Known as a gaffe machine, Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) has added another verbal blunder to his track record at a youth forum. Speaking on the issue of drug problems, Ko said that people who dropped out of junior-high school are 99 times more likely to become drug users than those who went on to pursue higher education.
He went on to say that helping disadvantaged groups in society is not taking pity or doing charity for them, but “protecting” oneself because if these people are not supervised properly, they would become “rapists or murderers in one or two decades.”
This is only the tip of the iceberg of Ko’s gaffes, so the absurdity of the remarks do not come as much of a shock. However, as a presidential candidate, people should be more critical and push back against Ko’s condescending and elitist mindset instead of growing indifferent to it.
For young people who just finished junior-high school, their household environment, family finances and where they live play a huge role in determining whether they would continue to pursue higher education. Some might need to help out the family by getting a part-time job. Others might prefer becoming apprentices. For example, the renowned philanthropic vendor Chen Shu-chu (陳樹菊), who sold vegetables at the Central Market in Taitung and was honored as one of the 100 most influential figures by Time magazine in 2010 for donating more than NT$10 million (US$312,402, based on the current foreign exchange rate) to charitable causes, only holds a elementary school degree. Other examples include Minister of Digital Affairs Audrey Tang (唐鳳), who never finished junior-high school.
As such, it is extremely unfair to say that these young people did not pursue studies because of delinquency, crime or drugs. A person’s education background has no direct relation to one’s accomplishments in life.
Whatever supervisory plans Ko has in mind for these minorities, whether its daily visits or police monitoring, they would only reinforce stereotypes and social stigma, without improving their situation or security. As a nation still haunted by elitism and authoritarianism, treating them as the Other is downright bigotry. The last thing a national leader should do is to discriminate or label them, or even exercise public power to control them.
A responsible national leader would introduce new measures or career paths to help minorities and disadvantaged groups complete basic education, instead of promising to round these people up like criminals.
A future leader should think about methods to improve social networks and how to guide minorities into vocational schools or reinstatement.
The establishment of a basic education and social network is to provide a fundamental safety net, so that those less fortunate, such as those born into poverty, or who face domestic violence at home, do not become a victim of circumstances outside of their control.
Even though the government has introduced the 12-year basic education curriculum for nearly a decade, the minorities that Ko was referring to demonstrate that despite this system, there are still students who fall through the cracks
Unfortunately, as a presidential candidate, Ko has only shown his unsuitability as a president and strong bias against people that he considers “low-end.”
Rather than winning the public over with solid policies, his ignorant gaffes and authoritation character has only reassured them that he is not the right candidate for the top job.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS