本微乎其微。因此，民進黨政府的二次金改，可以 說是極為廉價地將大公司經營權讓渡給友好財團。

二次金改私相授受之不當已如前述， 但是目前發生之台視釋股案則更為醜陋。如所週知，公營事業移轉民營只是基於效率 的考量，背後並沒有什麼道德正當性；但是黨政軍退出媒體卻是基於民主政治正常發展的理想，其政策背後確實是有極強的正當理念。現在，民進黨不但不能貫徹媒 體公共化的初衷，甚至由兩位內閣閣員出面，對國外媒體軟硬兼施，要求賣給與民進黨友好的自由時報。新聞局長甚至在席間表示：「對執政黨而言…由自由時報來 接收『掌控』台視會是最佳選擇」，這像是有新聞理念的人講的話嗎？

我們在日前社論 已經明白指出，所有的國家資產或經營權都是公產，不是民進黨、陳水扁或蘇貞昌的私產。我們的行政院 團隊（包括新聞局長、經濟部長、財政部長）不能秉持理念為人民爭取權益，卻只知對長官曲意配合。看日商狀似好欺，就脅迫就範，強行指定賣股對象；碰上財團 橫行霸道，雖然有一籮筐公司治理瑕疵，卻只敢到市場上收委託書，完全不敢提三年前的再造之恩。這樣一組行政團隊、這樣一個執政黨、這樣色厲內荏的表現，我 們真不知道要說什麼。我們只想請教蘇揆：除了逼宮危機之外，您心中還有沒有其他更重要的價值呢？