China Curtails Academic Freedom of Chinese Students and Their Professors in the U.S.

 

For more than a decade, we have witnessed an erosion of political freedoms and civil liberties across the world amidst a democratic backsliding toward autocracy, a system of government in which a single person (the autocrat) possesses absolute power to weaken institutions such as an independent judiciary that sustain the democratic system. At the same time, a surveillance-based economy, and anti-democratic threats this poses have thrived. 

This quote is from the abstract of an article on illiberalism I wrote that was published  August 10, 2020.  In the article I highlight China, where the mass surveillance of its citizenry is the most aggressive and invasive in the world. For example, using a range of personal data accessed by the government, citizens and businesses are supervised, judged, and rated as part of a “social credit system” that gives them “trustworthy” scores. Low scores ban them from any number of activities, including accessing financial markets or travelling by air or train. 

Since he took power in 2012, China’s strongman leader, Xi Jinping, has created  a “ruthless mix of autocracy, technology and dynamism“ to further his agenda, a hybrid form of capitalism enabled by the “institutional advantages” whereby China’s strong one-party state can harness its economic and social resources to meet critical objectives (Xi’s New Economy. Economist, August 15, 2020). A major ingredient in this mix is in “all-seeing Communist Party surveillance” that seeks to maximize the party’s information and control over its citizenry and quickly crunch any dissent. 

While China’s negative influence on academics around the world is a longstanding concern, a most recent move is posing unprecedented threats to Chinese students’ and their teachers’ freedom of expression, as well as their safety and security in U.S. colleges and universities.  As reported by the Wall Street Journal’s Lucy Cramer, China’s new national security law, which prohibits “secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces,” imposed on Hong Kong, is extending China’s surveillance apparatus beyond its borders.   In the 2018- 2019 school year, almost 370,000 Chinese students and 7,000 from Hong Kong were in enrolled in U.S. universities and colleges. Students from China account for more foreign students in the United States than any other country. Many of them take classes on Chinese politics, law, and culture to understand their country and how it is seen in the world. 

Professors who teach Chinese politics and related courses interviewed by the Wall Street Journal including at Princeton University, the Harvard Business School,  the University of Pennsylvania, and Amherst College, reported taking measures to protect their students and themselves such as giving  warnings that their courses may cover  materials considered politically sensitive by China, blind grading, and using codes instead of students’ names to protect their identities. Because during the corona pandemic many courses will be taught online and students from China and Hong Kong will connect with their U.S. courses via video links, some academics fear their classes could be accessed by Chinese authorities. 

Avery Goldstein at the University of Pennsylvania’s political science department reported that he plans to send out the syllabus to students enrolled in his course with a warning that the course may cover sensitive information. He worries that a security breach of his online classes might jeopardize his students’ safety, as well as his own, if he were to travel to China. Rory Truex, an assistant professor who teaches Chinese politics at Princeton, noted that China has always been hostile to academics along with Western journalists and that the new law amps up the hostility.  “If we, as a Chinese teaching community, out of fear stop teaching things like Tiananmen or Xinjiang or whatever sensitive topic the Chinese government doesn’t want us talking about, if we cave, then we’ve lost.” 

Copyright CourtMetrics 2020. All rights reserved.

Comments

  1. Unknown1:35 PM

    A complete set of employee engagement tools to connect, collaborate, understand, measure & optimize engagement for a superior employee experience. https://www.peoplehum.com/employee-engagement-software

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Top 10 Reasons for Performance Measurement

There is a growing demand of “show me the data” from citizens and taxpayers, legislators, executive agencies, oversight boards and communities – all of whom exchange money and other support (e.g., trust and confidence) for services -- that courts can ill afford to ignore. Courts need to measure their performance to meet the demand for public accountability. But the benefits of court performance extend beyond accountability including improved prediction, better understanding and control, influence, a sharpened focus on what is important, and discovery of better practices. Objective performance data is central to good management practices like strategic planning, performance-based budgeting, Balanced Scorecards, Total Quality Management (TQM), and Six Sigma. Performance measures allow court leaders and managers, policymakers, legislators and the public to evaluate court programs’ inputs (the resources allocated), outputs (direct results of program or service activities) and outcomes (bro
Read more

The “What Ifs” Along the Road in the Quest of a Justice Index

What if we could draw an indicator of the “health” of the justice systems throughout the United States – a Justice Index - from readily available public data that is impartial, reliable, objective and comparable, let’s say the amount of time that criminal defendants spend in custody without a trial, or even without any access to legal or justice services? Or the bail amounts imposed on misdemeanor defendants?   This kind of a measure would not be perfect – no measure is – but it would be something, better than nothing. It would address questions of fairness and efficient use of public resources. That is, a criminal defendant languishing in jail awaiting trial suffers, at the least, a delay in justice. He or she is also occupying a jail bed and spending taxpayers’ money. What if we then join this measure with another meaningful indicator of the health of our justice systems in counties and states, let’s say the degree to which jurisdictions prosecute domestic violence cases.
Read more

Q & A: Outcome vs. Measure vs. Target vs. Standard

Q: Those of who write and speak about court performance measurement rely on their share of jargon -- and it's often confusing. What are the differences among the terms “outcome,” “measure,” “target” and “standard”? A: Socrates said that the beginning of wisdom is definition. We’ll see. Outcomes are the benefits or changes for the intended beneficiaries of a court’s programs and services. Outcomes may relate to knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, behavior, condition or status of the program participants or recipients of services. Examples include litigants' satisfaction with a court's courtesy and responsiveness, success of probation, time to case disposition, clarity of orders, integrity of case files, percent of mediation agreements, enforcement of orders, and perceived fairness of proceedings, as well as percent of expected expenditures and percent of revenues received. Outcomes should not be confused with the activities of those who run the court. (See the October 1
Read more