In President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) New Year’s Day address marking the Republic of China’s centennial in 2011, he pledged “to create a sounder educational environment for our young people” and stressed that “education is the cornerstone of national power and children are our hope for the future.”
So much for flowery language.
Little did Taiwanese know that four years later, the young people touted by the president as the nation’s “hope for the future” would be greeted by his government with barbed wire and cast-iron doors as they sought to make their voices heard.
Student groups from high schools nationwide have, of their own initiative, collaborated to hold forums and stage protests against the Ma administration’s controversial changes to high-school social studies guidelines.
The students appealed to the Ministry of Education for talks, saying the modified curriculum stems from the ministry’s failure to maintain procedural justice and that changes made to history textbooks reflect a “China-centric” view.
However, instead of listening to the students’ opinions, the ministry appears to be bulldozing through the adjustments so they are implemented in the academic year that begins next month.
While the students ought be congratulated for manifesting the purpose of education, which is to foster their ability to think critically and act correspondingly, the Ma government ought be ashamed for not only failing to adhere to transparent policymaking, but for displaying unbridled arrogance in forcing Ma’s way no matter what.
Sadly, this total disregard for the fundamental principle of public governance is not new for the Ma administration.
The same absurd abuse of power was also displayed by the Executive Yuan’s 21-member Referendum Review Committee, which exists only to screen people by rejecting proposals backed by hundreds of thousands of signatures and disenfranchising people who seek direct participation in public decisionmaking.
While Taiwan might be a democratic country, the Ma government leaves no room for discourse on public affairs, let alone participation.
Instead, it brutally forces its own will regardless of any opposition.
“If we do not stand up today, we will not have a chance tomorrow to stand against the government’s injustice,” protesting students said outside the K-12 Education Administration building in Taipei on Monday.
While some have sought to smear the protesting students by accusing them of acting as a tool of the opposition, the students clearly know what they are doing and it appears they would not be easily swayed by any political party, be it the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the Democratic Progressive Party.
With the government turning a deaf ear to the protests and remembering Ma’s 2011 address, many are becoming more convinced that the purpose of the ministry is to serve a specific ideology.
They arrive at the conclusion that the Ma government, clinging obstinately to its course, is rotten to the core; incapable of being a government that listens to, has respect for, or engages in dialogue with this nation’s citizens.
Chinese actor Alan Yu (于朦朧) died after allegedly falling from a building in Beijing on Sept. 11. The actor’s mysterious death was tightly censored on Chinese social media, with discussions and doubts about the incident quickly erased. Even Hong Kong artist Daniel Chan’s (陳曉東) post questioning the truth about the case was automatically deleted, sparking concern among overseas Chinese-speaking communities about the dark culture and severe censorship in China’s entertainment industry. Yu had been under house arrest for days, and forced to drink with the rich and powerful before he died, reports said. He lost his life in this vicious
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
In South Korea, the medical cosmetic industry is fiercely competitive and prices are low, attracting beauty enthusiasts from Taiwan. However, basic medical risks are often overlooked. While sharing a meal with friends recently, I heard one mention that his daughter would be going to South Korea for a cosmetic skincare procedure. I felt a twinge of unease at the time, but seeing as it was just a casual conversation among friends, I simply reminded him to prioritize safety. I never thought that, not long after, I would actually encounter a patient in my clinic with a similar situation. She had
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
RSS