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.
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