文化認同的維繫：緬甸華文教育與台灣僑教政策（1960-2000）

The Sustainability of Cultural Identity: Ethnic Chinese Education in Burma and Taiwan’s Policy of Overseas Chinese Education, 1960-2000

1960年代以後，緬甸華人遭逢緬甸政府打壓華文教育的難關，他們在困境中另謀出路，藉由宗教名義，開辦華文補習班，並不斷擴充成為華文學校，致力於維繫華人文化。此時的大陸正在文化大革命的風暴中，而台灣政府則強調中華文化的復興，反而與緬甸華人在文化上有了較強的連繫。華人憑藉著自己的努力，加上台灣的僑生來台升學政策之支援，促成緬甸中北部的華文教育開展出蓬勃興盛的景象，而緬甸南部華人則比較不敢積極發展華文教育。此時期的緬甸華裔青年多半懷有一個來台升學的「台灣夢」；這個「台灣夢」既是華裔青年個人前途之所繫，也是台灣所提供給緬甸華人維護文化認同的一個選項。總結本文研究，有以下幾個重點：一、緬甸華文教育之所以維持不墜，是緬甸北部、中部一些華文教育人員的努力，其中很值得注意的是瓦城（曼德勒）孔教學校；瓦城（曼德勒）孔教學校後來還把自己的辦學經驗擴散到中北部其他學校。二、除了緬甸華人自身的努力之外，台灣的僑生來台升學政策對於緬甸華文教育也是一個重要的助力。三、台灣1960年代發起的中華文化復興運動，為緬甸華人和華裔青年提供了文化認同的一個選項。四、長期以來，台灣對於緬甸華文教育給予援助和支持，使得不少華裔青年嚮往來台灣升學，甚至有所謂「台灣夢」。五、緬甸北、中、南部華文教育的發展有所歧異，北、中部呈現蓬勃興盛的景象，南部則比較不敢積極發展華文教育。六、台灣政府和緬甸華人對於華文教育的推動，也有雙向的影響力，此即台灣的僑生升學措施也受到緬甸北、中部的華文學校之建議，而有所調整。

In the 1960s, ethnic Chinese in Burma confronted the suppression of ethnic Chinese education from the government of Burma. Under such severe situation, they zealously looked for other alternatives to continue their education and decided to establish cram schools, in the disguise of religious venues, for Chinese learning. These cram schools were gradually developed and eventually transformed into Chinese high schools dedicating themselves to sustaining Chinese culture in Burma. While Mainland China was overwhelmed by the fierce storm of the Cultural Revolution, the government in Taiwan, on the contrary, took actions to enhance the renaissance of Chinese culture and thus built closer and stronger cultural connections with ethnic Chinese communities in Burma. Through Burmese Chinese’s constant efforts and Taiwan’s political and educational supports for overseas Chinese education, ethnic Chinese education was vigorously developed in central and northern Burma. Burmese Chinese in southern Burma, however, were less active to promote ethnic Chinese education because of some concerns. During this period, many Burmese Chinese youth were passionate about studying in Taiwan and shared a“Taiwanese Dream”to which they entrusted their future. This“Taiwanese Dream”was also an option provided by Taiwan for ethnic Chinese in Burma to sustain their cultural identity. This paper has reached the following conclusions. First, the reason why it has been possible to constantly develop ethnic Chinese education in Burma is because of endeavors of those education staff persisting in promoting Chinese education in central and northern Burma. Among them, Kongjiao Chinese High School in Mandalay deserved special attention. This school even shared its own experience of school management with other schools in central and northern Burma. Second, in addition to Burmese Chinese’s efforts, Taiwan’s policy of overseas Chinese education also played an important role in boosting ethnic Chinese education in Burma. Third, Taiwan initiated the Chinese Cultural Renaissance Movement in the 1960s, providing an alternative of cultural identity for Burmese Chinese. Fourth, Taiwan also offered long-term assistance and support for ethnic Chinese education in Burma, making many Burmese Chinese youth yearn to study in Taiwan or even dream a“Taiwanese Dream.”Fifth, experiences in developing ethnic Chinese education across Burma were varied. While it was vigorously developed in central and northern Burma, ethnic Chinese education in southern Burma was relatively inactive. Sixth, the government in Taiwan and Burmese Chinese could influence each other when developing both overseas and ethnic Chinese education. Taiwan’s policy of overseas Chinese education, for example, was revised based on suggestions from Chinese schools in central and northern Burma.