Taiwan has come a long way since the Martial Law era. The public would not enjoy the freedom of speech and democracy it does today without the sacrifices made by democracy pioneers such as Freedom Era Weekly editor-in-chief Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕), who set himself ablaze on April 7, 1989, in defense of freedom of expression.
It is therefore both comforting and encouraging to see young people take a stand, as National Cheng Kung University’s student body did last month when it voted to name an area on campus “Nan-jung Square” (South Banyan Square, 南榕廣場) in honor of Deng, an alumnus of the school, as well as the school’s symbol of a banyan tree.
However, the school administration rejected the name and said that just because “Nan-jung” garnered the most votes, it did not mean the name would be used for the square, because it might carry negative political connotations.
In an open letter issued on Thursday last week to faculty and students, university president Hwung Hwung-hweng (黃煌煇) cited Article 6 of the Education Basic Act (教育基本法) and said the school should remain politically and religiously neutral.
To avoid disruption on campus, the school’s infrastructure should not be entangled with political activities or ideology, he added.
While Hwung’s statement might sound reasonable, it is not.
Deng’s tragic death planted a seed of democracy in the hearts of Taiwanese. His pursuit of “100 percent freedom of expression” later paved the way for a social movement that called for the removal of Article 100 of the Criminal Code, which allowed charges of sedition to be filed against those suspected of plotting to overthrow the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime.
Why is a name selected to honor the universal value of freedom of speech, for which Deng laid down his life, considered to have “negative political connotations” that might disrupt the campus?
Hwung should take a closer look at a map of the university campus.
There are several places with names strongly reminiscent of the former authoritarian KMT regime, such the Kuang-fu (光復) and Tzu-chiang (自強) campuses. There is even a Chungcheng Hall (中正堂), an obvious reference to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石).
If Hwung is serious about retaining “political neutrality” on campus, he should take the lead in ridding the campus of all names with strong links to the previous authoritarian regime and its agenda of “retaking the mainland.”
Young people today are often accused of being apathetic and indifferent to the world around them. Some have even chided them for enjoying the sweet fruit of democracy hard fought for by democracy pioneers without thinking of how they might contribute to and solidify those democratic achievements.
Rather than brushing aside students’ opinions, the university administration should be proud of them for displaying depth and understanding of the nation’s democratization while remembering the blood, sweat and tears shed by democratic pioneers.
After all, is this not the purpose of education — to inspire young minds to stand up for and act upon the values they believe in?
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS