A Facebook campaign launched by teachers concerned about a Ministry of Education decision to make study of the Confucian classics mandatory in high schools asks an interesting question — is there an ulterior political motive to forcing students to study the “Four Books”? The ministry’s stated goal in making the ancient textbooks required reading is to combat widespread bullying, drug use and gang problems among high school students. However, academics and teachers question whether studying the books would solve these problems, and point out that it would take time away from the study of elective courses.
What is the real reason for railroading through mandatory study of four books that were chosen as the most important Confucian texts by a Song Dynasty scholar about 900 years ago? Written more than 2,000 years ago, the books are unlikely to touch on modern themes such as peer pressure, gang dynamics, drug use, teenage pregnancies, broken families, pollution, the declining birthrate and other issues facing young people today.
The ministry summed up its stance on the issue when it described The Doctrine of the Mean (中庸), The Great Learning (大學), The Analects of Confucius (論語) and Mencius (孟子) as the “basic materials of Chinese culture.” But as Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Wong Chin-chu (翁金珠) has pointed out, classical Chinese texts have come to comprise 65 percent of the books read by high school students since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office, compared with making up 45 percent of required reading before his administration. If the Four Books were to graduate from being the topic of elective courses to mandatory subjects, that percentage would increase even further.
The Ma administration has apparently packed the ministry’s Curriculum Committee with loyal members whose goal is to push through an emphasis on reading Chinese classics. Curriculum Committee member Lin Lih-yun (林麗雲) said the committee submitted a curriculum that heavily emphasized Chinese classics in September last year shortly after several committee members were replaced, culminating five years of study on what high school students should be reading. The committee then overruled its own curriculum early this year to make the Four Books mandatory, starting next year. These sudden revisions seem overly hasty considering how much time had been put into planning the curriculum.
The Ma administration’s decision to emphasize Chinese classics did not start overnight, and it certainly is not a response to bullying in schools, which was only really elevated to the national agenda when Taoyuan’s former Bade Junior High School principal Wu Chia-ku (於家穀) was fired in late December for turning a blind eye to brutal bullying and gangsterism on campus. After that, the issue of bullying in schools polarized the media, but Ma’s campaign to force students to study ancient Chinese texts has been going on for at least the past three years.
In what looked like a kneejerk reaction at the time, but is more than likely a well thought out plan to capitalize on public indignation, education officials revised the required reading list at the beginning of this year, saying the Four Books would build character, instill morals and stop high school students from bullying each other, taking drugs and joining gangs. However, the ministry’s actions and its words don’t match up, which begs the question: Is requiring study of the Fours Books really meant to combat bullying, or is it meant to make Taiwan’s high school students more Chinese?
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
Birth, aging, illness and death are inevitable parts of the human experience. Yet, living well does not necessarily mean dying well. For those who have a chronic illness or cancer, or are bedridden due to significant injuries or disabilities, the remainder of life can be a torment for themselves and a hardship for their caregivers. Even if they wish to end their life with dignity, they are not allowed to do so. Bih Liu-ing (畢柳鶯), former superintendent of Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, introduced the practice of Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking as an alternative to assisted dying, which remains
President William Lai (賴清德) has rightly identified the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a hostile force; and yet, Taiwan’s response to domestic figures amplifying CCP propaganda remains largely insufficient. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) recently confirmed that more than 20 Taiwanese entertainers, including high-profile figures such as Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜), are under investigation for reposting comments and images supporting People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills and parroting Beijing’s unification messaging. If found in contravention of the law, they may be fined between NT$100,000 and NT$500,000. That is not a deterrent. It is a symbolic tax on betrayal — perhaps even a way for