The Ministry of Education’s new curriculum guidelines for the 12-year national education system suggest that Taiwan’s authoritarian past still haunts the nation, and cast doubt on the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s competence and resolve to consolidate democracy.
Transitional Justice Commission member Hua Yih-fen (花亦芬) on Friday said that the commission has found four flaws in the new guidelines, which the ministry plans to implement in September next year: romanticizing the party-state era; a lack of content on the Holocaust, the 228 Incident and the ensuing White Terror era as mandatory classes for high-school students; and statements that suggest the pursuit of transitional justice is potentially divisive.
These suggest that while Taiwan’s one-party state days are over, many educators still harbor scraps of the party-state ideology and did not part ways with authoritarian mindsets and practices.
High-school students in 2015 protested against the ministry’s controversial adjustments to high-school curriculum guidelines that critics said reflected a “China-centric” view.
The DPP at the time stood with the student protesters as it campaigned on a platform of democratic values ahead of the presidential and legislative elections the next year.
So it is doubly regrettable that, despite the protests and the DPP now controlling both the executive and legislative branches of government, the ministry chose to stay in the same old rut by allowing authoritarian ideology to creep into textbooks with attempts to glorify the party-state era, while neglecting, if not twisting, transitional justice efforts and the White Terror era.
Some were quick to come to the government’s defense by saying that many of the educators are themselves victims of the party-state dogma of the former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime and more time is needed for them to “detoxify” themselves from the decades of brainwashing they were subjected to.
That might well be the case, but it does not stop people from doubting the President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) administration’s competence in achieving transitional justice.
Education is a crucial element of transitional justice and the new guidelines should reflect the depth and understanding of the nation’s democratization, and teach the younger generation about the blood, sweat and tears shed by Taiwan’s democracy pioneers.
At least, that is what the guidelines should do, if the government is sincere in its efforts to achieve transitional justice.
In April, at a commemoration event for late democracy activist Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕), Tsai once again stressed the importance of transitional justice, saying: “It is the most important step following the democratization of Taiwan.”
Tsai has proved that she can talk the talk, but can she back her words with concrete action?
Granted, the government has passed the Act on Promoting Transitional Justice (促進轉型正義條例) and established the Transitional Justice Commission, but the new guidelines suggest that Taiwan is still a fragile democracy where ghosts of the one-party state era linger in school hallways and achieving substantial transitional justice remains elusive.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS