Textbook spat shows up over-politicization
It bewildered many that quite a few opposition camp members took issue with a move by the Education Bureau’s Textbook Committee to review history textbooks used by schools — with the aim of ensuring accuracy in the material.
Unlike ordinary story books, history textbooks demand a high degree of faithfulness and accuracy because of their function and purpose. That is self-evident.
It is both natural and imperative for any right-minded person to point out — and for responsible authorities to rectify — any mistake or inaccuracy found in any history textbook. That is why thousands of ordinary people and experts in Asia, including Hong Kong people, launched waves of protest against the Japanese government after the country’s education ministry approved publication of history textbooks that presented its aggression in World War II incorrectly.
No right-minded person in Hong Kong and elsewhere raised an eyebrow at those anti-Japanese protests triggered by textbook controversies, because people rightly believed history textbooks must present historical facts correctly and accurately.
Why then did some individuals take issue with the Education Bureau’s recent move to commission an expert committee to review history textbooks for local schools, with the aim of ensuring accuracy, ultimately for the benefit of students?
Committee members rightly pointed out some narratives in those books are obviously inaccurate or even incorrect. For one, the sentence: “China took back Hong Kong’s sovereignty” is incongruent with the historical fact that China never lost sovereignty over Hong Kong.
After obtaining its member seat in the United Nations as the legitimate government of China in 1971, the People’s Republic of China, through its UN representative Huang Hua, wrote in March 1972 to the UN Special Committee on Decolonization to state the position of China: The questions of Hong Kong and Macao belong to the category of questions resulting from the series of unequal treaties which the imperialists imposed on China. Hong Kong and Macao are part of Chinese territory occupied by the British and Portuguese authorities. The settlement of the questions of Hong Kong and Macao is entirely within China’s sovereign right and do not at all fall under the ordinary category of colonial territories. The UN assented to China’s assertion. On Nov 8, 1972, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 2908 by a 99:5 vote, removing Hong Kong and Macao from the official list of colonies.
Critics of the textbook review move are virtually suggesting that Hong Kong students simply do not need a correct knowledge of history and facts.
In response to such criticism, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor on Tuesday urged people not to overreact to this textbook review by the expert group.
To call such criticism “overreaction” is, indeed, an understatement. It is actually a reflection of the omnipresent phenomenon, called “over politicization”, that has plagued Hong Kong for years.