Last month, a National Taiwan University (NTU) student was allegedly involved in the vandalization of a statue at National Chengchi University (NCCU). After six days, the university administration broke its silence, pointedly picking Feb. 28 to issue a statement accusing the student of violent behavior and intensifying social division, and, in a rare move, saying that the incident would be handled according to university regulations.
The NTU administration’s statement is chilling because of the date and because it shows an utter inability to understand political statements. If the incident is handled according to its regulations, then how does the university intend to handle NTU president Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔), whom the Judicial Yuan has voted to impeach, or the 68 professors who illegally took side jobs?
The student’s actions at NCCU were a political statement. Should this kind of action also be treated as destruction of public property as specified in NTU’s regulations?
Furthermore, Article 5 of the Act on Promoting Transitional Justice (促進轉型正義條例) states that “symbols appearing in public buildings or places that commemorate or express nostalgia for authoritarian rulers shall be removed, renamed, or dealt with in some other way.”
Statues that show nostalgia for authoritarian rulers still have not been removed or had their names changed as school administrations ignore the law and instead call student actions extreme.
Do they really think that it is extreme to demand that the law be followed?
The accusations of violence and intensified social division by NTU are even more unacceptable. What really intensifies social division is people who are unwilling to understand history and who worship authoritarian symbols.
NTU, a hall of learning, does not even have a rudimentary understanding of transitional justice. On Feb. 28, NTU students spontaneously organized a forum on the April 6 Incident to discuss the history of state violence and the White Terror era and, on the very same day, the NTU chose to condemn a student.
That the NTU administration displays such a lack of awareness of history and such ignorance of the importance of the date is a source of endless distress.
If NTU really does have such high standards of “legal conscience,” and if it really does care about social division and its educational responsibilities, should it not set a good example by explaining to students why its president can remain silent, despite earning millions of New Taiwan dollars from side jobs and despite the Judicial Yuan voting to impeach him?
Should it not explain why academic papers that are possibly the result of ethics violations are not investigated, but instead passed off as “informal papers” to allay public doubt? Then there are the 68 professors who illegally took side jobs, almost entirely without punishment.
What have these incidents taught students?
The controversy over Kuan has been going on for almost a year, resulting in turmoil and division. To this day, the institute has not displayed the slightest intent to reform. Instead it made a big deal over issuing a statement on Feb. 28 so that its new president could crack his whip and bring out school regulations to address a political controversy.
Here is a piece of advice Kuan should consider carefully: Start by doing what is right instead of punishing students while allowing your staff to get away with worse.
Mo Yen is a graduate student at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry