The Ministry of Education's plan to revise high school history textbooks is a pragmatic and long overdue move. While no historical account can be free of some level of subjective interpretation, there is also no denying that the version of so-called "history" that has been taught in Taiwan's textbooks for decades is so notorious for its deviation from a common-sense view of the world that it cannot be explained by subjectivity alone. Therefore, opponents who oppose the ministry's plan are simply exposing their own ideologically-driven narrow-mindedness.
A long-standing problem with Taiwan's textbooks is their departure from the truth. Examples include portraying Chiang Kai-shek (
Even more troublesome is that the history of Taiwan is typically addressed by a few short paragraphs in these textbooks, while almost all of so-called "national history" is dedicated to chapters of Chinese history. These range from childhood stories about people such as Chiang and Sun Yat-sen (
According to the ministry's plan, two separate volumes of high school textbooks will be dedicated to the histories of Taiwan and China. As for the history of the Republic of China, it will be cut into two parts, with its early years covered by the volume on Chinese history and the later years covered in the volume of Taiwan's history. This of course makes sense, because when the Qing Dynasty was overturned and the Republic of China founded in China, Taiwan was under Japanese colonial rule. The ROC government did not exercise effective rule over Taiwan until after World War II.
The ministry will also include for the first time in these textbooks the debates over Taiwan's status. In the past, the country's textbooks have cited the Cairo Declaration of 1943 -- which is merely a press communique without any legal force -- as the legal basis for the claim that Taiwan's sovereignty was handed over to the ROC government. At the same time, the textbooks completely and deliberately ignore the existence of the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 and the Sino-Japan Peace Treaty, which shows the contrary. Leaving aside the issue of which view is correct, at the very least, shouldn't the existence of these treaties and the relevant debates be addressed in the textbooks?
After all, the biggest issue that continues to rip apart Taiwan's society is the nation's sovereignty. That's not even to mention the impact this issue has on cross-strait relations -- which poses a real danger to the continuation of Taiwan's way of life -- as well as the country's national identity. Shouldn't our youngsters at least have the benefit of knowing the entire story?
The fundamental problem with the nation's education is that it teaches our youngsters to unconditionally and blindly accept dogmatic views. Under those circumstances, it's no wonder that, according to a survey conducted by a well-known local tabloid newspaper, close to 60 percent of those polled believed that the pre-World War II history of the ROC should be covered as the history of Taiwan. This poll shows exactly where the problem lies.
“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