There are a couple of specific issues I find so appalling about academia and the university on everything with China. First, they are the polite plausible deniability apologists for the CCP. Mind you they are not Global Times apologists they are more pernicious because 1/n
It does not sound like rank apologism. They will say things like"we are concerned about..." or "human rights issues continue to..." but they continue to treat CCP money like any other dollar and do nothing to actually challenge the problem or put anything at risk. 2/n
Consequently out of that same mouth they will call for engagement and need to work together and better understand. This is a more dangerous form of apologia because while it may nod at the problem it urges speeding up on the road to hell. There is a second season 3/n
Second, they are rank hypocrites. Ask them about politicians, political parties, or banks and they will demand transparency and clean money (as well they should). Ask them or universities to do the same and the stuttering begins. We have clear cut cases of major influential 4/n
University accepting and knowing they have accepted laundered straw company corrupt proceed donations. In others, cooperating with PLA front companies. The hypocrites demand of others what they refuse to do. There is one final reason. 5/n
Third, they refuse to consider the absolute failure of their advice for the past thirty years. All of their advice has been tried. Engagement, everything else came from and was pushed by universities. Yet we face a China not illiberal and intolerant than anything since Mao 6/n
What is the University solution? Keep doing the same thing. There has to be a point where universities and professors stand up and change their behavior rather than just throwing another round table with the same boring people that have hardly been to China and repeat 7/n
The same tired drivel trust bright is to where we are now. Everyone can look around and realize how it of touch the University and professors are with reality. Moral bastions you are not
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My two youngest are attending English language school for the FIRST TIME EVER. Everything else has been 100% Chinese. At the beginning of the year my kids took a standardized test with all their classmates. Now let me remind you my kids have NEVER gone to school in English 1/n
They scored in top 10% in English. Note I'm not a tiger Dad. We have kids books and I try to limit their screen time but that's pretty much the extent. No tutors or cram schools. I asked the teacher "how the hell did they score so high they've never taken an English class?" 2/n
"Do they read?" "Uhh yes we have like kids books we got as gifts. We don't let them spend every waking moment on a device." "There you go." "That's it?" What stunned me more than anything if my kids should not be in the top 10%. They shouldn't. What stuns me here is how 3/n
So since the NYT has done a story on China Moly, a Congolese mine, and Hunter Biden I've been getting pinged a bunch and I think there is a key aspect that needs to be fleshed out. Hunter's firm really played no role here BUT (drum roll) that actually makes it worse 1/n
China Molybendum is the key Chinese player here is a major Chinese mining firm. They mine a variety of metals which are frequently found together like copper, tungsten, and cobalt. They are listed in HK and one of the largest globally in their category of preferred metals 2/n
Beijing had given China Moly and other Chinese firms marching orders about preferred sectors and investments. For China Moly that meant EV inputs like cobalt. Freeport McMoran a US company mining similar metal portfolio owned the Congolese mine producing copper and cobalt 3/n
There's a very simple dividing line: if you have business in China you don't talk about fight club. If you don't have business in China you talk about fight club. Marriot blocks refuses to host conference in Prague because they have business in China. 1/n
Li Na and Emma Raducanu say nothing because they have business and safety issues in China. US media outlet won't talk about employees of US media outlets imprisoned in China because they either want to stay in China or they want back into China. Business interest: ✅. 2/n
Universities, professors, and think tanks won't really say anything about China other than nibbling and the edges because they basically pay the bills and get tenure with full price Chinese students. That's a business interest. 3/n
So with the China journalist story back in the news I'm going to tell a story I don't think I have ever told completely, told parts of it but I tell it now so hopefully the context and my position makes more sense. Here goes 1/n
I had officially been let go from my job at Peking University and word was leaking out in the Chinese language community though I had not announced it publiclly because I felt doing so would put myself and my family at risk which was entirely accurate. 2/n
During this time, I received a speaking invitation from Xinhua for a conference in Hainan. This was very puzzling. Word was spreading rather rapidlyin the Chinese language world appearing on chat boards so they had to know so why were they inviting me when they clearly knew 3/n
So a short thread on the US China Zoom call and that other reason you come to Twitter epistemology (a big word that means how do we know what we think we know). So here goes. I rightly deride all the arm chair (yes looking right at journos and other Galaxy Brains) sophistry 1/n
Discussing the summits and yes I said the same under Trump. There are two basic reasons for this. First, most meetings of this kind produce very little new information. Read the output from the China side and the US side and it was like watching reruns you've seen before 2/n
Second, the information received is generally very poor quality so even if there is some shred of new information it is very poor quality signal. How many times do politicians promise things they never intend to deliver even in the best of circumstances? Armchair analysts 3/n
As I have detailed repeatedly, my complaint about journalism is not that they have an view point they want to push but rather they are awful at their fundamental job on gathering facts about complex news issues and events. The reason this matters is it provides very VERY 1/n
Distorted understanding and importantly solutions to problems. More importantly for them it sets their preferred candidates up for failure because they have absolutely no chance of providing the absurdly simple solutions provided by journalistic narratives. Couple examples 2/n
For the last four years the answer to any foreign policy issue was "stupid Trump". What was sold was that new leadership would be able to solve these problems. Anyone that wasn't cursed with a Galaxy Journo Brain knew these issues were deep seeded going back decades 3/n