…DPP lawmakers also accused Chiang Kai-shek of embezzling state funds, and provided some examples.
"On Jun 13, 1961, Chiang Kai-shek used NT$4,560 ($100 US)from state funds to buy milk powder imported from abroad. On June 14, 1963, he used NT$1,676 ($50 US) to buy medicines, picles and cigarettes, among other items. On Sept. 14, 1973, NT$18,265 ($550 US) was used by Chiang for his grandson Chiang Hsiao-yung’s wedding photos," [legislator] Kuan [Bi-ling] said.
Does this mean Shih Ming-teh’s "anti-corruption" red shirts will start demanding the removal of the generalissimo’s statue from public places in Taiwan?
Not bloody likely.
From what I’ve read, Chaing’s government, especially while they were still on the mainland, was notorious for its corruption, which was a significant reason why it lost popular support to the communists. This presented US policy-makers with a dilemna; on the one hand, communists, on the other, a right-nationalist who exasperated Western supporters. Not unlike Nepal today.
*
*
*
I’ve read that, too. Chiang’s in-laws were supposedly terribly corrupt, but he himself was said to be impeccably honest. If the legislators have got it right, then he wasn’t the straight arrow we were led to believe.
(CAVEAT: These are pretty small sums of money, from 45 years ago. We should be honest enough to admit that these minor accounting discrepancies could be due to simple bookkeeping errors.)
Well, as for the generalissimo and Chiang Jr., they could snatch up whatever they liked for free ‘cuz, basically, they owned the whole country. And they did, quite shamelessly. Even for their burial ground, they took from ordinary citizens for some pocket changes. Not to mention the Chiang villas/vacationing houses scattered around the nation. Far as I know, the Chiang family still enjoy a rather luxurious lifestyle and being worshipped like celebrities by the media. They earned that by themselves? Yeah, right, whatever……..
*
*
*
TJ,
Good points I hadn’t considered. Of course, every country’s president lives better than the average citizen, but sure, there does come a point where it becomes unreasonable.
A democratically-elected legislature that controls the purse-strings is more likely to keep presidential spending in check. However, Taiwan didn’t have such a thing until 15 years after Chiang’s death.
(BTW, were the villas registered as state properties or were they put in the Chiang family name? One or two presidential vacation houses might have been justifiable; any more would have been an extravagant waste of government funds.)
Thievery is thievery, though. And “buying” land for a pittance when you have the coercive power of the State behind you is exactly that.