The government’s brutal “minor adjustments” of curriculum guidelines for senior-high school history courses at the beginning of this year have now been followed by a new history textbook published by Shi Ji Cultural Co, which has added fuel to the fire and caused further controversy over history education in Taiwan.
The Ministry of Education, saying it respects “freedom of speech,” has done nothing and will not punish the publisher for the textbook, which states that the Taiwan independence movement is likely to plunge society into chaos over national identity.
However, which democracy would state in its history textbooks the future direction that the country should not take? That should be decided by Taiwanese, not textbook writers. In addition, the textbook arrogantly and presumptuously criticizes political parties, without specifying their names. Regardless of whether the party being criticized is the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the Democratic Progressive Party or any other party, the writers have crossed a line by acting like political fanatics.
So many academics and experts are working for the government. Why could they not see these problems in the textbook, which deviates from standard protocol for academic publications? Surely President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) and Minister of Education Chiang Wei-ling (蔣偉寧) know how to write for an academic publication. How can it be that this textbook passed the ministry’s review process? The government really owes us an explanation.
Furthermore, both the editor and the consultant to the publisher of this book serve as members of the ministry’s review committee for the curriculum guidelines, so there has been no attempt to avoid conflicts of interest.
Profits from textbook sales are limited, and most come from selling related products, such as teachers’ manuals, reference books, as well as discs with databases for practice questions and answers. Since they have appointed the publisher’s editor and consultant to sit on the review committee, the ministry should also take some responsibility for the controversy.
Once during a visit to the Berlin State Library in Germany, I saw a Chinese translation of Adolf Hitler’s autobiography, Mein Kampf. The last page of the book noted that the book is a “restricted item.” Researchers must register in advance to browse the book, which is not available to the public.
Out of curiosity, I asked the librarians why a democratic country would choose to ban the book, and their answer was clear and decisive: The German government does not want to repeat the mistakes that led to the Nazi era and it does not want hatred between different ethnic groups to extend to the next generation.
Germany’s ban on Nazi discourse is not a restriction of freedom of speech, nor is it worried about people having diverse opinions. Rather, the government is worried that studying the Nazi version of history may lead to serious consequences — such as hatred between different ethnic groups and massacres.
The true meaning of history education is to have an open mind about one’s own country and homeland and to write textbooks that honestly portray the past.
Textbooks should guide students on how to live with different ethnic groups and to respect differences. Unfortunately, Shi Ji’s textbook is based on the “winner takes all” concept as it tries to brainwash students and stir up hatred. No matter how they went about compiling the book, that is a line that really never should have been crossed.
Chu Ping-yi is a research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of History and Philology.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Weeks into the craze, nobody quite knows what to make of the OpenClaw mania sweeping China, marked by viral photos of retirees lining up for installation events and users gathering in red claw hats. The queues and cosplay inspired by the “raising a lobster” trend make for irresistible China clickbait. However, the West is fixating on the least important part of the story. As a consumer craze, OpenClaw — the AI agent designed to do tasks on a user’s behalf — would likely burn out. Without some developer background, it is too glitchy and technically awkward for true mainstream adoption,
A delegation of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials led by Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is to travel to China tomorrow for a six-day visit to Jiangsu, Shanghai and Beijing, which might end with a meeting between Cheng and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The trip was announced by Xinhua news agency on Monday last week, which cited China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao (宋濤) as saying that Cheng has repeatedly expressed willingness to visit China, and that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee and Xi have extended an invitation. Although some people have been speculating about a potential Xi-Cheng
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
RSS