Taichung Municipal Taichung First Senior High School and National Taiwan University recently triggered a backlash due to discriminatory remarks made by certain students against indigenous people. That the culprits were young people indicates that the remarks were not mindless gaffes, but a result of a lack of understanding.
At a very deep level, humans tend to be wary or defensive of “the other,” those different from them in terms of ethnicity, language, residence, class, race, occupation and religion. This is not prejudice or discrimination, but a natural reaction and mechanism to maintain one’s sense of security, much akin to parents reminding their children to look out for things when they go out.
The nation’s education policy classifies the following students as eligible for affirmative action: those from any area that has suffered a major disaster; children of parents who have been assigned to work overseas by the government; those who have excelled in an international academic or skills-based competition; those who have excelled in sports; veterans; students from Mongolia or Tibet who have had their naturalization application approved; overseas Taiwanese; foreigners; those who have passed an indigenous language proficiency test; and indigenous people.
The affirmative action policy varies for each group, where the bonus points can range from 10 to 35 percent. The policy is not unique to Taiwan. The US’ affirmative action, also known as positive action or positive discrimination, is a set of policies and practices that give preferential treatment to minority or disadvantaged groups based on their ethnicity, race, religion, gender or nationality.
However, some have questioned its legality or whether it discriminates against other groups. For example, the US Supreme Court appears ready to rule on whether the race-conscious admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are unlawful, likely imperiling more than 40 years of precedent that say race could be used as one factor among many in evaluating applicants.
The purpose behind the affirmative action adopted by the two universities is to bolster the number of black and Latino students to promote diversity and a greater representation of minority groups in the two colleges. However, the Supreme Court is concerned that the race-conscious policy contravenes Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment of the US constitution. In general, two themes ran through the questions and arguments: that educational diversity can be achieved without directly taking race into account and that there must come a time when colleges and universities stop making such distinctions.
Harvard University has said that it has taken applicants’ ethnicity, socioeconomic status, religion and other factors into consideration to create classes that fully represent the US’ ethnic diversity.
A document submitted to the court by an attorney on behalf of Harvard University says: Americans have come to regard diversity as an essential part of learning, and that the road to leadership should be open to all people. According to a Gallup poll released in 2021, 62 percent of Americans favor affirmative action programs.
It takes more than one’s identity for an indigenous student to qualify for affirmative action in Taiwan. Since 2004, they have to pass the indigenous language proficiency test to get a 35 percent bonus. Tests in the 43 dialects of the 14 indigenous languages spoken in the nation are offered, and they differ from other language proficiency tests in that students are only tested on their listening and speaking abilities.
Furthermore, as colleges and universities usually admit indigenous students under a separate quota, the policy does not affect other students’ chances of admission. Aside from one’s ethnicity, the goal of the test is to ensure that the student possesses “proof of culture.” As a minority group who gets preferential treatment, they are expected to pass down their language and culture to promote diversity in Taiwanese society.
Due to the nation’s sub-replacement fertility, students who receive appalling scores can still go to university, unlike 30 years ago when only 20 percent of high-school and vocational high-school students could receive a higher education. As a result, bigoted students’ discriminatory remarks should not be directed at the admission quotas for indigenous people.
Taiwan has become a truly diverse and multicultural country, and as “the others” started appearing around us, it is imperative that we learn to respect, appreciate and empathize with others. More importantly, we have to ensure that the education we give to our next generation is in touch with the current society and environment.
Pu Chung-cheng is an honorary professor at National Dong Hwa University.
Translated by Rita Wang
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has upheld the core goals of “making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” fully implementing an “America first” policy. Countries have responded cautiously to the fresh style and rapid pace of the new Trump administration. The US has prioritized reindustrialization, building a stronger US role in the Indo-Pacific, and countering China’s malicious influence. This has created a high degree of alignment between the interests of Taiwan and the US in security, economics, technology and other spheres. Taiwan must properly understand the Trump administration’s intentions and coordinate, connect and correspond with US strategic goals.
RSS