Seven days after a killing spree on the Taipei MRT system on May 21, in which four commuters were killed and 22 injured, the suspect’s parents appeared in public, kneeling down and apologizing to the victim’s families.
However, expressions of forgiveness are not very common in our society, while assigning blame is. Indeed, when this kind of incident takes place, most victims’ families find it unacceptable and will neither forgive the culprit nor the culprit’s parents.
The behavior of adults still involves their parents. For example, during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) epidemic in 2003, one hospital banned fifth to seventh-year medical students from working as interns in the hospital unless they had permission from their parents. The hospital had come under pressure from parents wondering what would happen if their children were infected by SARS during their internship and if the hospital would, and could, take responsibility if that happened.
One female student in her sixth year thought the announcement must be wrong and went to the hospital wearing her intern’s uniform, only to be stopped at the entrance by the guard. When she asked why he would not let her in, he said it was a school regulation and that she would need her parents’ consent to get in.
Her answer was: “I am past the age of 20, I can marry without my parents’ consent. I don’t have to get my parents’ permission even for such an important event. I can decide for myself. Why do I need their permission to work as an intern? I’m studying medicine and are we not supposed to save people? Now that I want to take part and learn how to treat people, I need my parents’ permission? What is this? I’m making my own decisions, I don’t need my parents’ permission.”
Just like that, she walked into the hospital as the guard looked on, helplessly.
When a few of the other women in her class heard what she did, they followed her, and when the male students heard about it, they felt a bit stupid, so the next day most of the men went to the hospital, too. Three days later, the whole class went there.
According to Taiwanese law, a person reaches the age of majority when they turn 18 and are given their full civic rights when they turn 20. Many young people have spoken up lately to demand that the law be amended to make 18 both the age of majority and when they acquire full civic rights.
The law also specifies that no one who is 18 years or older and commits an offense can be treated as a minor or a child.
Think about it. If people who have reached the age of 21 commit a crime, we still blame their parents for not bringing them up properly and even demand that they share responsibility for the crime. This is a sign of a very undemocratic and very unsound civic society, which does not differ much from ancient societies and notions about guilt by association.
This situation also highlights how our education system places too much emphasis on hatred — “hate the communist party” — and slaughter — “kill the Zhu [De (朱德)] and Mao [Zedong (毛澤東)] gang.”
Rarely does our education system mention forgiveness and mercy.
After apartheid was ended in South Africa, former South African president Nelson Mandela and then-archbishop Desmond Tutu told South Africans that “without forgiveness, there is no future.”
Perhaps we should reconsider the nature of our education system and needs, based on this concept.
Lu Chun-yi is a pastor at the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Acting Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) has formally announced his intention to stand for permanent party chairman. He has decided that he is the right person to steer the fledgling third force in Taiwan’s politics through the challenges it would certainly face in the post-Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) era, rather than serve in a caretaker role while the party finds a more suitable candidate. Huang is sure to secure the position. He is almost certainly not the right man for the job. Ko not only founded the party, he forged it into a one-man political force, with himself
RSS