During the controversy over the precise wording of Japanese history books, I was coincidentally engaged in a study of cultural and other influences that go into the writing of textbooks. The failure to consider these influences generates more heat that light in any textbook debate.
Although restitution to victims of Japanese atrocities during World War II is of concern to this letter writer, it is outside the scope of this particular letter.
The main purpose of education is for each generation to pass its values to succeeding generations. Nowhere is this more evident than in social sciences such as history.
Unfortunately, no nation succeeds in living up to its own values on a consistent basis. The loftier the values, the greater the discrepancy. To further complicate matters, a textbook is useless if schools choose not to assign it. If a high school history book told Japanese children that their kindly old grandfathers were sadistic rapists, thieves and murderers, their only buyers would be Japan's enemies in Beijing -- history's most prolific mass murderers.
Writers of history textbooks face disadvantages not faced by writers of popular histories found in bookstores. (Ironically, it's the popular histories that save history from the fate of being no more than "a set of lies, agreed upon.") They find themselves carefully selecting words and facts in order to promote the values they wish to impart. The best they can hope to produce is a textbook in which inconvenient facts are sacrificed on the altar of truth.
In A Nation Grows, the US history book I selected for my study, I found dozens of dubious passages. To give only a few examples, the seizure of Native American lands was compared to the immigration of Europeans to New York City. The Trail of Tears, along which 4,000 of my fellow Cherokees and thousands of other Native Americans were forced to travel, was given only five words, with no mention of what had taken place. The only Revolutionary War battles described took place in four Northeastern states.
New England's virtual monopoly on the importation of slaves was described in the passive voice -- thus leaving the culprits unnamed. Scornful fingers were pointed at Southerners.
Andrew Carnegie was praised for his supposed concern for the poor, while his depredations on the poor were condemned without mentioning him by name. One of the authors of A Nation Grows was a professor at Carnegie-Mellon University.
The concern over Japanese history texts is valid, but critics should view those concerns within a cultural context. The challenge is how the Japanese can promote the best of their history while facing the fact that the Japanese -- like the Chinese and the Taiwanese -- have not always lived up to their own best values.
Perhaps Beijing would like to produce a history book that accurately portrays the murder of 65 million Chinese by their fellow Chinese since 1949, the cultural genocides in Tibet and Turkestan and other shameful acts. Perhaps Taiwan's history textbooks should be similarly larded with mea culpas. By walking a mile in Japan's moccasins, Japan's critics may realize the enormity of the task they demand of the Japanese.
They may also realize that Beijing's histrionics have nothing to do with historical justice and everything to do with power politics in the Pacific.
Jerry Mills
Taipei
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS