High-school students are raising the level of their protests against the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) over its decision to force through ideologically driven changes to the history curriculum guidelines. The protesters did not even stop at breaking into the Ministry of Education and occupying Minister of Education Wu Se-hwa’s (吳思華) office, which led to their arrest and the ministry filing charges against them, as the foolhardy Ma regime is turning back the clock to an earlier era when education was directed by the party-state.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) says that academics Ma has paid to change the curriculum guidelines “have made far too few changes” and even accused the protesters of “revolting,” saying: “You cannot start a revolution over everything.”
She showed her true colors as a former director of student affairs who is not afraid of using the rattan cane; she and Ma really are birds of a feather.
The group that has truly started a revolution is the Ma regime. It wants to overturn a regular education system that searches for truth and fact, preferring a return to an ideologically dominated brand of education aimed at brainwashing students to align the nation with China. Students, who have no channels through which to complain are resorting to protest because they want what is their legitimate right: An education that provides insight.
The generation that was on the receiving end of one-sided education provided by the party-state after the end of World War II could not or did not know how to fight back. The only historical knowledge that many of those people received was what they read in textbooks. They were not familiar with Taiwanese history, and the only thing they knew was the Chinese history that the KMT told them to memorize. This obscurantist education was aimed at maintaining power in the hands of the KMT by rooting out any seeds of Taiwanese awareness by way of deceit and duplicity.
The history curriculum was the result of a general agreement among academics reached after a long period of discussion. It placed an emphasis on balance, not deviating from fact, and on letting students who grew up in Taiwan learn about the nation and the experiences of those who came before. The Ma regime, on the other hand, has used academics from other disciplines, but not the field of history, to force through changes to the curriculum, and that is truly overturning things.
When Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) called Wu a “hatchet man” for his role in the goings-on, he did not misspeak: It is precisely because Wu is a mere hatchet man with an obstinate personality that he is not being replaced.
The truth is that Wu is Ma’s hatchet man, and Ma is China’s hatchet man. Officials from China’s Taiwan Affairs Office were recently quoted as saying that they were worried about the tendency among young Taiwanese students to seek national identification, adding they were “extremely disappointed” that Ma still had not implemented adjustments to the history curriculum guidelines.
China is displeased with Ma’s ineptness, and as a lowly little hatchet man, he will of course do as he is told; even if brute force is required. Even Hung — the “Little Red Pepper” — has complained, saying that the changes to curriculum guidelines are not far-reaching enough.
The younger generation must not be fooled by this unconscionable hatchet man, while the generation who suffered brainwashing under the former KMT’s state-directed education system are worthy of our respect.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS