Alice Ou (區桂芝), who teaches Chinese language and literature at Taipei First Girls’ High School, stirred up controversy over remarks she made at a news conference at the Legislative Yuan on Monday last week, in which she criticized the 2019 curriculum guidelines for de-emphasizing classical Chinese.
Subsequently, Ou sought to rationalize her remarks by citing President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) advocacy of respect for freedom of identity.
However, Ou is responsible for teaching high-school students who are under 18 years old, in this case at the prestigious Taipei First Girls’ High School, where she is said to often spout off about her political leanings in the classroom.
This behavior is no longer a question of freedom of identity. Rather, the point is that teachers should not forcibly indoctrinate high-school students, whose ideology is not yet mature and fully formed, with their own political standpoints. To do so not only contravenes the constitutional principle of educational neutrality, but also sows divisions within the friendly and uncomplicated culture of the school campus.
Of course, teachers are entitled to have their own political ideas, but they should not bring them into the classroom, otherwise they would end up forcing their ideas and mindsets onto their students, which crosses the line between education and indoctrination.
Indoctrination is a process of forcing someone else to accept certain ideas, which is at odds with education’s emphasis on forming value judgements through independent thinking.
Ou’s pronouncements are deeply suspect, as she falsely accuses the government of destroying Chinese culture, while falsely supposing that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is protecting that culture. In reality, ever since China’s Cultural Revolution, the CCP has been the biggest offender against Chinese culture, gravely damaging its ethics and morals, and ruthlessly attacking the kindness of human nature.
Of course, anyone is free to identify however they wish, but they should not inflict it on innocent students who have not yet reached adulthood. Anyone who claims that the CCP regime preserves traditional culture is raising the banner of freedom to assert something that is patently false.
Chen Chi-nung is the principal of a junior high school.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
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
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS