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.
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic