I took a stroll through the memorial today, noting the dents in the new metal “Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall” signboards.
But what struck me, besides the grossness of the grandious design of the place (it has that stink of oppression you feel all over Beijing’s great historical works) was how orderly the place is. Nice planted trees and shrubs, decent materials used in the construction, or at least decently maintained.
If the Chiang era had left Taiwan in such an orderly state one could reasonably make an argument that the legacy of father and son,despite its obvious odious side, is one that should be respected. Such arguments are made in favor of Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore. Despite ruling autocratically, he left a poor, dirty backward country with the highest standard of living in Asia. He left it prosperous but equaly important, clean, beautiful, well run, and relatively free of corruption.
What can the Chiang era claim? Taiwan is far uglier, dirtier, than it was when the KMT arrived. GDP is higher but it was achieved stupidly, with no planning for the future. Factories were allowed to be built beside rice fields, filling them with heavy metals and other contaminants. Rivers were used as garbage dumps. No sewage lines were put in place so that at the turn of the millenium about 5% of the country was hooked up, having massive consequences for the environment.
Taiwan has stunningly beautiful countryside marred in so many places by uregulated development. This is the legacy of the Chiang era.
Rural towns and small cities are filthy eyesores. This is the legacy of the Chiang era.
Taiwan’s big cities are little better. They have poor infrastructure, terrible design, few open spaces. This is the legacy of the Chiang era.
Taiwan’s government is corrupt and its court system weak. This is the legacy of the Chiang era.
The Chiang’s did not develop this country in many ways that deserve praise. They could have done so much better with only minimal effort. They simply didn’t give a shit and it shows.