The Nazi-costume farce that played out at Hsinchu Kuang Fu High School, with the class’ teacher performing a Nazi salute, was, as many have pointed out, an indication of the nation’s poor education on its own transitional justice.
Sadly it also reflects a larger vacuum in education in general that discourages independent, systematic and logical thinking.
As the scandal gained attention, it was revealed that at the same cosplay event another class performed a skit about Aborigines killing Japanese, aiming to recreate the Wushe Incident of 1930. The host touted the skit as a “revival of the Chinese nation,” or zhonghua minzu.
Transitional justice for Aborigines is another thing the nation has gotten wrong, with Aboriginal opposition to the colonial government still misinterpreted or intentionally misappropriated for another oppressor’s political end.
Entrenched Chinese/Han-centered ideologies aside, that the misuse of history and symbols — as exposed by the Nazi-themed event — is prevalent in Taiwan cannot be separated from the fill-in-the-blanks education system that has been adopted to facilitate the grading of students.
How do you expect students to seriously deliberate the reasons for the rise of a totalitarian regime in what was supposedly a parliamentary democracy in pre-World War II Germany and learn from the lesson when what is required of them are exam answers to questions like: “What year did the Nazi regime take over,” or selections in a multiple-choice question asking them to name the causes?
If history is only about numbers — How many people were killed? What year did an incident happen? — and information is disconnected from context, students are not led to reflect on humanity. For them, history is never about people and their fears, arrogance and ignorance, but only about symbols, which will be treated with flippancy.
There is less about right and wrong, and diminished thoughts on questions of why things happened, while there will be more about simple outcomes, like who won and who lost.
There is a hint of consequentialism in this style of education. The system of “merits” and “demerits” used to grade students is an example, while the practice of writing off demerits with awards is actually in place.
It is not rare to hear Taiwanese say that a certain political leader, autocrat, or regime might have done something wrong, but they also contributed to society; the unspoken agenda is certainly that their failings might be canceled out by their contributions.
However, that is not how justice — even justice in the most naive sense — works and explains why compensation alone without holding the perpetrator accountable can never satisfy those who are treated unjustly.
Injustice cannot be erased by achievement. Injustice needs to be confronted and its makings need to be reflected on so that history can be used to understand what is going on in today’s world.
The controversy over same-sex marriage has a group of people with resources and political influence invoking fear and manipulating the public with lies to dehumanize a minority.
It might require gradual steps to achieve fully fledged legislation, but there is no “consensus” to be reached when it is not facts that the opposing groups bring to the debate.
“Conciliation” and “social harmony” should not be used as pretexts to tolerate discrimination and falsehood.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS