The long sweep of Chinese history reveals interesting patterns, and one stands out in particular: It is striking how many great Chinese met tragic ends. Time and again, China’s rulers persecuted brilliant individuals.
Emperors were usually ordinary men of average ability, so they had no choice but to depend on people whose talents far surpassed their own. However, they often mistrusted subordinates who were far more competent than themselves. Emperors needed talent, but feared it, a contradiction that brought many brilliant people to bitter ends.
In both past and present-day China, countless talented Chinese have experienced persecution. Some cases seem remarkably similar. Today’s China might have a veneer of modernity, but their society still grapples with its ancient authoritarian legacy.
Han Xin (韓信), a military genius instrumental in establishing the Han Dynasty, is universally ranked as one of the greatest generals in Chinese history. The renowned ancient historian Sima Qian (司馬遷) called him “A man without equal in the realm — the foremost among generals.”
A master strategist, Han’s victories on the battlefield laid the groundwork for a new era. More than anyone else, he was responsible for establishing the new dynasty and making Han Gaozu (漢高祖) emperor. However, his extraordinary talent became his undoing. Gaozu felt insecure ruling over an unstable new dynasty, making him wary of potential threats, and began to consider Han Xin as a menace who had to be eliminated. Eventually, he had Han Xin executed.
The tragic downfall of one of China’s greatest strategists highlights a sad truth — rulers of middling talent have always feared outstanding ability. When talent casts too long a shadow, they root it out.
In the 21st century, a remarkably similar case is seen in entrepreneur Jack Ma (馬雲). A list of the most creative entrepreneurs of the modern era would place Ma near the top. China once celebrated Ma as a pioneering business genius whose innovations transformed global commerce.
However, success made him bold and outspoken. He rightly considered the dead hand of the Chinese Communist Party the major impediment to China’s economic growth. Hoping to move his country forward as quickly as possible, he publicly criticized glaring flaws in government policies. As a result, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) began to consider Ma a threat. He feared that such a wealthy and celebrated magnate would create a power base to rival his own.
Like Han Xin, Ma’s brilliance brought retribution. Xi had Ma dismissed from the company he founded, silenced and exiled.
What unites the narratives of Han Xin and Ma is not just the tragic fate of two brilliant men, but also the cruel imperatives of authoritarianism that destroyed them. In ancient and modern times, rulers of limited ability fear talent. They feel comfortable around obedient mediocrities and suspect anyone who challenges the “status quo.”
The tragic stories of Han Xin and Ma remind us that authoritarian leaders in every era mistrust genius. They see exceptional talent not as a resource to be nurtured, but as a threat to their precarious hold on power. As the Chinese saying goes, there cannot be two suns in the sky.
Han Xin and Ma operated in entirely different spheres — one on the battlefield and one in the boardroom. However, their stories converge on a critical point: Authoritarian regimes, by their very nature, undermine the excellence that might propel society forward. They punish people for daring to excel, sacrificing talent on the altar of absolute power.
Authoritarianism not only crushes the human spirit, but also dooms society to mediocrity. The question facing China’s elite is — who is next?
Bret Hinsch is professor emeritus of the Department of History, Fo Guang University.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
Tomorrow is the 78th anniversary of the 228 Incident. On Monday, at a meeting with the Overseas 2-28 Survivors Homecoming Group at the Presidential Office, President William Lai (賴清德) spoke of the importance of protecting the nation’s freedom and sovereignty. The 228 Incident is in the past, but the generational trauma exists in the present. The imperative to protect the nation’s sovereignty and liberty from Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aggression will remain for the foreseeable future. The chaos and budget cuts in the legislature threaten the endeavor. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have worked together to
RSS