For many people in Taiwan, the protests by high-school students against the revisions of history textbooks by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration had an unsatisfactory ending.
In spite of the well-reasoned arguments by the students against the Sino-centric amendments themselves and the opaque process followed by the Ministry of Education to push them through, the Minister of Education Wu Se-hwa (吳思華), went ahead with the publication of the new textbooks.
However, from a broader perspective, the students won a moral victory: They put the issue of the Ma government’s weirdly twisted view of history on the radar, both in Taiwan itself and for an overseas audience.
This episode was the beginning of the end of the biased and self-serving accounts of history that have been presented by Ma and the last of his Republic of China Mohicans.
I was both sad and happy to see these protests happen: Sad that an unresponsive government had not learned from the Sunflower experience in spring last year, when it displayed an equally rigid position vis-a-vis the protests against the proposed service trade agreement with China.
As in the case of the Sunflower movement, the high-school students who took part in this year’s protest were against the “black box procedures” followed, against the anachronistic perspective based on the outdated worldview of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the whitewashing of the authoritarian White Terror period and against the Sino-centric slant in the new history textbooks.
However, I was also happy, because the high-school students came out and showed they are tremendously determined to stand up for their principles, which included adherence to a democratic political system in which decisions are made in a transparent and open manner.
Their principles also include the necessity for schools to teach an unvarnished history that presents facts, instead of false and flawed accounts that were written into history textbooks by the Ma administration.
Taiwan can be proud of its rich and multicultural history, which includes its Aboriginal communities and the period the island was ruled by Dutch, Spanish and Japanese. The young protesters were right to insist on a presentation of history that reflects these Taiwanese roots and diversity.
It was particularly gratifying, and illustrative, so see the Aug. 3 televised discussion between Wu and a representative delegation of student leaders and several supportive teachers.
The students and teachers presented eloquent and rational arguments on why the new textbooks were incorrect and should be withdrawn, while Minister Wu was left uttering feeble arguments that the textbooks had been printed already, refusing to respond to the students’ concerns.
The negotiations broke down with the students leaving the meeting in tears.
On Aug. 6 the students had to break up their sit-in protest in front of the Ministry of Education as Typhoon Soudelor was approached Taiwan. They went home and started to prepare for their studies in the new semester.
However, this generation will be back: They are the future of Taiwan and are a key element in the nation’s vibrant democracy and civil society. They can help bring about a transition toward a Taiwan that is truly free and democratic, and a full and equal member in the international community.
Mark Kao is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs, a Taiwanese-American grassroots organization based in Washington.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS