Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) is under fire again for making controversial comments, which is nothing new, but his behavior should still be scrutinized and addressed, as he is an elected public figure.
No matter what his reasons, his words still often set a bad example for society, especially children.
In the latest incident, Ko was questioning the Central Epidemic Command Center’s (CECC) purchase of a batch of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines that are to expire at the end of this month.
However, unhappy with Centers for Disease Control Deputy Director-General Chuang Jen-hsiang’s (莊人祥) response, Ko allegedly asked if Chuang’s IQ was below 70.
After this set off a storm in the media, the Taipei City Government tried to explain that he actually said: “Does he think my IQ is lower than 70?” and that his mask and background noise obscured his words.
This is Ko’s typical response: justifying his actions rather than addressing problems.
Ultimately, it does not matter which version is true. The former is obviously more offensive, but neither is okay. This is not a random number Ko blurted out, an IQ of below 70 is an indicator of intellectual disability. Either way, it is hurtful toward those who do score in that range, many of whom lead productive, happy lives and have their own opinions on the government.
Some might even be working for Ko at Taipei City Hall.
The comments are especially troubling as Ko, a former surgeon, often touts his IQ of 157.
However, as most highly intelligent people have learned — often the hard way — smarts do not always translate to success.
If IQ is everything, why is Ko constantly offending people?
In a society where academic prowess is still at times seen as a prime indicator of a person’s worth, comparing IQs — especially in an offhand, out-of-context remark — does not help to defy this faulty mindset.
Long gone are the days when students were assigned class numbers according to their pre-semester aptitude scores, and schools have been pushing against over-glorifying test results. Even so, a superiority complex associated with people of high intelligence remains an issue.
Ko’s behavior will not change. It has not affected his popularity much, as he was re-elected in 2018.
However, his latest outburst is still a good opportunity to teach people an important lesson. Many public figures are holding him accountable — explaining why IQ is not everything and why such remarks can be offensive.
Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) was among the first to sound off, saying that modern society values well-rounded human beings, not just those with high IQs.
Physician Tan Che-kim (陳志金) said that people are tired of Ko frequently mentioning his high IQ, adding that it is an indication of deep insecurity.
Hsieh Tsung-hsueh (謝宗學), another physician, shared a story about how he was almost sent to special education classes as a child, but he worked hard on his academic and public speaking skills to fulfill his goal of becoming a doctor.
As TV anchor Chang Ya-chin (張雅琴) put it: “I want to tell my audience, especially children, please do not follow Ko Wen-je’s example. When you disagree with someone, you should never question their IQ.”
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
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
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
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
RSS