This topic has been on my mind as of late because I have been interviewing students under an alumni admissions program my alma mater, Carleton College, offers. Those who have been applying or those related to an applicant will know that students have been stressed recently with final applications deadlines closing.
Anyone who has set foot on an undergraduate campus in the past few years will have noticed the rising number of Chinese (PRC) students. Even in the small, midwest, and scarcely known (albeit highly ranked) liberal arts college that I attended, the numbers of PRC students entering the incoming freshmen class was 2 in 2004, 10 in 2007, and 19 in 2009. Of course, the total number will be significantly higher, and constitutes a significant number for a school of about 1,800.
Having been on campus not too long ago and as a current participant in the admissions process in China, there are some trends that I have observed.
Chinese students going abroad used to be able to be easily separable into two fairly distinct groups: exceptionally capable students with strong academic backgrounds and exceptionally rich students with poor grades. The gifted students would basically apply independently (there is no counseling system in China, students are admitted through the gao kao or college entrance exam) and, due to their good grades and ambition, get into good universities. In contrast, there are many extraordinarily wealthy families in China with what one might call spoiled children who often went to private schools (in China, private schools are usual lower in quality), and who are unable to test into a Chinese university. As a result, their parents pay their way into a mediocre university in usually the UK and Australia, and sometimes the United States.
This trend is changing. No longer are there two extremes; the ‘middle’ group is taking interest in studies overseas. Overseas education has become a popular alternative in part because of the high paying careers obtained by students who have studied abroad (they have, in effect, raised the bar for higher education), and in part because the gao kao is becoming more competitive with more students competing every year for limited spots. Regardless of the specific reasons, American universities have increasingly become the place for Chinese students pursuing tertiary education abroad.
There are clear consequences for both China and America.
In China, there has been the rise of education consulting firms which specialize in sending students abroad to study. However, there are significant ethical issues that have arose with the emergence of these companies. Simply put, these firms write the application materials for the students. In America this is considered cheating, but there is a bit of a culture gap here. For the average Chinese family who is accustomed to a means-tested education system, a system in which you take a test and get into a university, they are unfamiliar with the admissions process for an American university and most likely figure that the student takes an exam, pays a fee, and the company takes care of the administrative issues. It should also be mentioned that China is a very results-oriented society, especially in regard to education. A mixture of an exam-based education system (who cares what you learned or how you grew if you did not test above the cutoff mark?) and an extremely competitive environment has given many in China an ‘ends justifies the means’ mentality. However, in the United States, the discovery that a student paid someone to write the entire application materials is means to effectively blacklist him/her. Already, admissions officers are wary of these organizations and what the services they offer students. As American universities recruit increasingly from Chinese high schools, the need for transparency will increase as well. How this will materialize is anyone’s guess, but already we are witnessing American colleges establishing direct relationships with schools. The gist of these relationships is that the high school or organization has top students apply, and the university can accept them conditionally (i.e. more English instruction etc.). I can only envision more types of these relationships emerging.
This has become a high profit and thus a highly competitive market. There is sufficient demand and insufficient knowledge on the part of the consumers, allowing companies to demand high prices. Also there is a sufficient number of Chinese students who have the experience studying abroad and who have recognized a good business opportunity.
In American campuses, there has emerged an interesting and sometimes troubling dynamic. To illustrate this, imagine that with two Chinese students on campus. These students will naturally find their own interests and circles of friends. They are simply too few to construct a social group. With twenty, they become a clique. Then what follows is a classic high school story: exclusive lunch tables (speaking only Chinese), deviant members scolded for not acknowledging members of the same group on the way to class... This has made a group that was previously considered open and friendly on campus to be increasingly seen as aloof and insular.
(It should be noted that this is not necessarily a new problem. Exclusivity and intra-group politics have characterized other groups on campuses, including international students in general.)
One possible (and probable) trend for the future lies in American high schools. My contemporaries at Carleton had all applied from China, either from public high schools or foreign language schools. Recently, many students entering American universities during the past two years have either attended high school in America or have attended some type of exchange in America for extended amounts of time (1-2 years). Education consulting firms have already targeted this market and have begun sending students to American high schools and boarding schools. I would not be surprised that if in a few years as the competition for American universities becomes increasingly competitive, we will start to see a similar rising trend of Chinese students attending American high schools. Let’s not forget, it was only a few years ago when articles came out describing the phenomenon of the large numbers of Chinese students entering American graduate schools.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
How are American Politics Perceived?
Recently, one piece of news has rattled American voters ahead of both the 2010 midterm elections and the slightly more distant 2012 presidential election. The Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 to overturn the previous restrictions on corporate campaign finance arguing that it conflicted with the First Amendment’s most basic principle of free political speech. Not being a Supreme Court specialist, this news instead made me think of things closer to home, specifically what people’s impressions are of political occurrences across the Pacific. Although admittedly there are limited elections here, the political system is vastly different from what is found in America. Given the difference in governing system, how do average citizens interpret news of elections in foreign countries?
This question evoked the memory of a conversation I had with a good friend of mine, a Beijinger of a similar age. I cannot recall exactly how we got to the topic of American politics, because it was not an election year and no major political upset had occurred. Regardless, I remember this friend saying something along the lines of, “Aren’t American elections simply a game dominated by the rich?” There is arguably some truth to this statement, but I did not want my friend to live life thinking that all of American polity is simply some game manipulated by the ultra-wealthy and corporate interests. I tried to respond by explaining public funding for campaigns, campaign finance rules as well as a few rags-to-riches examples of American politicians, but despite my efforts my friend was not convinced.
Where do these sentiments come from? The media here does not denounce elections that occur abroad. In fact, there is fairly wide coverage of elections all over the world (there was, in fact, considerable coverage of Ukraine’s recent elections, something that I found largely absent in even American media sources). However, especially given the political movements in Taiwan and Hong Kong, there is often an association of what someone from the American context might conceive of as a representative political system with something that is either chaotic or manipulated by elites (the affluent background of many American candidates plus the Bush/Clinton political families are probably enough to convince anyone of the latter).
There are aspects of the American system of governance that people here do admire, but these are, counterintuitively, aspects that are not things most Americans like to advertise about their country. Two such events are the Monica Lewinsky and Watergate scandals. While these are events that do not make Americans proud of their political system, there is a deal of admiration here for the American political institutions that enforce the laws even at the highest echelons of political society and that will hold powerful leaders accountable for their actions.
These are simply my thoughts. I do not know enough about other areas such as the education system to say with any degree of accuracy what is taught in the classrooms. Other interpretations are welcome.
This question evoked the memory of a conversation I had with a good friend of mine, a Beijinger of a similar age. I cannot recall exactly how we got to the topic of American politics, because it was not an election year and no major political upset had occurred. Regardless, I remember this friend saying something along the lines of, “Aren’t American elections simply a game dominated by the rich?” There is arguably some truth to this statement, but I did not want my friend to live life thinking that all of American polity is simply some game manipulated by the ultra-wealthy and corporate interests. I tried to respond by explaining public funding for campaigns, campaign finance rules as well as a few rags-to-riches examples of American politicians, but despite my efforts my friend was not convinced.
Where do these sentiments come from? The media here does not denounce elections that occur abroad. In fact, there is fairly wide coverage of elections all over the world (there was, in fact, considerable coverage of Ukraine’s recent elections, something that I found largely absent in even American media sources). However, especially given the political movements in Taiwan and Hong Kong, there is often an association of what someone from the American context might conceive of as a representative political system with something that is either chaotic or manipulated by elites (the affluent background of many American candidates plus the Bush/Clinton political families are probably enough to convince anyone of the latter).
There are aspects of the American system of governance that people here do admire, but these are, counterintuitively, aspects that are not things most Americans like to advertise about their country. Two such events are the Monica Lewinsky and Watergate scandals. While these are events that do not make Americans proud of their political system, there is a deal of admiration here for the American political institutions that enforce the laws even at the highest echelons of political society and that will hold powerful leaders accountable for their actions.
These are simply my thoughts. I do not know enough about other areas such as the education system to say with any degree of accuracy what is taught in the classrooms. Other interpretations are welcome.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Evan Osnos in Beijing
Today, the New Yorker magazine China correspondent Evan Osnos gave a talk in Beijing, touching on many of the big issues that exist between the US and China. My summary of some of the major points is below.
Climate Change
The question was raised: isn’t it unfair that the developed world has polluted the world for years without consequence whereas developing countries must now sacrifice industrialization and economic growth for the sake of environmentalism?
To this, he responded that the question of fairness is in effect an outdated question; all countries are going to be affected equally by global warming. Arguably, America should bear much of the burden given all of the pollution it emitted and its status as the largest polluter in the world until recently, however to argue that America alone is responsible for solving global warming is simply an unrealistic suggestion.
Although Copenhagen was a failure, it revealed something about both America and China. Both are reluctant to sacrifice economic growth for the sake of environmental protection. He argues that instead of playing to their weaknesses, any viable solution should instead play to their strengths. Specifically, environmental technology can be developed in America and manufactured in China. This would utilize the relative strengths of America’s research and development capabilities and China’s manufacturing efficiency.
Taiwan
The question posed was an interesting one. China, Taiwan and the United States have a complicated relationship, and China often criticizes America for selling arms to Taiwan. However, it was reported that while America sold, say, 100 F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan it only supplied engines parts for 40, so while Taiwan had 100 jets, only a fraction could be in the air at one time. Is China overreacting, and is it time for the government to re-evaluate the way it approaches the Taiwan question?
Osnos is, by his own admission, not a Taiwan expert and certainly not an arms specialist. However, by his own evaluation Taiwan is quite far from the American consciousness. Sino-American relationship encompasses many complicated factors and among them, Taiwan is a very small part of it. Many American students are considering the very likely possibility that they will, in the course of their professional life, work in China. In addition, many congressmen are eager to avoid the Taiwan issue and to urge Taiwanese officials from causing an international crisis in order to manage much bigger and more pressing issues.
Reporting in China
When asked what were the biggest problems he encountered while reporting from China, he said that he feels that it is actually quite easy to be a reporter here. Of course, there still exist a few travel restrictions for foreign journalists, but the overall situation has improved dramatically (i.e. accessing information, officials, interviewing, travel, etc.)
In regard to the last point, I have heard a similar opinion from former New York Times reporter Howard French. According to French, reporting in China is hardly different than reporting elsewhere. All governments are, to a certain degree, antagonistic toward the media. Governments have a set interest in protecting their image and it is the role of media to find the shortcomings in government policy. It is the responsibility of a journalist to be relentless about seeking information, and many take pride in being something that governments are wary of. This is not to say that reporting in China is easy. All governments will make it difficult for journalists to obtain information, the methods may be different in China but it is by no means any worse than other countries.
Climate Change
The question was raised: isn’t it unfair that the developed world has polluted the world for years without consequence whereas developing countries must now sacrifice industrialization and economic growth for the sake of environmentalism?
To this, he responded that the question of fairness is in effect an outdated question; all countries are going to be affected equally by global warming. Arguably, America should bear much of the burden given all of the pollution it emitted and its status as the largest polluter in the world until recently, however to argue that America alone is responsible for solving global warming is simply an unrealistic suggestion.
Although Copenhagen was a failure, it revealed something about both America and China. Both are reluctant to sacrifice economic growth for the sake of environmental protection. He argues that instead of playing to their weaknesses, any viable solution should instead play to their strengths. Specifically, environmental technology can be developed in America and manufactured in China. This would utilize the relative strengths of America’s research and development capabilities and China’s manufacturing efficiency.
Taiwan
The question posed was an interesting one. China, Taiwan and the United States have a complicated relationship, and China often criticizes America for selling arms to Taiwan. However, it was reported that while America sold, say, 100 F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan it only supplied engines parts for 40, so while Taiwan had 100 jets, only a fraction could be in the air at one time. Is China overreacting, and is it time for the government to re-evaluate the way it approaches the Taiwan question?
Osnos is, by his own admission, not a Taiwan expert and certainly not an arms specialist. However, by his own evaluation Taiwan is quite far from the American consciousness. Sino-American relationship encompasses many complicated factors and among them, Taiwan is a very small part of it. Many American students are considering the very likely possibility that they will, in the course of their professional life, work in China. In addition, many congressmen are eager to avoid the Taiwan issue and to urge Taiwanese officials from causing an international crisis in order to manage much bigger and more pressing issues.
Reporting in China
When asked what were the biggest problems he encountered while reporting from China, he said that he feels that it is actually quite easy to be a reporter here. Of course, there still exist a few travel restrictions for foreign journalists, but the overall situation has improved dramatically (i.e. accessing information, officials, interviewing, travel, etc.)
In regard to the last point, I have heard a similar opinion from former New York Times reporter Howard French. According to French, reporting in China is hardly different than reporting elsewhere. All governments are, to a certain degree, antagonistic toward the media. Governments have a set interest in protecting their image and it is the role of media to find the shortcomings in government policy. It is the responsibility of a journalist to be relentless about seeking information, and many take pride in being something that governments are wary of. This is not to say that reporting in China is easy. All governments will make it difficult for journalists to obtain information, the methods may be different in China but it is by no means any worse than other countries.
Friday, January 22, 2010
The view of Massachussetts
Deviating slightly from my usual topics, I would like to make mention of the Massachusetts special election, which has dominated most political and US-oriented blogs and media sources. It is a story of a political upset and irony, as Obama’s political agenda is now threatened by the very forces that brought him to power: an electorate disillusioned with the status supporting the underdog candidate in a grassroots campaign.
Massachusetts, traditionally a Democratic enclave, recently had a special Senate election, which pitted the attorney-general, Democrat Martha Coakley, against little known state senator, Republican Scott Brown. It should be mentioned that the seat contested belonged to Ted Kennedy, who was the state’s ‘liberal lion’ in Senate for decades. After easily winning the Democratic nomination, Coakley settled in for an easy campaign while Brown aggressively toured the state, and has used his truck (which has picked up thousands of miles) as a symbol of his resolve to take back the ‘people’s seat’.
Coakley made a fatal miscalculation. Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to 1 in the state, but this is a misleading statistic. Registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans; the majority is undeclared or independent. Brown was politically savvy and took advantage of the widespread political frustration among this group.
Polls were counted around 11:30 am Beijing time showing that Brown emerged victorious (51.9% over Coakley’s 47.1% see NYT analysis), and the Massachuttan diaspora was in arms. Many were shocked that the state elected its first Republican senator in about 30 years, and many more were enraged that their fellow constituents would endanger President Obama’s political agenda. The significance of this election is that with Scott Brown’s victory, Democrats have lost their filabuster-proof hold over the Senate, posing dire consequences for Obama’s health care reform.
There has been mixed review from the media.
The Economists America blog, Democracy in America, discusses the decline of Obama’s rhetorical appeal:
The Wall Street Journal depicts a pessimistic outlook for Obama:
Asked whether Obama was having a bad day, Dunn laughed and asked: "Why? Because he's only got 59 votes in the Senate? Can we get a little perspective here, people?"
Massachusetts, traditionally a Democratic enclave, recently had a special Senate election, which pitted the attorney-general, Democrat Martha Coakley, against little known state senator, Republican Scott Brown. It should be mentioned that the seat contested belonged to Ted Kennedy, who was the state’s ‘liberal lion’ in Senate for decades. After easily winning the Democratic nomination, Coakley settled in for an easy campaign while Brown aggressively toured the state, and has used his truck (which has picked up thousands of miles) as a symbol of his resolve to take back the ‘people’s seat’.
Coakley made a fatal miscalculation. Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to 1 in the state, but this is a misleading statistic. Registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans; the majority is undeclared or independent. Brown was politically savvy and took advantage of the widespread political frustration among this group.
Polls were counted around 11:30 am Beijing time showing that Brown emerged victorious (51.9% over Coakley’s 47.1% see NYT analysis), and the Massachuttan diaspora was in arms. Many were shocked that the state elected its first Republican senator in about 30 years, and many more were enraged that their fellow constituents would endanger President Obama’s political agenda. The significance of this election is that with Scott Brown’s victory, Democrats have lost their filabuster-proof hold over the Senate, posing dire consequences for Obama’s health care reform.
There has been mixed review from the media.
The Economists America blog, Democracy in America, discusses the decline of Obama’s rhetorical appeal:
Oddly, the great orator's voice is beginning to grate. And it's not just me: op-ed columns have started to complain about his lack of audible passion and his monotonous cadences. Often his speechifying feels too cerebral and schoolmasterish. Welcome though it is to have a cool rationalist in the White House, a president must sometimes breathe in and express the national mood, even if this requires a bit of acting. President Obama must beware of becoming Professor Obama.I think there is some truth to this. It is easier to say “yes we can” than “we will wait and deliberate and weigh all the options before rushing into a decision,” which was fundamentally his response when asked why it was taking so long to come to a decision regarding Afghanistan. However, this is to be expected. I want to point out that while Obama has been an attractive campaigner himself, he has not been successful in using his appeal to help other candidates (in, for example, New Jersey and Virginia), much less an un-charismatic and under-prepared candidate such as Coakley.
The Wall Street Journal depicts a pessimistic outlook for Obama:
President Barack Obama suggested he's open to Congress passing a scaled-back health-care bill, potentially sacrificing much of his signature policy initiative as chaos engulfed Capitol Hill Wednesday.The New Yorker has been more merciful, blaming the unrealistic expectations surrounding Obama:
...
One day after losing their filibuster-proof Senate majority in a Massachusetts special election, exhausted Senate Democrats looked downtrodden as they filed into their weekly lunch in a second-floor room at the Capitol. "People are hysterical right now," said one Senate aide.
Ultimately, I think Obama’s real problem has been a familiar one, namely that, inadvertently or not, he overpromised and necessarily underdelivered. This is a problem, in some sense, that all presidents run into, since voters tend to attribute to the President far more power over the economy than he actually has. But the problem was exacerbated in Obama’s case by the rhetoric of his campaign—“yes, we can” sounds great, but it doesn’t mean that it’s easy to recover from the bursting of an eight-trillion-dollar housing bubble —and the hopes that people placed in him. I never understood the somewhat messianic qualities that certain voters ascribed to him: Obama has been exactly the kind of President I expected him to be (and the kind of President I hoped he would be), namely rational, pragmatic, thoughtful, and even-tempered. But clearly many voters—even, oddly enough, some of those who didn’t vote for him—expected a miracle worker. When they got a problem-solver instead, one with little authority over Congressional Democrats and no authority at all over obstructionist Republicans, they were disappointed.Ending things on a positive note, however, the Washington Post quoted the former White House communications director Anita Dunn:
Asked whether Obama was having a bad day, Dunn laughed and asked: "Why? Because he's only got 59 votes in the Senate? Can we get a little perspective here, people?"
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
China and Haiti
The earthquake and relief effort in Haiti have dominated the news in America. CCTV News has also conducted pieces on the Chinese relief effort and the stories of Chinese soldiers and relief workers in Haiti. Even though there have been several stories like this in from Chinese news sources, the coverage of Haiti has been noticeably less here.
James Fallows of The Atlantic has this to say on the subject:
In this post yesterday I quoted a reader's comparison of U.S. response to the Haitian disaster -- which for America is right next-door -- with the much more modest mainland Chinese response. The reader said that this was one sign of the difference in the overall dimensions of national influence between the US and China.
Then another reader -- rather, one of many -- pointed out that a reason for the difference might be that Haiti is one of the 20+ countries still to maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan, rather than with the PRC government in Beijing, thus dampening mainland Chinese enthusiasm. I also noted that, as of the time I posted, the announced contribution from Taiwan was also relatively modest - about half a million dollars.
Two updates since then: current reports show that the Taiwan government has committed at least $5 million to Haitian relief, with more possibly on the way. The PRC government has also added to its initial commitment. I have no interest in turning a historic catastrophe into an arena for mainland-Taiwan rivalry, nor do I think dollar-counts are the real point here. (After the Sichuan earthquake in May 2008, comparative donation-counts for big Chinese companies or famous Chinese people took a really unpleasant turn inside China, with campaigns of internet denunciation for those who seemed to be falling behind in the count.) Just updating the initial donation report, for the record.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Homosexuality in China
Recently, the article written by New Yorker journalist Margaret Talbot on the Supreme Court case in California challenging Proposition 8 has gotten considerable press. For those who have not read it, it is an interesting read and features an odd couple of litigators: Theodore Olson and David Boies, lawyers who argued on opposite sides during the historic Bush v. Gore case which gave the 2000 election to George W. Bush, have now found themselves fighting for the same cause.
Interestingly, this has coincided with news on homosexuality in China. According to the BBC, China's first gay pageant was shut down by police just hours before it began. From the BBC.com:
Organisers said police informed them it could not go ahead because they had not applied "according to the procedures".
Homosexuality was illegal in China until 1997, and officials described it as a mental illness until 2001.
The event's organiser, Ben Zhang, said he had been hoping the event would mark another step towards greater awareness of gay people in China.
I have very mixed feelings about this. One could feasibly (and quite accurately) state that in terms of recognizing the rights of homosexuals, China is quite far behind other countries. No form of civil unions are recognized and many homosexuals are fearful of coming out of the closet. At the same time, there is a clear absence of a right-wing, social-conservative political block in China as there exists in America. This was made clear to me last year when I was studying at Tsinghua university. For a class, I was watching Chinese language talk shows and discussing the issues with a teacher. One day, the issue of homosexuality came up during an episode of Tiger Talk (Yi Hu Yi Xi Tan) from Phoenix TV. Among the audience members, there was overwhelming sympathy and support for homosexuals. Even with the opposing side of the debate, there was no Bible waving or accusations of moral deviation. This is not to say that being homosexual in China is easier than in the US, but simply to raise the point that the nature of the debate is different. There is yet to be a Chinese Sarah Palin, but there are still many opponents of homosexuality here.
For someone who wants to look into this topic further, a good source is my friend and author of the blog Jonathan in China: An American in Shanghai, who has written numerous posts on this homosexuality in China (see, for example, this one).
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Multiple Races Recognized in Singapore
Children in Singapore can now select multiple races on their identification cards (i.e. Chinese-Malay, Indian-Chinese, etc.)
In Singapore, this has received mixed reviews as those of mixed racial backgrounds can have their ethnic identities legally declared. However, the 'dominant' race must still be selected. Others have sited the fact that racial identity determines the amount of subsidies a family receives, and has potential to be abused.
For mixed bloods in general, this comes as a relief, as many have criticized the "Choose one" instructions encountered when selecting race on most documents.
(This criticism has also been levied on the US Census Bureau)
Race option for kids
Jan 13, 2010
By Kor Kian Beng
INDIAN-CHINESE, Malay-Indian, Chinese-Malay or Eurasian-Chinese?
Parents from different races can soon pick these 'double-barrelled' race classifications for their newborns, said Senior Minister of State Ho Peng Kee in Parliament on Tuesday.
But in making the choice, they have to decide which of the two races is to come first when registering
This is to help the child identify better and be 'culturalised' with a particular race, he added.
He said the ICA will give more details of the proposed change in due course, as well as when it will take effect. He announced the change in his reply to Mr Hri Kumar Nair (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC), who had asked whether the Government would let parents of different races reflect both races on their children's identity cards.
Copyright The Straits Times
www.straitstimes.com the child's birth at the Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA), said Associate Professor Ho, of the Law and Home Affairs ministries.
Reactions to Google
By now, most have probably read this morning’s announcement by Google stating that it was a victim of a cyber attack in which numerous Google accounts belonging to China-based human rights activists were hacked. Currently, Google is planning on meeting with the Chinese government to negotiate an agreement allowing an “an unfiltered search engine within the law,” or it will consider leaving the China market altogether.
Given this event, along with censorship and filtering, and controversies over Google Books, I can understand their frustration.
The company’s message has met with mixed reactions. As expected, Google’s decision was lauded by human rights activists and free speech advocates alike. Others in China are silently smirking at the fact that someone is finally standing up to one of the world’s most infamous internet censors. However, as the New York Times reports, some also have questioned the business logic of such a decision:
However, the general reaction has been one of support. ChinaSMACK, a blog which translates popular discussions from Chinese chat rooms, recently translated Chinese netizens’ reaction to Google’s decision. The original post was critical, chastising Google for reacting so strongly while other Chinese sites did not make such a public display, and for not taking sufficient care of its users’ security. However, subsequent posts were supportive of Google, praising the company for putting morals before profit. The Wall Street Journal Blog in China has also done a piece on students in Beijing visiting the Google office and showing support by placing flowers on the logo in front.
Given this event, along with censorship and filtering, and controversies over Google Books, I can understand their frustration.
The company’s message has met with mixed reactions. As expected, Google’s decision was lauded by human rights activists and free speech advocates alike. Others in China are silently smirking at the fact that someone is finally standing up to one of the world’s most infamous internet censors. However, as the New York Times reports, some also have questioned the business logic of such a decision:
"While Google’s business in China is small, analysts say that the country could soon become one of the most lucrative Internet and mobile markets, and a withdrawal would significantly reduce Google’s long-term growth."The China Daily made a similar report, arguing that with a 33.1% share of China’s search engine industry, Google is going to losing out if it leaves the mainland. It quotes Tang Jun, the former Microsoft China CEO as saying, “"The decision is not a big deal for Chinese netizens, but this will be the most foolish decision in Google's history, To give up China means to give up half of the world."
However, the general reaction has been one of support. ChinaSMACK, a blog which translates popular discussions from Chinese chat rooms, recently translated Chinese netizens’ reaction to Google’s decision. The original post was critical, chastising Google for reacting so strongly while other Chinese sites did not make such a public display, and for not taking sufficient care of its users’ security. However, subsequent posts were supportive of Google, praising the company for putting morals before profit. The Wall Street Journal Blog in China has also done a piece on students in Beijing visiting the Google office and showing support by placing flowers on the logo in front.
With that said, I do not expect an uproar here. First of all, most Chinese use Baidu.com, a local search engine. Baidu has numerous functions, including a useful Chinese dictionary, rankings for popular music and music downloads (which it had before Google.cn came out with its own legal version), and a Baidu zhi dao (Baidu knows) which has answers to countless questions ranging from directions to definitions to where to get the best deal. It is what a large number of Chinese netizens use to find information (as reflected by the China Daily statistics). In addition, information controls, and sites blocked or shut down have almost become a way of life here. The blockage of a website is not viewed in terms such as liberty and human rights as it might be debated in the United States. Instead, it has simply become another nuisance not unlike a traffic jam; it is frustrating until you find a way around it.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Is America Going to Hell?
I am piggy-backing off of Howard French's blog by posting this article from James Fallows of The Atlantic discussing the necessity and possibility of reform in America. He covers several topics, including infrastructure, education, party politics and institutional reluctance to change. To some degree, the article is not much different than some of Thomas Friedman's work, comparing the stark contrasts between the United States and other countries (including developing countries) in terms of infrastructure and telecommunications. However, he takes a slightly different approach given his experience living abroad. He decries the sense of former glory and crumbling infrastructure that characterize many American cities. He also describes it through his correspondence with international students in America and his own experiences traveling to Europe as a young man.
When I was a schoolboy in California in the 1950s and ’60s, the freeways were new and big and smooth—like the new roads being built all across China. Today’s California freeways are cracked and crowded and old. A Chinese student I knew in Shanghai who has recently entered graduate school at UC Berkeley sent me a note saying that the famous San Francisco Bay Area seemed “beautiful, but run down.” I remember a similar reaction on arriving at graduate school in England in the 1970s and seeing the sad physical remnants—dimly lit museums, once-stately homes, public buildings overdue for repair—from a time when the society had bigger dreams and more resources than it could muster in the here and now. A Chinese friend who flew for the first time from Beijing to New York phoned soon after landing to complain about the potholed, traffic-jammed taxi ride from JFK to Manhattan. “When I was growing up, these bridges and roads and dams were a source of real national pride and achievement,” Stephen Flynn, the president of the Center for National Policy in Washington, who was born in 1960, told me. “My daughter was 6 when the World Trade Center towers went down, 8 when lights went off on the East Coast, 10 when a major U.S. city drowned—I saw things built, and she’s seen them fall apart.” America is supposed to be the permanent country of the New, but a lot of it just looks old.
While he outlines his critique of American polity, he still mentions the abundance of American existence: the material ownership of Americans both rich and poor, the cars, the television sets, the full diets. I believe this resonates with many who have lived abroad, especially in Asia. Yes, China is mass producing engineers, making massive strides in infrastructure, and has a ravenous appetite for Gucci bags, yet you still see material need all around you.
Monday, January 4, 2010
General Note on Mixed Blood Identity
There are certainly many ways to examine the mixed blood experience.
I recall attending the Midwest Asian American Student Union (MAASU) some years back as part of my university’s delegation. The workshop that left the deepest impression on me was on bi/multi-racial issues. I specifically remember one woman who raised the issue of appearance. She is of partial Japanese ancestry, but when I met her was hardly distinguishable from a Caucasian woman. When she would introduce herself as someone of Japanese descent, people’s reactions varied differently based largely, she perceived, on her appearance. If she approached others as I saw her with brown hair and fair skin, she would get a negative and repudiating response. However, there was a time when she had dyed her hair a darker shade and gotten quite tan, and she found that when she introduced herself as someone of Japanese descent again, the response was much more positive and accepting.
I discussed with many people at the conference the issue of language. Language of course has the intrinsic ability of bringing people together through interaction. In addition, language can also let the individual feel a connection to a culture. For people of somewhat ambiguous identities, language can act as a strong bond to a cultural identity. My personal experience with Chinese culture suggests this to be the case. First of all, Chinese (from PRC at least) commonly expect overseas Chinese to speak Chinese and be familiar with Chinese culture. I have heard several times the anecdote that describes an elderly Chinese who is adamant that Chinese children adopted into American families can speak Chinese. These stories were corroborated when in chatting with Chinese friends (young, university educated), they expressed to me their surprise, for similar reasons, when they met Chinese children adopted by American families who linguistically, culturally, etc. resemble American children.
With that said, for many Chinese it is still a shock to meet a Caucasian American/non-Asian speaking Chinese. Countless American friends have started commotions in China by merely saying ni hao, or hello in Chinese. I have also overheard Chinese friends and acquaintances express shock at the fact that non-Chinese can speak Chinese. This reaction has been jokingly referred to as the ‘talking-dog’ effect, or same reaction one would give to an English-speaking dog: complete and utter disbelief.
The reaction commonly evoked by many mixed bloods is initial curiosity at someone who looks different, but then familiarity when the individual introduces themselves as overseas Chinese or as part Chinese.
For example, today I went to the Silk market near where I work to pick up some winter clothes. It is usually considered a place where tourists are cheated, but it’s close and I am usually able to get a decent price regardless. I went to one deserted stall, planning to take advantage of the situation in order to get a good deal. Initially, the shop owner was determined to speak English to me even when I spoke to him in Chinese. However, the more we spoke the more he realized that we could better communicate in Chinese. As we chatted, I told him that I am American, but my father is Chinese from Guangdong and he introduced himself as from Anhui province, where I had actually visited during the October holiday. When we discussed price, it was clear that his perception of me had changed. I do not have so much hubris as to suggest that he viewed me as one of his own, but my actions clearly closed the cultural gap between us, and this was revealed by both his words and actions.
I recall attending the Midwest Asian American Student Union (MAASU) some years back as part of my university’s delegation. The workshop that left the deepest impression on me was on bi/multi-racial issues. I specifically remember one woman who raised the issue of appearance. She is of partial Japanese ancestry, but when I met her was hardly distinguishable from a Caucasian woman. When she would introduce herself as someone of Japanese descent, people’s reactions varied differently based largely, she perceived, on her appearance. If she approached others as I saw her with brown hair and fair skin, she would get a negative and repudiating response. However, there was a time when she had dyed her hair a darker shade and gotten quite tan, and she found that when she introduced herself as someone of Japanese descent again, the response was much more positive and accepting.
I discussed with many people at the conference the issue of language. Language of course has the intrinsic ability of bringing people together through interaction. In addition, language can also let the individual feel a connection to a culture. For people of somewhat ambiguous identities, language can act as a strong bond to a cultural identity. My personal experience with Chinese culture suggests this to be the case. First of all, Chinese (from PRC at least) commonly expect overseas Chinese to speak Chinese and be familiar with Chinese culture. I have heard several times the anecdote that describes an elderly Chinese who is adamant that Chinese children adopted into American families can speak Chinese. These stories were corroborated when in chatting with Chinese friends (young, university educated), they expressed to me their surprise, for similar reasons, when they met Chinese children adopted by American families who linguistically, culturally, etc. resemble American children.
With that said, for many Chinese it is still a shock to meet a Caucasian American/non-Asian speaking Chinese. Countless American friends have started commotions in China by merely saying ni hao, or hello in Chinese. I have also overheard Chinese friends and acquaintances express shock at the fact that non-Chinese can speak Chinese. This reaction has been jokingly referred to as the ‘talking-dog’ effect, or same reaction one would give to an English-speaking dog: complete and utter disbelief.
The reaction commonly evoked by many mixed bloods is initial curiosity at someone who looks different, but then familiarity when the individual introduces themselves as overseas Chinese or as part Chinese.
For example, today I went to the Silk market near where I work to pick up some winter clothes. It is usually considered a place where tourists are cheated, but it’s close and I am usually able to get a decent price regardless. I went to one deserted stall, planning to take advantage of the situation in order to get a good deal. Initially, the shop owner was determined to speak English to me even when I spoke to him in Chinese. However, the more we spoke the more he realized that we could better communicate in Chinese. As we chatted, I told him that I am American, but my father is Chinese from Guangdong and he introduced himself as from Anhui province, where I had actually visited during the October holiday. When we discussed price, it was clear that his perception of me had changed. I do not have so much hubris as to suggest that he viewed me as one of his own, but my actions clearly closed the cultural gap between us, and this was revealed by both his words and actions.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Maiden Post
As indicated by the title, the author of this blog is what is known as bi-racial or mixed blood, and this blog is intended to discuss issues concerning China, Asia and the West through this perspective. One with multiracial heritage is always able to get close to others without them putting up their natural defenses/reaction usually observed when facing what they perceive as an outsider. For example, I was born and raised in the United States, and unsurprisingly it is relatively easy for me to get close to an American and understand his or her perspective. However, although I am American, my Chinese roots can always close the distance between me and a Chinese individual. These factors, in addition to having lived, studied and worked in Asia for some time, allow me to offer, the intention is, an interesting and unique perspective.
Of course, this blog is not intended to cover only issues concerning multi-ethnic backgrounds or multicultural issues, although these are issues in which I am interested and will offer my opinion when they arise. I also intend to share my thoughts on the social and political issues concerning Asia, and mostly China, that emerge.
More to come and happy new year.
Of course, this blog is not intended to cover only issues concerning multi-ethnic backgrounds or multicultural issues, although these are issues in which I am interested and will offer my opinion when they arise. I also intend to share my thoughts on the social and political issues concerning Asia, and mostly China, that emerge.
More to come and happy new year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
