While the world makes a concerted effort to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, China’s approach to educating the public about the outbreak is puzzling and, more importantly, not helpful, if not counterproductive.
With the coronavirus crisis worsening, governments across the globe are looking for a pragmatic approach to handle the situation. As more cases are confirmed, medical experts are becoming more anxious to find a solution. Needless to say, if timely actions are taken to fight the virus, more precious lives can be saved.
Yet, instead of focusing on openness and transparency, China is seemingly busy working to save the face of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), rather than people’s lives. Beijing first refused to acknowledge the outbreak, then tried to blame other countries for it.
The reason is ultimately attributable to the Chinese authoritarian political system. The ruling party to all appearances is determined to hold on to power, no matter how badly the situation deteriorates.
On Monday last week, the Chinese Ministry of Education, in conjunction with People.cn, the online counterpart of the People’s Daily, invited four professors to produce an online presentation entitled “A Lesson on COVID-19 and Political Consciousness for University Students in the Nation.”
The speakers were Beijing’s Tsinghua University professor Ai Silin (艾四林), Renmin University of China professor Qin Xuan (秦宣), Beijing Normal University professor Wang Binglin (王炳林) and Central University of Finance and Economics professor Feng Xiujun (馮秀軍).
They are all well-known and are among the most prestigious academics in China.
They primarily addressed how Chinese President Xi Jingping (習近平) and the CCP have taken the lead in responding to the virus crisis. The speakers put great emphasis on Marxism, and two of them explained how Chinese had successfully fought quite a few wars since the 1950s, giving the Korean War as an example.
Separately, each of the professors gave a 30-minute speech to raise awareness of patriotism among young Chinese.
The problem is that they seem to have misinterpreted Marxism in a manner that would hardly convince young people. For example, the concept of responsibility for “protecting our home and defending our country” was mentioned several times to remind younger Chinese of their task to help overcome “the disease struggle.”
Patriotism has never been a core Marxist principle, because the state is supposed to wither away after a communist revolution. What is more perplexing is that it is not clearly explained how national disease prevention efforts could be turned into an effective tool for indoctrinating the students.
Moreover, the speakers referred to history time and again, but hardly touched on Marxist concepts of history, which are pregnant with the idea of progress by moving the society to a higher level of development. Where is this idea of progress in the lectures of these academics?
These lessons will not register with young Chinese, but rather leave them wondering where the CCP and Xi are leading them to?
Huang Yu-zhe is an undergraduate studying political science at Soochow University and has been accepted to National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Law and Interdisciplinary Studies.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS