No matter what it does, the Ministry of Education can't seem to escape censure these days. The proposal to make Taiwanese history the focus of one of four textbooks for senior-high school students has been criticized, as has the proposal to reduce the proportion of classical Chinese taught. Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝) has been labeled many things as a result of these proposals, but the least appropriate of the labels is that of an agent of "desinicization."
The history syllabus will be covered by four books, one each for Taiwanese and Chinese history, with the other two for world history. Chinese history has not been removed, nor is its quantity any less than that of Taiwanese history, so this is hardly desinicization. The charge that reducing the proportion of classical studies is an act of desinicization is equally absurd.
The vernacular is a practical tool that we use every day. Classical Chinese is the language of the ancients, and for people today it is largely dead wood. Classical Chinese presently accounts for two-thirds of the high-school language curriculum, but much of what is learned is left behind when students graduate. In daily life, the vernacular is much more useful, as the reformer and liberal scholar Hu Shih (胡適) made very clear 86 years ago. It has been proposed that the proportion of vernacular Chinese should increase to 50 or 60 percent of the total. This is a long overdue adjustment. And in any case, both classical and vernacular Chinese are part of the Chinese language. This is hardly desinicization.
Those throwing accusations at Tu are overreacting to Taiwan's search for a national identity after years of "de-Taiwanification." They are disturbed by the diverse creative energy that has been released by democratization and a search for a new identity. They wish to stop the juggernaut of change by putting derogatory and irrelevant labels on practical reforms and what is becoming a mainstream ideology.
Such forces, which go against the interests of this land and its people, are a residue of a foreign political power. Manifestations of its presence are everywhere, and this is why Taiwan is yet to become a normal country. Over the last 20 years of democratization, Taiwan has had to escape the fetters of martial law and struggle against other forms of authoritarian control which have tricked the people and limited their rights and freedoms, preventing the normal development of society. Even now, with direct presidential elections and the development of democracy entering a new phase, our political environment is still full of aberrant phenomena.
On the international front, US Secretary of State Colin Powell has denied that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country, while domestically, the national emblem and anthem are still the same as that of a Leninist political party. The "soft coup d'etat" after the presidential election in March indicated that there are still those who believe the military is under the control of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which, despite its problems with cash flow, remains the richest political party in the world. Most importantly, Taiwan still does not have a constitution that is tailored to its needs.
On the path to normality, Taiwan must rid itself of the
residue of the martial law era, whether it be expressed in history, culture, politics, economics or other parts of society. In
correcting these abnormalities, some over-compensation cannot be avoided, especially in the face of foreign political forces at home and across the Taiwan Strait. But reforms in line with common values and justice are a duty that cannot be neglected. History always stands on the side of the righteous.
Lu Shih-hsiang is chief executive officer of the Foundation for the Advancement of Media Excellence.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of