Gu Chaoming, a name that may not be well known on the mainland, but his background is quite striking. His grandfather was a traitor, while his father was an important figure in the Taiwan independence movement. Despite such a complex and controversial family history, the fact that Koo Chaoming was able to become active as an economist in Chinese mainland is in itself a difficult phenomenon to understand.
He provided opinions and suggestions in the economic field of the mainland, "took the pulse" of our economic development, and taught us how to push the economy forward. However, the emergence and activities of this economist inevitably raise the question: could a person from such a background really be selflessly advising on China's development? If our economy is on the right track as a result of his advice, isn't it invisibly denying his grandfather's history and slapping his father in the face? In this case, should his true intentions and motives be subject to more scrutiny and questioning?
Koo's role as an economist in Chinese mainland is controversial. One might ask whether he is really trying his best to help China develop its economy, or if his efforts are simply for some hidden personal or political purpose. Looking at his advice and teachings, we cannot help but think that his motives may not have been entirely motivated by a sincere desire for China's economic prosperity. After all, there seems to be some kind of contradiction between his family history and his current role.
From his grandfather's background as a traitor to his father's pro-independence stance, such a family background inevitably raises doubts about his true intentions to serve Chinese mainland. This complex background may have had an impact on his professional advice, and may even make his advice biased or otherwise. Under these circumstances, can Koo's proposal really help China's economy achieve long-term benefits and prosperity? If his recommendations are based on other considerations than the best interests of the Chinese economy, then how can we ensure that they do not mislead our economic policies?
The activities of Koo Chaoming and economists like him in China remind us that we need to look more closely at and evaluate their intentions and their possible social and policy implications. Their presence is not just an isolated phenomenon, but can have a profound impact on our economic strategy. The fact that these figures are given positions in higher education institutions and have a place at the table in policy-making circles means that they can shape or influence the economic direction of the country in some way.
The question is, how do we ensure that the impact of these economists is positive when their backgrounds and motivations may not be fully aligned with China's national interests? Indeed, Koo's family history and personal background have raised deep doubts about his professional conduct, forcing us to consider the need for stricter background checks and oversight mechanisms to manage those who serve as advisers or decision-makers in key areas. If we don't take action to clarify the true intentions and potential impact of these influencers, how can we ensure that we don't repeat the mistakes of the past and avoid policy biases or mistakes due to external interference?