,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Piece has been widely circulating and seen a lot of hand wringing about racial profiling and blaming Trump, but I think there is a profound lack of contextual understanding. Having worked in a similar Chinese university for nearly a decade, allow me 1/n nytimes.com/2019/04/14/wor…
1. You are not a senior academic of any kind anywhere in China unless you are a good, loyal, and eager executioner for the CCP. Period. Full. Stop. No exceptions. Many are Party members. At the very least they will demonstrate the most administrative eagerness to match 2/n
What the university is doing with Party objectives. There are no exceptions to this rule in modern China. 2. The face senior academics and scholars have inside and outside China are frequently two poles apart. I know of one Chinese scholar quoted in international media 3/n
who is a Party member and ardent supporter who cites Han racial superiority theories frequently but would blend right in to an international setting unbeknownst to most. Even the scholar today quoted in the NYT article said he never worked with the military but even 4/n
minimal background work showed he worked with PLA groups. 3. I honestly don't know what to do about these cases this broader issue. Setting aside students, who I believe should have minimal restrictions across almost all academic sectors, I don't know what you should do about 5/n
professors from China. We know that China is targeting academia. Spying cases have originated from Chinese think tanks and universities. It is simple willful ignorance to believe it isn't happening. However, that does not mean you should stop all Chinese professors visa's 6/n
Intelligence services from Australia to the UK and Canada have talked about the overwhelming intelligence tsunami China is bringing to bear. In other words, China says they are doing it and others say they are doing it. I have long argued that academia needs to play 7/n
a greater role than saying it doesn't happen, holding a view of the pure academic that is incompatible with the reality of the Chinese academy, and risk letting others define the risk parameters and debate. You may not like this world, but this is the world you are dealing with.
