"The Trump administration’s intervention [at Harvard University] is not about destroying freedom but about putting an end to bullying." — Zhao Xiao (赵晓)
Your characterization of Zhao is interesting as a Christian convert, makes me think of these Falun Gong crazies whom I gave some benefit of the doubt for a while as "Born-Again" Buddhists but then realized they're just looking for redemption from struggle, poverty, and the heavy history of China, resulting lack of social/political order/rule of law, overly authoritarian reactions, etc., but have crafted a whackadoo narrative just like the Q-Anon. As I have listened to new immigrants to America from the Mainland embrace Trump, when those of us who grew up here know he was always in the news as a celebrity-hanger-on blow hard, it was alarming to see how increasingly hopeless it was. They could not believe that he was really a sexual predator. They thought it was just drummed up fake news. But since they weren't here in the 1990s when he was always openly cavalier about being a crass disgusting ogre, when American culture was in a different place and accepted such open lewdness, when no one in their right minds, even the Donald himself, would've thought he'd sit in the WH... Well, here we are...Their understandable but wholly incorrect reading of American history and culture was beyond my ability to fix through reasoned conversation. It was just as frustrating as talking to Americans who don't know much about China. The thing about MOST Chinese and Chinese Americans - all except the minority of well-educated and thoughtful - and I am judging my own family members with advanced degrees up the wazoo but only in STEM - is that they lack education around history and politics to PROFOUND levels. Like White Americans - Liberal or Otherwise - they lack understanding of the history of Slavery in this country, not to mention the genocide of Native Americans and the role of Spanish Colonialism across the Americas (which in the US Mainland affects the history of the West when it used to be Mexico). And that real history has real economic legacy consequences that affect us to the present. These people know NOTHING of these facts on the ground. So of course, Zhou cannot understand DEI. And yet, they would be the first to push back against criticisms of China by outsiders for not understanding REAL Chinese history, which is usually correct. And then you factor in an over-lionization to the point of fetishization of Harvard... Ugh. America doesn't value education the way Chinese people do. So that's another thing that creates a different dynamic. And frankly, Chinese people are NOT ENTITLED to Harvard. They hold it up like it's BeiDa, but it's not. Have you heard of Legacy/Athletic Admissions? It is real and far more an obstacle to fairness than DEI when it comes to elite college admissions. Harvard a "free market of ideas"? Ha! Are you even on the same planet? No one goes to Harvard for a free market of ideas. They go for the connections to make money. The institution sprinkles in great people who then try to instill some humanity into these sharks. That's the formula for all the elite schools. Just enough good people to not be a total sham. And those good people stay b/c they were lured in by the $$ and then they also see the work that needs to happen to try to make the younger gen's some kind of responsible. Harvard is a business. Just because you might come from a Confucian culture that values what you think is "higher education" does not make Harvard the mythical paradise of your fantasies. The SAT/ACT is not valued as the Gao-Kao. There is no long Imperial history to pound this into the culture. And let's not forget who pays taxes to support all such establishments - us ordinary American citizens. Harvard exists in the context of the USA. Systemic racism - especially against Black Americans - has been a problem since before 1776. Helping people build wealth through opportunities they were denied from generations prior is part of the point of DEI. Fixing the poverty and denial of human flourishing is something Chinese people should be able to sympathize with. But they don't. Why? Stupidity, that's why. Inability to be knowledgeable and connect the dots. Harvard is not a golden ticket. Just ask any Harvard grad who didn't go into finance or tech. This is ridiculous. You know what you have the freedom to be in America? You have the freedom to be stupid and the economy/tech/infrastructure is so robust that it just might not even matter. But Kaiser, always, thanks for your work on everything. But hey, if these people want to continue to fetishize Harvard, then challenge them to read Harvard Professor Jill Lepore's These Truths. Let's see if they can even get through the entire thing. If not, then they don't deserve to be considered educated. And by extension, I'd pose the question of whether such people should be platformed. Demand more from people who consider themselves intellectuals. They have no business "debating" DEI without knowing the history. Don't know the history? Grab your "freedom" to go out and read all about it.
Thanks for this very interesting discussion; I have some sympathies for both sides :-). Personally I would prefer a third way between letting universities "freely" follow illiberal fashions and government intervention in favour of conservative ideology. That third way is tried and tested in economics; it's called competition. Competition between economic agents keeps them honest and on their toes; in the same way, what's needed is healthy competition in the marketplace of ideas. If some universities pursue a DEI agenda, others a MAGA agenda, and yet others do neither and concentrate on science instead, I trust the non-ideological institutions will win out, getting the best teachers, the best students and the most money. So all the government has to do is to ensure there is no monopoly but strong competition, in academe like in the economy.
I will also add that as Chinese people, they have no business characterizing an education institution as part of some kind of "market." Geezes, so many things wrong with their terminology! Sure, this is very American... many argue that's part of what is wrong with America, that everything is a "market." The legacy of a culture that has valued education for so long is that there is a baseline of richer, more nuanced and enlightened terms accompanying the enterprise of education. I was just at the Confucius Temple in Beijing and so moved by the whole revisit into his core ideas and struggles. But these 2 guys with their lack of awareness that education is part of the spectrum of Human Development, not acquiring things... Ugh. Really? This is wholly unacceptable. And it should be unacceptable to more people. An insult to thinking, feeling, sentient beings with some idea of their own souls and consciences. Society that is more humane and just will never get far with such a baseline. Every caring parent knows this - it's not about the "getting," but about the relationship, the back-and-forth, the exchange, the things you do together, the experience that makes you more human, more enlightened, more compassionate and able to connect with others.
Your characterization of Zhao is interesting as a Christian convert, makes me think of these Falun Gong crazies whom I gave some benefit of the doubt for a while as "Born-Again" Buddhists but then realized they're just looking for redemption from struggle, poverty, and the heavy history of China, resulting lack of social/political order/rule of law, overly authoritarian reactions, etc., but have crafted a whackadoo narrative just like the Q-Anon. As I have listened to new immigrants to America from the Mainland embrace Trump, when those of us who grew up here know he was always in the news as a celebrity-hanger-on blow hard, it was alarming to see how increasingly hopeless it was. They could not believe that he was really a sexual predator. They thought it was just drummed up fake news. But since they weren't here in the 1990s when he was always openly cavalier about being a crass disgusting ogre, when American culture was in a different place and accepted such open lewdness, when no one in their right minds, even the Donald himself, would've thought he'd sit in the WH... Well, here we are...Their understandable but wholly incorrect reading of American history and culture was beyond my ability to fix through reasoned conversation. It was just as frustrating as talking to Americans who don't know much about China. The thing about MOST Chinese and Chinese Americans - all except the minority of well-educated and thoughtful - and I am judging my own family members with advanced degrees up the wazoo but only in STEM - is that they lack education around history and politics to PROFOUND levels. Like White Americans - Liberal or Otherwise - they lack understanding of the history of Slavery in this country, not to mention the genocide of Native Americans and the role of Spanish Colonialism across the Americas (which in the US Mainland affects the history of the West when it used to be Mexico). And that real history has real economic legacy consequences that affect us to the present. These people know NOTHING of these facts on the ground. So of course, Zhou cannot understand DEI. And yet, they would be the first to push back against criticisms of China by outsiders for not understanding REAL Chinese history, which is usually correct. And then you factor in an over-lionization to the point of fetishization of Harvard... Ugh. America doesn't value education the way Chinese people do. So that's another thing that creates a different dynamic. And frankly, Chinese people are NOT ENTITLED to Harvard. They hold it up like it's BeiDa, but it's not. Have you heard of Legacy/Athletic Admissions? It is real and far more an obstacle to fairness than DEI when it comes to elite college admissions. Harvard a "free market of ideas"? Ha! Are you even on the same planet? No one goes to Harvard for a free market of ideas. They go for the connections to make money. The institution sprinkles in great people who then try to instill some humanity into these sharks. That's the formula for all the elite schools. Just enough good people to not be a total sham. And those good people stay b/c they were lured in by the $$ and then they also see the work that needs to happen to try to make the younger gen's some kind of responsible. Harvard is a business. Just because you might come from a Confucian culture that values what you think is "higher education" does not make Harvard the mythical paradise of your fantasies. The SAT/ACT is not valued as the Gao-Kao. There is no long Imperial history to pound this into the culture. And let's not forget who pays taxes to support all such establishments - us ordinary American citizens. Harvard exists in the context of the USA. Systemic racism - especially against Black Americans - has been a problem since before 1776. Helping people build wealth through opportunities they were denied from generations prior is part of the point of DEI. Fixing the poverty and denial of human flourishing is something Chinese people should be able to sympathize with. But they don't. Why? Stupidity, that's why. Inability to be knowledgeable and connect the dots. Harvard is not a golden ticket. Just ask any Harvard grad who didn't go into finance or tech. This is ridiculous. You know what you have the freedom to be in America? You have the freedom to be stupid and the economy/tech/infrastructure is so robust that it just might not even matter. But Kaiser, always, thanks for your work on everything. But hey, if these people want to continue to fetishize Harvard, then challenge them to read Harvard Professor Jill Lepore's These Truths. Let's see if they can even get through the entire thing. If not, then they don't deserve to be considered educated. And by extension, I'd pose the question of whether such people should be platformed. Demand more from people who consider themselves intellectuals. They have no business "debating" DEI without knowing the history. Don't know the history? Grab your "freedom" to go out and read all about it.
Thanks for this very interesting discussion; I have some sympathies for both sides :-). Personally I would prefer a third way between letting universities "freely" follow illiberal fashions and government intervention in favour of conservative ideology. That third way is tried and tested in economics; it's called competition. Competition between economic agents keeps them honest and on their toes; in the same way, what's needed is healthy competition in the marketplace of ideas. If some universities pursue a DEI agenda, others a MAGA agenda, and yet others do neither and concentrate on science instead, I trust the non-ideological institutions will win out, getting the best teachers, the best students and the most money. So all the government has to do is to ensure there is no monopoly but strong competition, in academe like in the economy.
I will also add that as Chinese people, they have no business characterizing an education institution as part of some kind of "market." Geezes, so many things wrong with their terminology! Sure, this is very American... many argue that's part of what is wrong with America, that everything is a "market." The legacy of a culture that has valued education for so long is that there is a baseline of richer, more nuanced and enlightened terms accompanying the enterprise of education. I was just at the Confucius Temple in Beijing and so moved by the whole revisit into his core ideas and struggles. But these 2 guys with their lack of awareness that education is part of the spectrum of Human Development, not acquiring things... Ugh. Really? This is wholly unacceptable. And it should be unacceptable to more people. An insult to thinking, feeling, sentient beings with some idea of their own souls and consciences. Society that is more humane and just will never get far with such a baseline. Every caring parent knows this - it's not about the "getting," but about the relationship, the back-and-forth, the exchange, the things you do together, the experience that makes you more human, more enlightened, more compassionate and able to connect with others.