Current affairs perspective
Recently, the teacher's recruitment of teachers in Taiwan Central Plains University had insulted and discriminated against mainland Chinese students during the lectures. Lu Sheng who listened to the lesson reported the professor on this, and the incident continued to ferment and heat up, which caused fierce discussions in Taiwan and both sides of the strait.
Some people believe that the Lu Sheng has done a lot of questions because of the cross -strait ideas and dissatisfaction with the teacher of the Republic of China Taiwan, and hype political issues.The party that supports the teacher believes that the core of this incident is the issue of freedom of speech, and the teacher's freedom to express his point of view is the right of academic freedom and constitutional guarantee.The opponent disagreed, thinking that the classroom remarks of Zhaowei were eaten more than poisonous milk powder on the other side. It was said that you (referring to Lu Sheng), involving personal attacks and discrimination, not only infringing the human rights of Lu Sheng and deteriorating the campus ecology.
The heating up the incident attracted the attention of the cross -strait authorities, and when the social hotspots were involved in political disputes, the real is becoming more and more farther away from us.The Taiwan Affairs Office of Mainland China accused the Taiwan authorities of being a black -protecting umbrella in the anti -China Anti -China revenge, and the Ministry of Education and the MAC came forward to platform for teachers, claiming that the freedom of academic lectures cannot be violated.Experience democratic politics and diversification.
The hot social issues involved cross -strait issues quickly converted into ideological and unified disputes, and they had to sigh the sensitivity of political issues.
If we return to the teacher's words and deeds itself, it is not difficult to find that there is a lot of inappropriateness to connect the poisoned milk powder with Lu Sheng who teaches the lecture.First of all, the poisonous milk powder incident is endless in mainland China. Although it is worth reflecting, how do you conclude that the Lu Sheng eats or manufacture poison milk powder?If it was really Lu Sheng ate poisonous milk powder, shouldn't you not be ridiculous if you should not attack words?Obviously, what you lack basic factual foundation and humanistic care is that you lack.
Secondly, the first point can be extended that the inappropriateness of this remark is to abduct individuals and society.Social problems in mainland China cannot be carried out by the student, and individuals should not be responsible for their problems that they have not participated or indulgent.Could it be that for those who escape from North Korea, we must accuse him of being so poor and unpopular with a sarcasm. Yes, what is said is you!Or a Japanese student said that you have a far -Hiroshima atomic bomb and have Fukushima nuclear food. Atoms can spread throughout the country. Yes, you are talking about you!
North Korea's human rights conditions and Japan's nuclear radiation are not what ordinary people want, nor the evil they do. On the contrary, they are innocent victims.If the teacher does not talk about the northern and Japanese students, can Lu Sheng be tart?
Again, deeper problems are reflected in the ethical bottom line of freedom of speech.Almost all the laws of political theory and democratic countries define the boundaries of freedom of speech.Like other basic freedoms, freedom of speech is not a borderless and bottom line, but it is necessary to respect the personality and dignity of the other party.Even if the land is not directly associated with the poisonous milk powder, it should not be accused of social issues.
The teacher connected the two in a sarcasm in the public occasion of the classroom, and portrayed some audiences, namely Lu Sheng as a child who grew up to poison milk powder. This behavior itself was not responsible, but also for the character.Insulting and serious injuries.What's more, this kind of speech comes from a teacher who is a teacher and should be a student to open up the model.
The public opinion of Taiwan and the Ministry of Education's remarks are even more worrying.If such words and deeds occur in European and American countries, there may be no controversy at all. The apology of teachers and schools has already subsided, but the ideological disputes and noise of miscellaneous on both sides of the strait make this problem complicated and difficult.
Not only did the Taiwan government not carefully review the improper remarks of the personality and the at stagnation of teacher ethics, in the instead, this problem was politicized. It is believed that some people are affected by the autocratic thinking, not adapted to the environment of freedom and democracy.The grid cannot be suppressed.
When teachers' ethics and freedom of speech are transformed into political and ideological issues, people are not so rational and objective.Since the epidemic occurs, the two sides of the sides of the mask exit, the Wuhan Taiwanese and the children of the land returning to Taiwan, the right to teach the land, and the World Health Organization's participation in many issues and other issues are fiercely collided and tense.The upgraded political vortex has become a microcosm of political confrontation.
Taiwanese scholar Lin Yusheng once defined Taiwan's political ecology as populism democracy, and distinguished constitutional democracy represented by Europe and the United States.The main difference between the two is that in the context of the legitimacy of most people, the former can harm political opponents and personal rights, while the latter's power in the constitutional system is balanced.Under the intensified cross -strait disputes, this solution is becoming a true portrayal of Taiwan's political society.
The recruitment incident can have a highlight of democracy and freedom of democracy, promoting mature civil society under the framework of constitutional government, and encouraging rational and objective democratic discussions.However, on the basis of the response of mainland China, by the anti -China emotions spreading since the epidemic, the ruling of Taiwan has abducted the right to speak and reshape it into cross -strait confrontation.Whether it is dwarfed, thus simply covering up the abuse of freedom of speech and damage to the dignity of the personality.
A mature democratic society should be based on the benign interaction of democratic systems, personal rights and dignity, and personal rights should not be wrapped by a simple majority decision or leading politicians.If you blindly manipulate the populist emotions and cover up the nature of many social problems, it will not only be conducive to the solution of the problem itself, but also intensify social contradictions. In the long run, it will not be conducive to the improvement of social integration and democratic systems in the long run.
The history of democratization in Taiwan is not long, and there is still a long way to go, but politicians should not only focus on the political interests brought by populism in front of them, but should plan long -term and work hard to develop the healthy development of Taiwanese society.Perhaps this can bring more practical effects than the mask's diplomatic epidemic prevention and diplomacy, and the Taiwanese brand will be recognized by more people.
The author is a doctoral student in political and international relations in Oxford University in the United Kingdom
