Distortions of a Chinese Education

My wife and I have recently begun acting as liaisons for foreign students studying at Emory University, and last weekend we had our newest student over for a dinner party. Most of the students in this program are older and already have doctorates but are pursuing post-doc studies in a certain very specific area. Our student, who I will call “Jin” for privacy—and in admittedly annoying fashion will refrain from using pronouns for Jin in order to shield gender references throughout this blog post—was no exception, already having an advanced biology degree and pursuing advanced disease-related research at Emory.

First, I have to say that Jin reinforced the notion that I have held for a long time that if all the myriad people in the world could simply meet face-to-face, we would not have the kinds of catastrophic conflicts that exist today. Putting a face to “China” makes invective ring hollow. Jin was a very nice, polite, and possessed an extremely refined culinary palate (as anyone who praises the results of my food preparation will be identified in this blog). However, when we discussed politics and the differences between our two countries, the failures of Jin’s education and the extent to which Chinese orthodoxy reigns were clear.

Let’s just take three examples. First, one of the company assembled that evening mentioned Tibet and what Jin thought about the independence movement there. Jin seemed genuinely surprised about the topic and pointed out that the people of Tibet love Chinese control and involvement because of all the “free healthcare and services” the government provides. Jin also seemed to consider the Dalai Lama a radical crazy person, though we did not delve too much into that issue.

Second, we briefly discussed free speech and voting rights. Jin told us that Jin did not care for either McCain or Obama. Jin was also very happy and “glad” that Jin did not have to “worry” about voting. A committee chose the next leader of the country—or as Jin put it, Mao Zedung chose Deng Xiaoping, Deng Xiaoping chose Jiang Zemin, and Jiang Zemin chose the current leader, Hu Jintao. Jin considered it a burden that we here in America must vote.

Finally, Jin’s view of the protests and subsequent massacre at Tienamen Square in 1989 were that they were necessary to prevent disorder and the destruction of the country—though it was “sad.”

These beliefs were genuine. There was also no reason for Jin to worry about compatriots informing on Jin, because none were there, so there was no peer pressure from Jin’s countrymen.

I do not think I need to say much about the apparent efficacy of Chinese propaganda. Clearly, the party line is well thought out and calculated to present rationality for each abuse of human rights or power mongering. The thing that struck me so strongly was Jin’s disinterest and almost boredom in critically examining the government, its motives, and societal issues in general. They were mere facts, and uncomplicated ones at that.

I believe that this is not only due to the power of the Chinese government to tamp down such behavior, but also due to the Chinese government’s emphasis on a highly technical education. From an early age, Chinese children are pushed to learn science and mathematics and only exposed to humanities/liberal arts in a very factual sense (i.e., this happened, then this happened, etc.). The result of such an education is the devaluation of self-examination, philosophy, government, economics, and other soft sciences. The genius of such an education from the government’s point of view is that propaganda becomes inculcated and self-acting. The government need not work so hard to persuade what its people already are predisposed to. This is exemplified in the product, Jin.

Now, obviously, there are other factors at play. The traditional view of the clash between Western and Eastern cultures centers around individual rights versus collective rights. The recent (in historical terms, which can span centuries) Chinese government’s propaganda surely pales in comparison to the development of a certain cultural attitude developed over millenia.

I occasionally see examples of similar behavior among certain graduates of purely technical institutions in this country. Viz., a lack of social context due to a lack of education about non-technical fields of study. But that is a blog post for another time...