Because Who We All Are

This article was written by guest contributor Eunice Lee, a graduate of Arcadia University who studied International Peace and Conflict Resolution and has worked in the front lines of some of the major conflicts in our society today. She was born in Taiwan but currently lives in New York.

In the Bantu language, the word ubuntu embodies the concept of I am what I am because of who we all are.

I was born in Taiwan, but after just five years of walking this earth I immigrated to the U.S. with my family. My exposure to my so-called roots consisted of attending a church full of Taiwanese Americans and occasionally interacting with immigrants from Taiwan. For a long time, Taiwan did not mean much to me other than family reunions, tours led by cousins and their friends, and much needed Chinese culture and language lessons. When I walked down the streets of Taipei I could blend into the crowd quite easily, but soon someone would realize the 100% American girl just behind the faint masquerade of physical appearances. Thankfully, over the years my connection to Taiwan has given me the wonderful chance to soak in stories of family members and the rich cultures that exist there.

However, I have also come to discover a source of uneasiness hidden somewhere in my Taiwanese heritage.

This story started while I was in college, when I was a naïve young woman who knew preciously little about the world outside the upper middle class Caucasian American environment I grew up in. At the time I had the chance to study environmental human rights in Thailand for four months. That experience opened my eyes to the brokenness of the relationships between people as well as between us and the earth. I became convinced that there is a desperate need to restore these relationships somehow.

Since then, I have traveled to Northern Ireland, Costa Rica, Rwanda, Kenya and Tanzania in my nascent pursuit of restoring the broken. In 2008, I enrolled in a graduate program studying international peace and conflict resolution. Part of this program required studying and working in the city of Arusha in Tanzania for six months. I would work at the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda while taking classes in international law, African regional organizations, and development in Africa. I could not have asked for a more exciting and fitting opportunity.

Upon hearing this news, however, many of my relatives in Taiwan immediately expressed profound concern and bewilderment. “Why go to Africa, of all places?” they asked. Apparently, the entire continent was home to one mess of a dangerous society, and I was advised to never trust anyone there. I was told horror stories of pickpockets, robberies, extortions and murders, not to mention dangerous beasts and mysterious deadly diseases.

But my experience had taught me otherwise, that things are not so black and white. I eventually made it to Tanzania in July 2009. The small city of Arusha had become a hub for tourists looking to experience anything between the UN tribunal and NGO projects to Tanzanian gorillas on a packaged safari tour. That and the consistent UN bustle made Arusha the perfect hodgepodge of people from all backgrounds and worldviews in which my friends and I immersed ourselves. Furthermore, while in Tanzania we traveled to Kigali in Rwanda, and made new friends there as well.

It was on East African soil that my desire to contribute to the global process of restoration was further affirmed. This happened through meeting survivors of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda who are contributing to the national healing process. Listening to Tanzanian friends apologize for the way their fellow Tanzanians gave me every reason to feed into some of my extended family members’ stereotypes of Africa. Seeing foreigners in Tanzania and Rwanda who gave up a life of privilege in their homelands in order to lend a hand to people with whom the only connection was a desire to serve. Such acts of kindness made it difficult for me to relate to the judgments that relatives and friends in Taiwan often bestow upon Africans, people whom they may not even know very well.

Of course, worries and warnings for me about my safety in Africa were my family’s way of showing me their love for me. It was not so much my family’s precautions that disconcerted me, but the tone in which these precautions were delivered. I will even guess that many of these judgments of Africa and Africans stemmed from an ignorant fear of the unknown and a blind acceptance of the socially constructed dichotomy of “us” (Taiwanese or Americans) versus “them” (Africans).

The love my family showed me made it difficult for me to blow them off outright. But what I saw with my eyes and heard with my ears in Africa gave me no choice but to fragment the false dichotomy that much of my family in Taiwan assumes. This tension of worldviews between my own world and my heritage has reaffirmed in me just how imperfect and complex we all are as human beings—but also that there is always hope for us to nurture what is positive in our collective consciousness.

It must be possible, I believe, for the next generation of Tanzanians to shake their reputation as a people forever mired in poverty who resort to the most primal violence to resolve conflicts. Similarly, It also must be possible, then, for a generation of Taiwanese to break down preconceived and unfounded condemnations of Africans (or any other group of people, for that matter) and truly treat all fellow human beings with the same level of respect and reverence. I believe this is possible whether we are piano teachers, theater producers, managers of factories, line workers, fishermen, veterinarians, physical therapists, politicians, cooks, gardeners, or whoever we may be.

Perhaps it comes down to loving thy neighbor—something that we need more of, globally. Perhaps the question is not whether I am who I am because of other people, but rather what kind of person will I become because of other people. I believe this is a question that we need ask ourselves, for the sake of future generations of both East Africans and East Asians alike.

In the Bantu language, the word ubuntu embodies the concept of I am what I am because of who we all are.

一面牆的教育意義

為了電視台建國百年紀念專題，週一下午，我來到位於台北市木柵的興隆國小採訪。那是一所全校不到40個班，創校不到50年，人數不多，佔地不大，校史不長的學校。坦白說，採訪車行途中，我無法預料我會碰到什麼「新聞點」，這樣的未知讓我有一點擔心。

車子還沒開到校門口，我聽到裡面傳出學童大笑的聲音。車子剛停下來，我看見一群學生在走廊上互相追逐嬉鬧，還有一個班級在操場作體操。操場後面是一間教室，一名數學老師正拿著三角模型揮舞著。此時我腦海中忽閃過一個念頭：這是一間幾乎「沒有牆」的學校！升旗台、走廊或空中花園發生了任何事，外頭經過的人一眼就能看見。

這是個什麼樣的概念呢？

我一邊思考著，一邊發現這些學生不時對我眨著天真無邪的雙眼。眼裡閃動著自然和誠摯，好像隨時都準備好要與我分享他們書包裡珍藏的棒球卡。在這之前，我從未感受如此無聲且熱情的邀請。

當攝影同事和我一踏進校園，學生立刻蜂擁而上，在鏡頭前爭相作鬼臉、打招呼，盡情地笑鬧。只見體育老師在後面苦笑，似乎在跟我賠不是。我笑著牽起其中一個女孩的小手，往裡邊走。

學生團團圍繞著我，成了一個小圈圈。我站在中間，對著他們發問:

「外面的人看你們上課，會不會害怕? 」

「看到鄰居經過，上課會不會分心? 」

「學校沒有牆耶，會想要出去玩嗎? 」

每問完一個問題，都有數十隻小手高舉空中揮舞，搶著回答。

「不會害怕，有什麼好怕的」

「會跟他們打招呼」

「下課就可以玩了，上課要專心才聽得懂」

答案很真實。

那不是教科書上的是非題或選擇題，那是隨機走進一個班級，擷取到的隨機反應。

這和我印象中，我的、你的小學生活，差了十萬八千里。記得我讀小學時，背九九乘法表，背錯了得揹椅子半蹲罰站。還不到小四，期中考的科目已經從四科變成六科。

書包裝不下所有課本，我每天要多拎一個手提袋上學，裡面塞滿各科參考書。體育課和美術課「理所當然」地被挪去寫模擬考卷。到了小學六年級，我還看不懂五線譜。而這一切，都被200公分的水泥圍牆阻擋下來。外面的人看不到我，我也不知道我背的乘法表、認識的專有名詞，和外面的真實世界，有任何關聯。

這和我在興隆國小所見所聞，截然不同。

半個小時後，我訪問到校長，問他為什麼這間小學的氣質這麼不同。為什麼家長和教師放心，在矮牆或是幾乎沒有牆的校園，實施教育。這帶給學生什麼影響？

校長的回應很哲學。

他說治安的問題，不是「很高的牆」能夠解決的。

刻意矮化的牆、縷空的牆，卻可以讓學校變成開放空間，培養孩子的存在感、真實感，讓他們知道自己是廣大社會中的一部份。學校不是工廠，不是軍隊，它需要敞開大門讓學生走出去，更要讓外面的養分和關注，滲透進來。

我不知道在教育的範疇裡，這些詞彙會不會略顯抽象。當我們不再聲嘶力竭地要求滿分、全勤、背誦乘法表、做理化實驗，而是讓學生用健康的身心，自然地和社會作連結，這個做法會不會太不切實際。

我不確定就教育的尺規而言，「50年」是不是一段足夠的時間，能陶冶出學生自然、自信的能力，或是培養面對陌生的問題，能夠擁有如此開放、饒富嘗試的勇氣。

但我知道我在做「建國百年」紀念專題。我知道當民國堂堂邁向100年的同時，我們要有新的標準，新的期待，新的價值，一種開放的教育精神，或許該從一面「沒有高度的牆」，開始落實。

[在 The Notebook on Facebook 繼續討論！]

孔子和平獎得主連戰給胡錦濤主席公開信

「中華人民共和國國家主席兼中國共產黨主席 胡錦濤先生 啟

戰 今早甫接獲消息 提名戰為孔子和平獎首屆得主 戰實為受寵若驚 此先向孔子和平獎評審委員會之厚愛 敬上千萬分謝意

然而戰以為 這份天大榮幸 萬萬不可授予戰

孔聖人以畢生之心血 縱橫於春秋列國之間 只求君王以仁為本 盼望天下太平

戰雖以促進兩岸之繁榮與和平為己任 並參與見證國共兩黨格半世紀之相會 但如今仍未達到戰所期待：

身為中華民國行政院長以及副總統 戰仍無法殲滅黑道勢力導致犬子受害 戰有愧於家人之和平
身為中國國民黨黨主席 戰仍無法終結國共內戰 堅持中國大陸放棄武力解決台灣問題 戰有愧於國人之和平
身為中華民國總統候選人 戰仍無法促進貴國承認中華民國在台灣 雙方和平共處 戰有愧於天下之和平

因此戰以為 非貴國撤除瞄準於台灣之導彈 承認中華民國為合法之國家 共同商議復興中華文明 以進世界大同 則戰任務未達 談何資格受獎

而 如錦濤主席肯了戰以上心願 則此孔子和平獎非錦濤主席莫屬 戰也必盡餘生之力 促進錦濤主席取得諾貝爾和平獎 讓世人無不知曉錦濤主席之大仁大德

祝錦濤主席萬壽無疆 國運昌隆

連戰 敬上」

（以上內容純屬虛構 如有雷同純屬巧合）

連戰和胡錦濤 (照片來源：人民日報）

Taiwan’s Competitive Edge: National Identity

From the recent anti-Korea sentiments, we see a specific kind of worldview coming from Taiwan. On the internet, calls to rise up against “Korean dogs” and “Chinese pigs” reflect how frustration towards unfair treatment becomes anger directed at entire ethnic groups. In all honesty, has there been a recent major news item that wasn’t tainted by prejudice and stereotype? On Chinese foreign students, we feared that they will take advantage of our resources; on helping victims of Typhoon Megi, we fought over the treatment of Chinese tourists who lost their lives; on the construction accident on Freeway 6 in Nantou, we pressed to punish undocumented foreign workers instead of inquiring about their working conditions; and there has always been incidents of Thai, Filipino or Vietnamese laborers or caretakers being exploited and abused. Taiwan’s political rift is similarly built on inflated ethnic conceit and wholesale distrust of outsiders. These are the norms in Taiwan’s society.

Feelings of prejudice always comes from uncertainty of self. Over the course of history, world powers viewed Taiwan as a colony whose people were beneath the colonizers. After World War II, two ethnic societies clashed on Taiwan but were stuck together on the same island. As each ethnic group tried to defend its own identity and survival, a culture of distrust and stereotyping came naturally. A society based on putting others down instead of looking at positive self-accomplishments can only continue to suppress others, when faced with new challenges.

Therefore, building a different kind of national identity is a critical project for Taiwan. Although there has been many pleas for non-ethnic identity building over the last two decades, ethnic standoff became entrenched in the political process, making it difficult to have rational discussions on public issues. Fortunately, on a everydya level people are slowly coming to identify with shared experiences instead of far-fetched ethnic myths. In a series of recent essays, commentator Jou Yi-cheng points out that our generation of Taiwanese are beginning to move beyond ethnic-based national identities. In doing so, we have redefined the political reality known as The Republic of China, and blended our concrete attachment to Taiwan with an abstract heritage of Chineseness. In other words, to be a citizen of the Republic of China you don’t have to prove your lineage to China but merely take part in the shared experience of living in Taiwan, and to be Taiwanese you don’t have to reject Chinese culture but merely show your ROC identification and embrace a liberal democratic way of life.

Southeast Asian handicrafts at a elementary school fair in Taiwan, provided by members of the TransAsia Sisters Association (Chris Stowers for the Wall Street Journal, April 8, 2010)

This could be the start of something new. However, this also means that any evolution of Taiwan’s national identity must include the “Taiwanese of the future”: immigrants. They not only include migrant workers and families in Taiwan today, but also anyone who comes to Taiwan in the future. Globalization has made the movement of people easier than ever before. As multinational corporations expand, it will be even more common for employees to shuffle between countries. Add to that the problem of low birthrates and an aging society in Taiwan, Taiwan will dramatically lose its competitiveness unless Taiwan is able to replenish its diminishing talent pool and workforce with immigrants from elsewhere. Due to decreasing birthrates in the developed world, countries like Japan, Korea and the US will all eventually be fighting to retain immigrants. Taiwan cannot afford to keep immigrants away.

Therefore, Taiwan’s xenophobia will be a disaster if not properly dealt with. Ironically, the history of ethnic conflict may just be Taiwan’s best chance in the future. Because Taiwan had long been a society of immigrating ethnic groups, Taiwan not only experienced the evils of ethnic conflict but is also fertile for a more inclusive identity beyond ethnic affiliation. If we can succeed in evolving a national identity based on shared experiences and liberal democracy, then any newcomer to Taiwan can, by contributing to that same shared experience and liberal democratic system, become 100% Taiwanese. Compared to single ethnic states, Taiwan can potentially be more welcoming of outside talent.

Of course, Taiwan is still very far from this ideal. Even now, the new national identity is in infancy. Taiwan’s political machines have gotten used to mobilizing ethnic suspicion for its own purposes. Media exploits distrust and disdain for entertainment and profit. A simple confrontation with another country very often elicit overly emotional responses like “they are all cheaters” or “all of them hate Taiwan,” and inconceivably, these responses appear normal and innocuous to many. Cultural prejudice towards our neighbors in South and Southeast Asia seems to be a matter of course. Furthermore, Taiwan’s society and legal framework still ignore immigrants, or simple pretend that they don’t exist, instead of treating them like a the necessary piece of our society that they are. If Taiwan wants to encourage and retain foreign talent to come to Taiwan, much work is to be done.

Population decline and immigration will certainly become explosive issues for the next Taiwanese generation. An open and welcoming society, then, is one critical asset for Taiwan in the near future. If Taiwan still wants to compete with Korea, then Taiwan must embrace Korean immigrants to settle and work in Taiwan; if Taiwan still wants to challenge China, then Taiwan must welcome Chinese talent to relocate and contribute to Taiwan; if Taiwan still wants to find its place in the world, then the people of the world must be able to find themselves a place in Taiwan. The painful experiences of past ethnic battles may just be the key to the future, and there is no reason for us to let it go to waste.

Further reading:
Original version of this essay on The Notebook
Taiwan Needs a New Theory of Chineseness
The New Taiwanese

台灣競爭力之優勢：國家認同

從最近的反韓情緒，可以感受到身為台灣人複雜的心理。網路上滿天飛的「韓狗」與「支那豬」鮮明的反應了在台灣，被欺負的懊氣如何變成仇外的怒氣。回顧近期的若干重大新聞事件，哪一件沒有參雜著對特定族群的歧視跟偏見呢？補助中國學生來台，就怕讓陸生佔了便宜；處理蘇花公路罹難者事宜非要斤斤計較本國外國待遇；國道工程發生意外，除了施工安全問題外，社會大眾似乎更關心如何懲置外籍勞工；泰勞，菲傭，越南新娘被雇主虐待之事件更是屢出不窮。不僅如此，台灣的政治惡鬥，也如此建立在膨風的族群認同和對非我族類的非理性猜疑與仇恨，台灣人民對此更是司空見慣，不足為奇。

對於「外人」的藐視，其必出於對「自我」的心虛。台灣在歷史上總是被周圍強權視為非得佔領的戰略位置，但又是低於本土的化外之地。二次世界大戰之後，更有本省與外省兩股族群勢力互相視為加害者，又不得不共同生活在一個小島上。為了自衛，各個族群只互相懷著疑心，強調對方的惡劣，把個人的作為當作整個民族惡性的證明。如此以貶低、猜疑外人來強化的自我認同，自然承受不起任何新的挑戰，也自然非得繼續仇外對立不可了。

建立新的國家認同，是台灣極須面臨的課題。過去二十多年以來有許多超越族群的呼籲，但是族群對立成為了政治民主化的代價，導致現今理性的社會對話與政策形成仍舊非常困難。幸好在一般民眾的生活中，共同生活的經驗已經漸漸代替不切實際的族群神話。近期周奕成發表的台灣新中華論觀察，更驗證了我們這一代台灣人已經朝著脫離血緣族群國家認同的方向出發。新中華論指出，在台灣的「中華民國」已經被改變，並且同時包括著具體的台灣認同與抽象的中華認同。換句話說，身為中華民國公民可以不必強調炎黃子孫血統，但彼此擁有在台灣土地上打拼的共同經驗；身為台灣人可以不用以唾棄中華文化來驗明正身，而只需要出示中華民國身份證，認同自由民主體制即可。

這是一個轉機的開端，但也意味著將來台灣發展的國家認同必然要包括未來的台灣人：新移民。新移民不僅是指目前還被當作是「外國人」的外來勞工及家眷，更包含了以後來台各國各界人才。全球化的深化，造成全世界人口流動更便利，也更劇烈。跨國公司無國界的運籌，員工與幹部也理所當然跟著跨國界移動。加上社會高齡化、少子化，台灣即將面臨人口減少的危機；如果沒有新人口進入台灣，勞動力大幅退縮，社會也將無力照顧高齡人口。日本，韓國，美國，在人口減少的壓力下，在不久的將來必然搶著鼓勵移民入駐。這些因素都將嚴重影響台灣的生存空間。台灣如欲維持國際競爭力，那更需要網羅世界各地的頂尖人才及勞動力為台灣效命。台灣沒有本錢排斥移民。

在台灣仇外的心態，如果沒有處理，將會造成台灣的災難。但是，很幸運也很諷刺的，造成台灣族群對立的歷史經驗，也是台灣未來的優勢。如上述，台灣原本就是移民社會，經歷了一波接一波的族群鬥爭，但也造就了超越血緣族群認同的環境。台灣社會如果成功形成以共同經驗與自由民主為基礎之台灣國家認同，那任何外來族群都有機會， 以與台灣社會分享共同經驗和接受台灣民主制度，成為百分之百的「台灣人」。比起日本和韓國，甚至是芬蘭或法國等民族國家，台灣會更有能力接納多元種族，比這些國家更能吸收外藉人才。

但是，目前台灣離這個目標還很遙遠。非血緣國家認同在台灣僅在雛型階段，台灣政治集團也還是以族群界線為分歧。網路、媒體上的所謂的政論，還是充斥著針對族群的惡意指控與猜疑。與外國發生爭議事件，從電視到日常生活中很容易遇到「X國人本來就都很賤」或是「X國人就是看不起台灣」之類的情緒反應，而這種反應竟然是家常便飯，無為不妥的事。更者，台灣社會制度似乎沒有把移民當成「準台灣人」，反而似乎一廂情願的妄想他們與台灣社會無關，甚至根本不存在。更不用說，藐視東南亞，印度或是其他某些民族的文化，幾乎是理所當然。以這樣的環境，要吸引外籍人才入籍台灣，還需許多努力。

社會高齡化與移民處境是下一代台灣人將面臨最嚴苛的考驗。開放包容的社會，將會是未來各國互相競爭的重點。假如台灣還有志氣要與韓國競爭的話，那台灣必然得包容韓裔人才來台灣立業成家；假如台灣還希望領先中國的話，那台灣必然更加接收中國菁英移居台灣貢獻於台灣社會；假如台灣還有遠見提昇國際競爭力的話，那台灣必然要有納百川的胸襟，接納來自世界各地的移民成為台灣人。放眼東亞，台灣痛苦的族群鬥爭經驗是面對即將巨變的未來的契機；我們沒有理由白白浪費了這樣寶貴的資產。

Taiwan Essentially

The morning is a good time to take a slow walk outside. Not eight or nine, but more like five or six in the morning. Depending on where you are, you may be hearing birds, cicadas, or scooters slowly edging past you on the street. But no matter; the destination is the same. An elderly neighbor pushes open her metal door, and the rust on the hinges generates a sound like a razor cutting through the air. You watch her as she waters the plants in front of her house with a small plastic water bottle. The dog across the street looks up briefly at her, at you, and goes back to sleep.

You take a deep breath. The air gives you hints on where you are: it is smoky and musky, but also has a floral component as well. You think you smell eggs being fried and assembled into breakfast sandwiches. Another scooter edges past you, with a little girl in a yellow tank top riding in the back. She waves at you. You wonder what could possibly be on her mind today. No matter, the destination is the same.

On the main road, there are already a few people lining up for the intercity buses. A boy about 14 or 15 wearing a blue school uniform has a large canvas bag across his shoulders. His nose is buried in a tiny paperback; you can tell he is trying to hide the cover of the book with his palms. Behind him is a slim woman in a gray business suit and a white blouse. She’s busy pulling her hair together. Maybe she works for a foreign company? Or maybe she’s a news anchor in training? Now that you think of it, you might have seen her on TV before.

To your right, two tanned men are unloading stacks of newspapers from a small van in front of the local 7-Eleven. Each time they enter and exit the 7-Eleven, you hear the familiar “ding-dong!” which makes you instinctively feel blasts of air conditioning on your skin. The bus comes and the tires screech a bit, the elderly neighbor finishes watering her plant and stretches, and the little girl in the yellow tank top clutches her daddy’s hand; but no matter, the destination is the same.

* * *

It was the last time I rode my bicycle along the bank of the stream. I was in fourth grade then.

I was riding with my dad, but it is still not clear to me why he thought it was a good idea on that particular Wednesday afternoon to take half a day off and drag me out biking. We weren’t one of those people who owned cycling suits and tackled trails every weekend; instead all we had was a old cruiser from before I was born, and a small mountain bike we bought at Carrefour some time ago. We didn’t even have helmets then. No matter; we just took the bikes out and started riding towards the stream by the edge of the town.

It was a breezy and sunny day in April. We left our apartment complex and navigated our way between the four story concrete buildings that make up our town. Once we emerged from the town the riverside opened up like another world. The stream was a deep blue, dotted with glitter from the sun. We were riding along the two lane road along the stream, grass growing in all directions and reaching into the water. On the other side, construction was underway—a new six lane elevated highway was being built. The pillars were all done, painted light blue and stabbed into the stream at regular intervals, casting long shadows on the surface. Construction vehicles were driving up and down, lifting a great amount of dust from the ground.

We came up to the section where a metal fence had been put up. A sign posted on the fence had the title “Stream Beautification” written in huge block letters, and a huge painting of a new riverfront park. “Daddy look, they’re going to build a new bike path along the stream—now we don’t have the ride on the road anymore!”

He didn’t say anything for a while, but looked at the sign as to make out some deeper meaning from it. Then he said, “let’s go back.” As I looked back at him as he turned his bike around, I imagined what the new riverside park would look like in real life.

A few months after that trip along the stream I moved to the U.S., and it was almost ten years before I went back. As my taxi drove from the airport towards Taipei, we passed through that very stretch of the highway by the stream where I used to live. I looked out the window, but I still didn’t get to see what eventually happened to the stream underneath the highway.

* * *

Her New Year’s Eve began at 10 pm, when she’s finally done putting all the papers into the right file cabinets. Even though she was working at the Taipei headquarters of a high profile American investment bank, she was sure she was hired because of her English skills and nothing else. She had spent a few summers in Australia with her father and his family.

At 10:00 pm sharp she left the office and took the MRT to Neihu. At Xihu station a friend picked her up in a Yamaha scooter. “The view is supposed to be great, you know? You can see the Taipei 101 fireworks a lot better,” her friend said.

“I actually just came from there. My office is next to Taipei 101. I almost couldn’t get out! So many people everywhere.”

“Well, it’s New Year’s Eve.”

“So whose place are we going to again?”

“I don’t really know either, one of my boyfriend’s friend’s cousin, I think.”

The apartment was at the top floor of a just-finished high rise residential building overlooking the Keelung River. There were still saw dust and plastic sheets strewn around the lobby. The two girls were greeted by a few more people: three guys and two girls in all. One of the girls was clutching onto a bottle of whiskey.

What was it they were talking about? One of the girls mentioned the new Uniqlo shop opening soon. “Now I won’t have to go to Tokyo to get my underwear!” They also talked about a new wine bar by Anhe Road, new diet and nutrition books, and where they should go clubbing after the fireworks.

At 11:30 pm in the middle of somewhere in Neihu, she didn’t know how to tell her new friends that she had suddenly wanted to just be home. She was afraid to spoil their fun. Instead, she hesitantly followed them into the elevator going up to the top floor.

是電視粗淺？還是人民麻木？

台灣的教育界，五月有一件大事，就是要不要開放大陸學生來台。

為了審理陸生法案，立法院在兩個星期內，兩度上演全武行。藍綠陣營立委，檯面下協調不做，

在教育委員會上直接用肢體杯葛，雙方打到鼻青臉腫。在國會殿堂，你可以看見委員哭著對鏡頭說話，也可以看見扭打成一團的助理。這些打架招式、委員崩潰的情緒，是當天中午和晚間電視新聞的頭條。但該開的會、該替學生把關的資源問題、競爭問題，全台灣目前沒有人清楚。

台灣的政治界和中小企業，六月最關心的事情，是兩岸經濟合作協定ECFA的簽署。

六月二十五號，綠營動員三萬人上街頭，為了反對簽署ECFA進行遊行，在三十度高溫和午後雷陣雨的肆虐之下，台北市議員、議員參選人、五都候選人拿著烏烏茲拉，高喊口號，告訴民眾這是一場「以經求政」策略性騙局，口號喊了一聲又一聲。當天各家電視新聞，最少拆了六條電視新聞分別報導遊行場景，但是有沒有發揮實際的影響力呢？ECFA內文以及早收清單，四天之後，原封不動直接在重慶完成簽署，中國大陸代表和台灣代表，似乎是在半個地球之外作這些決策，讓人誤以為遊行似乎是大夢一場，其實根本從來沒有發生…。

是電視新聞放錯焦點了嗎？是新聞記者呆滯、迂腐、不懂前進？為什麼分析電視新聞的字眼，總是和膚淺、錯陋百出畫上等號？為什麼電視頻道撲天蓋地，現代人反而變得目光如豆，閉門造車？

為什麼明明動用採訪記者、出動攝影機，新聞產出之後不痛不癢，幾乎沒人記得媒體說了什麼？

究竟是電視沒有在進化，還是人民沒有在要求？

思考這個問題的當下，我想替電視新聞辯護，這裡提出一個「本質」的角度供參考。畢竟電視/市場/收視之間的矛盾命題存在太久了，一時半刻也不會徹底的解決。

我想提醒的是，新聞採訪產出的原因，有時不一定是因為記者清楚感受到觀眾的「需要」，而是記者在非常迫切而且短暫的時間裡，先向同行競爭的壓力「屈服」。這些壓力，指的就是數量龐大的電子媒體互相瓜分廣告和商業利潤大餅的現實。獨家、即時的新聞一下就能夠拉抬收視率，觀眾在能判斷訊息有沒有效之前，會先因為好奇心和窺視欲望，鎖定某一則新聞。

這裡出現很明顯的特徵是，收視率會提昇，不是因為論理精確或比較分析，單純的只是「民眾好奇」。這時候，電視新聞的本質就被很清楚地定義出來：也就是快速，也就是新奇。無須長篇大論，引經據典，而是在黃金的幾秒裡面，提供斷裂而且片面的「現象」或是「部份事實」。它相對於其他媒體形式的競爭優勢，是建立在「速度」上，而不是「深度」上。這和時間壓力有著最直接的關聯。

從柏拉圖的時代開始，我們把哲學家、思想家定義成「有閒階級」，相對於「市集階級」，他們因為有時間懷疑、論證、歸結，所以會有立體而連貫的思考體系。但是每一分鐘都在截稿的電視台沒有這樣的時間。它在畫面的要求上，比文字更強烈；清楚明白快速，就是好的電視新聞的最高標準。提昇民眾的興趣，鎖定頻道，才能拉高收視率。

如同產品有區分功能，在一系列的媒體形式中，當然各自也有不同的特性展現。電視新聞沒有辦法長時間辯論考證，就只能發展出快速準的營運模式。偶爾提供像便利商店提供的「新奇感」，已經是電視台採訪中心的極限。如果把教育人民的責任一昧加諸在電視新聞上，不但是一種妄想，更凸顯了對電視產業的無知。或者，國家如同巨靈，每一個人站在巨靈身上，應該各司其職。

即時是電視新聞的功能，相對的，數據取得，理論套用，甚至旁徵博引分析，正反合的辯論，應該放手讓其他平台介入，去補平資訊需求缺口。快速影音回覆的 youtube，每個人都能人上傳照片的 flickr、網誌，還有商業報紙、雜誌、期刊、公報….還有那麼多的媒介，為什麼不能分攤類似責任？

電視媒體其實並沒有統合資訊的責任。現代社會本來就是分裂的，特地花費時間金錢，去滿足小部份群眾的胃口，就是不合邏輯的商業行為。換句話說，統整資訊的工作，應該交回給群眾本身。它可能會有一個流程，例如A透過電視知道消息，B上網查詢背景，C在晚報看見深入採訪，D在雜誌看見國內外比較分析，這可以是一條優秀的產業鍊，各司其職，互相抬升，沒有必要把全部的標準都設置成齊平之後，再來怪罪不符合標準的媒體。提供搜尋功能的Google，從來也沒有義務，要保證民眾更全知、更能監督政府、更熱愛地球。

電視不粗淺，它只是有「特性」。

再談 ECFA

「台灣的主權值多少錢？」

這個問題或許是很多人對 ECFA 的疑問。雖然馬英九總統與民進黨主席蔡英文上禮拜的辯論多針對經濟問題，可是在許多人心中，與中國簽署任何的合作協議都對台灣的主權政治問題有極大的影響。目前台灣兩派意見，一派說主權無價，一點不容退讓，更遑論拿來換錢？另一派則稱，經濟發展是社會之本，國家有實力主權才有意義，不然主權難道可以吃嗎？雙方喋喋不休，一點交集也沒有。ECFA 爭議中最核心的問題，就是政治與經濟的取捨；這個問題卻又無人敢正面面對。

為什麼呢？因為要思考這個問題，需要具備很多台灣政治領導者目前無法達到的條件。第一個條件：承認所謂「主權」或是「經濟成長」都不是絕對好或不好的事情，而只是利益交換的籌碼，達到某種結果的「手段」。換句話說，「主權」與「經濟成長」視情況而言，可多可少。第二個條件：有辦法說清楚「主權」與「經濟成長」到底是什麼。如果主權可以讓，該怎麼讓？是讓軍事自主性，還是外交空間，亦或是改國號改國旗的權力？經濟成長是指協助財團併吞中小企業成為全球性公司，還是輔導傳統下游產業？是攝取眼前的短期利益，還是去追求長期發展？第三個條件，有能力說服群眾接受這樣的觀點，整合國家機器實際執行經濟成長與主權的折衷方案。

雖然這個問題目前看來似乎無解，可是這就是台灣每天必然面對的挑戰。每天中國與台灣互動之間，雙方的實力都在承受微妙的變化。當兩岸在二十年前開始對話的那天，台灣就進入了主權與實際利益互相拉扯的時代。中國崛起，區域整合加速，美國影響力消減，這都讓台灣的處境更加艱難，因為區域整合與全球化正是各國為了達到團體的利益而把自己主權內自主決定的權力交出，甚至為了生存而不惜放棄完整的主權來換取曇花一現的經濟機會。台灣作為一個強權包圍下的小國，要生存下去就非得事事計較主權與利益之間的折衷不可。

當然這不代表台灣就該拿主權去換取利益，也不代表為了主權就該放棄一切獲利的機會。重點是在於「折衷」。 因為解答不在於黑與白兩個極端，而是在中間的某個灰色地帶。可惜在台灣根深蒂固的抗爭政治制度下，只有兩個極端是看得見的，從一個極端到另一個極端的路卻是一片漆黑；所以我們只能在兩個極端互相喊話，而讓解答的機會繼續流失下去。

或許，為 ECFA 的爭議解套不一定需要回答這個問題。沒錯，經濟上獲得的利益與政治要付出的代價並非成正比，而經濟成長甚至可能因著提昇台灣在全球經濟體的重要性而更加維護台灣的主權。在這樣的思想框架下來思考，是不是維護主權也可能對經濟有利呢？說不定不簽 ECFA 反而對台灣的經濟比較好？可是台灣有辦法等到那個時候嗎？這些問題之間又該怎麼取捨呢？

Rewriting History Once Again: New Salvos Fired in the Battle for Taiwan’s Classrooms

In the novel 1984, British author George Orwell famously opined, “he who controls the past controls the future, and he who controls the present controls the past.” His contemporary, Prime Minister Winston Churchill, echoed those same sentiments when he announced that, “history is written by the victors.”

This battle over the control of history has carried on to this present day, as Taiwan’s Ministry of Education (MOE) grows closer to redesigning the Taiwanese high school history curriculum by increasing emphasis on Chinese history over world history. Already, battle lines are being drawn in preparation for the MOE announcement, with activists such as Ng Chiau-tong (黃昭堂), the chairman of World United Formosans for Independence, decrying what he  views as political “detaiwanizing” of education. As Mr. Ng put it, “if the government turns Taiwan history into a subsection of Chinese history, Taiwan will have no hope because the next generation will be taught that its ancestors were Chinese.”

Under the current history curriculum, students are taught one semester each of Taiwanese and Chinese history, followed by another two of world history. The revisions, suggested by National Taiwan University philosophy professor Wang Hsiao-po (王曉波), would have students learn one and a half or two semesters of Chinese history while reducing the number of semesters of world history courses accordingly. Proponents of the change point to complaints from high school history teachers that they have not had sufficient time to teach the breadth of Chinese history, while opponents, in addition to citing concerns of detaiwanization and marginalization of Taiwanese interests to Chinese interests, fear that de-emphasizing world history would lead to training a populace insufficiently versed in Taiwan’s place in the global community and context.

This controversy, of course, should be placed in its own proper context – this is hardly the first time Taiwan has engaged in political battles over the contents of its textbooks. The current breakdown of history topics was itself a politicized change made in 2006 by a DPP-leaning Ministry of Education, revising a 22-year-old KMT-organized curriculum that included three semesters of “National History” encompassing both Taiwan and China as a single unit and one semester of “World History” into one that disaggregated Taiwan history from Chinese history and furthermore placed a greater emphasis on world history. Ironically, in 2006, it was then-KMT party chairman Ma Ying-jeou who leveled a charge against the DPP of trying to falsify history and confuse students about Taiwan’s origin.

The significance of potential changes to textbooks cannot be understated. The effects of the successful DPP overhaul of the educational curriculum less than half a decade ago can already be seen in the rhetoric on both sides, with KMT lawmakers, such as Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) assuring legislators that there will be maintained a “proper proportion” for Taiwanese history, Chinese history, and world history, while DPP politicians such as former government spokesman Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) proclaimed that putting Taiwan at the center of history had become the “country’s mainstream opinion.” Neither side pointed out the fact that such a viewpoint was only officially established less than five years ago, substantially altering the discourse over what was to be the “default” view, so to speak, of history. Nor did either side point out that the 2006 DPP revisions went beyond reallocating time spent on individual subjects and furthermore went into relabeling historical events, such as the change of “Japanese occupation” to “Japanese colonial rule”, or of “ROC Founding Father Sun Yat-sen” to merely, “Sun Yat-sen.”

How might this set of changes play out? Assuming that the MOE changes are limited to the modest ones of adding a semester of Chinese history and taking out a semester of world history, there is unlikely to be a seismic shift of what constitutes “mainstream opinion” as to Taiwan’s place in the history books. Nor is there a sense that the MOE task force, which is composed of professors and educators charged with making the edits, will aim to rewrite history in a dramatic, overtly political way as seen with the Texas school board’s proposed wholesale changes in American history textbooks because of conservative concerns. That being said, there definitely may be “spillover effects” as to what an emphasizing of Chinese history over world history may do in other areas. Will it change viewpoints as to Taiwan’s proper role in regional and international organizations? Will it affect public opinion as to cross-Strait relations such as the current round of negotiations over ECFA? Will the backlash generated by the DPP help to propel them back into power, or hurt them in the next round of elections as they are portrayed as irrational separatists with a seeming disregard for the relevance of Chinese culture and history? Each of these questions seem to be relevant and potentially subtly altered by the curriculum change, but the answers will only be known when the next round of textbook alterations take place and we look back to the effects of this year’s MOE decisions.

評【卓越】一文

從個人的角度言之，追求卓越本身應為一件廣受稱許之事。一個人執著於特定目標，經過一段時間與努力達成之，應受到肯定與嘉許。

而在石之瑜教授所作之【卓越大學　卓越奴隸】一文，筆者認為文章對於「卓越」的定義似乎過於狹隘。何以愈是追求卓越，就愈是沒有自己？ 為什麼愈嚮往卓越，卻又愈成為奴隸心態呢？此卓越的定義到底為何？

文章裡說到歐美學生為準備 GRE 或 SAT 之類的標準化考試而參加補習的人為少數，但事實上在美國，以美籍學生為招生對象之補習學校有非常好的業績，在各大書店的參考書或考古題庫也是琳瑯滿目。此外，歐美標準化考試所使用之語言假如非應試者母語，亦是影響是否參加補習班因素之一。

的確，受到台灣過去的殖民歷史及後帝國主義時代於亞洲的影響，我們常常過度在意所謂的先進國家對自己的看法，整個教育系統為了迎合歐美的排名而作出許多不理性的變動。以台灣大學商學院為例，為提升英語教學課程來吸引外國學生，新進教授﹝通常是助理教授﹞被強制要求用英文授課，但校方卻未考慮到教授本身的英文能力，以及課程本身是否適宜使用英文教學。一昧地規定英語授課，雖然某程度可以吸引外國學生前來台大就讀，但若老師本身的英文能力欠佳，英文授課只是個掛羊頭買狗肉伎倆。若欠缺英語授課之課程，校方實應考慮聘請外國客座教授﹝但並非崇尚所謂的名校大牌教授﹞於台大授課，而非單純的邀請外國教授前來台大進行一次性演講兼旅遊。

至於文中對台大模擬聯合國做出「迎接天子來犒賞」的評論，可能只是對於表面現象之主觀判斷。台大校方官網的「狂賀」固然對旁觀者來說有小題大作之嫌，但每年的模聯大會均需經過全世界各國的大學申請主辦權，再由主辦單位篩選指定。台大模聯團隊在過去的十年向模聯主辦單位申請了五次主辦皆鍛羽而歸，終於第六次申辦成功。在台大模聯籌備團隊學生的努力下，2010年模聯會議也達到 「零客訴」的目標。特別是考慮到台灣自從1971年就被排除在聯合國大門外，台灣學生至少能以模擬聯合國的方式邀請世界各國的學生來台灣交流，不失為一個向世界推廣台灣的良好機會。

石教授之文固然希望表達對於過度迎合先進歐美國家之不滿，但筆者認為，世界秩序與「卓越」之標準到目前為止還是歐美文明所訂，想要提昇台灣之競爭力，無非還是要向歐美標準做某種程度的妥協。如何在這樣的架構下走出自己的路，恐怕不是單純的捨棄歐美制度就能解決。

石之瑜【卓越大學　卓越奴隸】原文