The brazen hypocrisy of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government has once again been on blatant display this week after a revelation by opposition lawmakers and civic organizations that the new edition of high-school textbooks has failed to give proportional mention of — or even simply omitted — historical events, such as the 228 Massacre and the White Terror era.
Many might recall that in recent years at events marking the anniversary of the 228 Massacre — a brutal crackdown by the then-KMT regime starting on Feb. 27, 1947, against tens of thousands of Taiwanese that subsequently ushered in the White Terror era — President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) could be seen wiping away tears during speeches that touted his understanding of victims’ suffering and how his administration’s efforts “to protect human rights and act in accordance with the law will not stop.”
Ma also pledged that he would instruct the Ministry of Education to increase the amount of educational materials dealing with this tragic page in Taiwan’s history to teach the next generation.
However, as the 228 Massacre fails to secure a proportional mention in the new edition of the high-school history textbook, and the phrase “White Terror” has been erased from the new high-school civics textbook, it proves once again that Ma can only talk the talk, but cannot walk the walk.
The ministry’s changes to high-school social studies curriculum guidelines stirred controversy last year. The changes prompted much criticism from academics who accused the ministry of ideological bias, describing the ministry’s design process as opaque and an attempt to push through a “brainwashing” policy that would see the new curriculum reflect a more China-oriented perspective.
And yet, despite a verdict handed down by the Taipei High Administrative Court in February ruling against the ministry’s decision to implement this controversial national high-school curriculum adjustment, the ministry not only implemented it anyway, but also advanced its efforts by blocking out public scrutiny of its ongoing review of the 12-year national education curriculum plan.
According to Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Cheng Li-chun (鄭麗君), the meetings held to discuss the issues have been conducted in an opaque manner, where names of meeting participants were not mentioned and opinions presented during the discussions were not recorded in meeting transcripts.
It is more than regrettable that in Taiwan, which often prides itself as a democracy, such a ministry exists: One that would resort to a “black box,” opaque and despicable approach in leaving out factual historical events such as the White Terror era from children’s civic education.
So much for Ma’s talk about his government’s efforts to uncover the truths about incidents such as the 228 Massacre, his emphasis on how justice can be served and lessons learned, and his pledge to safeguard the nation’s democracy. The truth is that the ministry’s brazen actions — in its insistence on implementing the controversial high-school social science curriculum and its failure to adhere to procedural justice in the discussion of the 12-year national education plan — clearly demonstrate that the Ma administration is in effect attempting to “brainwash” the youth of Taiwan with a China-oriented perspective, while making a mockery of the nation’s democracy.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS