Tiananmen Now Seems Distant to China’s Students

Jonathan Ansfield contributed reporting. Huang Yuanxi and Zhang Jing contributed research.

 

BEIJING — On April 30, the cell phones of the 32,630 students at Peking University, a genteel institution widely regarded as one of China’s top universities, buzzed with a text message from the school administration. It warned students to “pay attention to your speech and behavior” on Youth Day because of a “particularly complex” situation.

 

Campaign posters for student elections at Peking University in Beijing. The university was a hotbed of political activity in 1989.

 

Today’s Chinese students seem uninterested in protest or ideology. “You know where the line is drawn,” one student said.

 

Few students had to puzzle over the meaning. Youth Day, on May 4, commemorates a 1919 student protest against foreign imperialism and China’s weakness in resisting it. Seventy years later, in 1989, students from Peking University were again massing in the center of Beijing, demanding democracy. The student movement shook the ruling Communist Party to its core and ended with a military crackdown and hundreds of deaths.

 

And if a student today proposed a pro-democracy protest?

 

“People would think he was insane,” said one Peking University history major in a recent interview. “You know where the line is drawn. You can think, maybe talk, and think about the events of 1989. You just cannot do something that will have any public influence. Everybody knows that.”

 

Most students also appear to accept it. For 20 years, China’s government has made it abundantly clear that students and professors should stick to the books and stay out of the streets. Students today describe 1989 as almost a historical blip, a moment too extreme and traumatic ever to repeat.

 

But whether democracy still inspires them is a more complex question.

 

Interviews with students and teachers at Peking University, as with experts on China here and abroad, draw a layered portrait of today’s students: disinclined to protest, but also lacking the economic grievances that helped ignite protests in 1989; proud of China’s achievements and flocking to the Communist Party, but seldom driven by ideology.

 

They are disturbed by government corruption and censorship and are eager to study in the West, especially the United States. And despite the government’s attempts to wipe the 1989 protests from Chinese history, some have learned what happened. All but one of eight Peking University students interviewed for this article, for instance, said they had managed to download an acclaimed — and banned — documentary on the Tiananmen protests and view it in their dorm rooms.

 

“There is a stereotypical view that students are not interested in democracy. I don’t buy it,” Cheng Li, research director of the China Center at the Brookings Institution, said in an interview. “At the very least, they have a mixed opinion of the Communist Party.”

 

Xia Yeliang, a Peking University professor, said many students supported democracy in theory but did not want to risk their futures to fight for it. Students joke that they will get involved once pro-democracy forces gather steam, he said. “A rather high percentage of students are not interested in politics,” he said. “They say, ‘We know this is a good thing, but what relation does it have to us?’ They think about their personal affairs, how to get a job, how to go abroad.”

 

Even the mouthpiece of the Communist Party, People’s Daily, laments a general lack of idealism on campus. “Many university students are clearly very utilitarian in their thinking,” People’s Forum, a magazine published by People’s Daily, complained this month after a conducting a student survey. “Everything is based on ‘whether or not it is useful to me,’ ” the magazine said.

 

In fact, today’s students have more to lose than did protesters 20 years ago. Then, university students believed that their futures were endangered by a soaring inflation rate of 28 percent, rampant government corruption and shrinking job prospects, according to a 2001 book on the Tiananmen movement by Dingxin Zhao, a University of Chicago sociology professor. Many had lost hope in the government’s economic reforms.

 

Today, even students who criticize Communist rule are gratified by China’s great strides. “Sometimes we don’t like the policies of our government,” said Wang Yongli, fourth-year physics major. “But on the other hand, nowadays we are proud of the country and the government because they have moved so many people to a better life.”

 

The Communist Party is careful to cultivate this image, while seeking to defuse longings for democracy by vowing to govern “democratically.”

 

Officials say they oppose Western-style multiparty democracy as wrong for China, but embrace the idea of consultation, public review and balloting under party rule. China will open up the political system, step by step, as the country becomes wealthier and more stable, officials promise.

 

Some China analysts suggest that student discontent could rise if the current economic crisis clouds their futures. China sends nine times as many students to institutions of higher education now as it did in 1989, and competition for good jobs is fierce. Nearly one in four graduates last year could not find work, Xinhua, the state-run news agency, reported.

But since 1989, Communist Party leaders have realized that they ignore youth at their peril. The government is now trying to ease job anxieties with training programs and incentives for graduates to work in rural areas. “If you are worried, then I am more worried than you,” Prime Minister Wen Jiabao told one student group in December.

The party has also ratcheted up recruitment and political education, making college students the party’s fastest-growing segment, said Susan L. Shirk, a political science professor at the University of California, San Diego. More than 8 percent of all students were party members in 2007, compared with less than 1 percent in 1989. At elite institutions like Peking University, percentages are much higher.

Some of those students echo the party’s line that Western-style democracy does not suit China. “China has a large population, and education has a long way to go,” said Song Chao, a Peking University ecology major. “Considering that, we need to put some regulations on people. The major task for China now is development.”

Others hope to nudge the party toward reform. “Of course, if we could become a democratic society, we would like that,” said another history major and party aspirant. “But this is not something you can achieve by radical means. What if there is chaos?”

But a majority of students seek party membership not as an ideological statement but rather as a means to a better job, the survey published by People’s Forum concluded. At Peking University, many students say they nap through the university’s much mocked, though mandatory, political thought classes. “Even the teachers know they are teaching rubbish,” one senior said.

Most students will make such statements only anonymously because government control of campus speech remains tight. Professors say some students are assigned to report to administrators if they hear teachers adopting antigovernment lines. Most students interviewed for this article did not want to be identified, saying their comments might be negatively noted in their files.

Five years ago, the university shut down a computer bulletin board — a vibrant hub of information for 300,000 users — after the central government’s education minister complained that it did not always reflect “the right view.” Students say they are careful about what they write on the new, restricted and monitored board because their identities can be traced.

Surveys show that four of five university students still rely on China’s heavily censored media for their news. But in a digital age when nearly 70,000 Chinese students are studying in the United States and roughly 163,000 foreign students study at Chinese universities, walls against information are porous.

One senior recalled an excruciating roundtable discussion with foreign journalists who visited Peking University in 2007 and asked about the government crackdown on student demonstrators in 1989. “They always ask about this June 4 incident, and we just keep silent,” she said. “It is not because we don’t want to talk. It is because we have no idea what exactly happened!

“I felt a little bit humiliated because we don’t know our own history,” she said. “So I went to the library and I read about June 4. Basically, everything was written by foreign journalists.”

The curbs on public debate can reduce even political controversies on campus to the status of rumors. Two Peking University professors were among the first to sign Charter 08, an online pro-democracy manifesto released in December and backed by many intellectuals.

After signing, Professor Xia, the economist, said he was forced to resign from positions at two research institutes. His fellow signer, He Weifang, a celebrated law professor, was transferred to an obscure college in China’s far west. Professor He’s exile was news overseas. But much like the coming anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown, it drew little notice from students.

One student defended the professor with an anonymous post on the campus’s computer bulletin board. “The day will come,” he wrote, “when Professor He can go where he wants.”

 

纽约州一直是民主党的天下,Ithaca更是自由开放的代表,大学生又是Obama的忠实群体,所以几乎很难听到支持McCain的声音,两边的争辩更是不可能了,一边倒的态势只会产生搞笑版的Palin.听不到来自另一方的辩驳,我也许会觉得有点遗憾,但也让我从民主党候选人竞选时起就相信Obama会一路走下去,结果是我的朋友们赌赢了.我留意到这样的数据:在Tompkins County(也就是在Ithaca注册投票的)支持Obama的人近70%,这足以说是压倒性优势了,纽约州对Obama的支持率是62%,而尽管Obama获得了2倍于McCain的有效选票,但全国支持率实际是53%,完全不像我所处的环境这样偏颇.

 

美国大学生们对于竞选总统的关注其实是很值得捉摸的.年轻人对于政治,社会的无所谓是非常普遍的,当下这个时代就不是一个革命的时代,很少有年轻人口口声声念叨这个国家会如何如何.之前我还在想为什么学校里的朋友很少主动谈及当下的经济危机,反倒是国内的朋友常问起我.但对于这次竞选,应该说学生群体的关注程度相当高.每次的总统候选人辩论,大家都会聚在一起看电视,学校里的民主党和共和党俱乐部也会每周组织讲座,投票当天还有专车去投票.Obama自然也以其年轻而试图抓住年轻人的心,Facebook上常见他的广告.回报是可想而知的:18-29岁的选民中66%投给了Obama.

 

而最令我意外的,是获知Obama当选的这个夜晚.在11点过后的几十分钟之内,大家尖叫着,奔跑着,从各自的宿舍汇集到Flagpole,在一起相互拥抱,合影,狂欢,高呼Obama的名字,高呼USA,高唱美国国歌.学生们的爱国激情是最单纯,最自然,也最冲动的. 后来的确有警察光顾,让我感到某种不安,但毕竟是在美国,大家也只是庆祝,没有任何意外冲突,相安无事.这样的场景恐怕人一生中都很难碰到,或者说这样的场景实在是久违了,只有在文革中的红卫兵,60年代西方的学生运动,6.4天安门广场的学生中找到过这样的身影,而那些历史片断都是我所质疑的.但这个夜晚,我确实身临其境,感受着他们的快乐,见证着这一历史性时刻.哪怕只是为了这一刻,我来到美国,来到这里读大学也是有意义的.若不是第二天有考试和演讲,我肯定会彻夜难眠地记录下我的感受.

 

当然,我从来就不是能够持续狂热的人.多数人的欢喜,自然伴有少数人的失望.Obama个人以及民主党的胜利,或许带给人们更多的希望,但面对1930年以来最严重的经济危机,今后的路仅靠乐观是完全不够的.Bush留下的烂摊子就要全权交给Obama处理了,这对后者不公平但是没办法,但愿美国人是选对了人.学生的政治热情又能持续多久也有待考察,我不希望只有一夜的昙花一现.但现实是除了第二天的政治课用了整节课谈论大选,发现学校前晚庆祝的消息和视频已经被放上了CNN和Youtube,认真地看了Obama和McCain在结果揭晓之后的演讲(应该说两人都讲得很好,Obama的感召力和McCain的大度让人印象深刻)以外,学校似乎很快又恢复了以往的平静.

 

Bush的失败无疑是共和党此次竞选的阴影.尽管McCain再三强调他与Bush不同,但民众却很难再信任共和党,宁肯换民主党试试,也就是选党不选人的逻辑.近期的金融危机更是对共和党的打击,它不仅再次表明Bush把国家推进了深渊,也让更多人呼唤改变,而这正是Obama的竞选口号.无论是怎样的改变,无论改变能有多大,如此应时应景的口号,自然能够赢得民众的心.从Obama当选的那一刻起,改变也随之到来.

 

Obama的当选应该是意料之中的事,但当这样的历史时刻真地到来的时候,当美国这样一个至今种族问题依然严重的国家,由人民自己选出了第一位黑人总统的时候,还是有点难以置信:今后的几年里,人们将随口叫出President Obama了!他的当选是少数裔美国人的胜利,同时也是美国社会包容性的最好证明.但他的当选并不能掩盖这个社会依然存在的种族歧视和因种族差异造成的不平等,他的当选也不完全因为他是黑人,而是他相比McCain更适合在此时成为总统.越来越多的人把Obama和Kennedy相提并论,自然缘于他们强大的领袖气质,都是敢于挑战多数的少数人,但Obama是否也会有和Kennedy一样的结局呢,多少令人担忧.

 

我一向很怀疑个人魅力在一个民主的制度里到底有多大作用.尽管Obama本人确实很有领袖气质,聪明,自信,沉稳,善辨,所有的拉票,演讲,辩论让他有如明星一般.但我还是担心明星政治是否在造成某种假象,日后人们恐怕也会发现Obama的政策有很多问题.就在竞选结果出来的第二天,股市的行情并没有好转,各种指数依然在下跌,也算印证了我的怀疑.

 

无论怎样,祝贺Obama,祝福美国,相信他们是在国家危难的时刻用民主的方式选择了他们最需要的总统.

 

General Education

 

The idea of general education has just been brought to Chinese universities these years by Chinese intellectuals, who experienced American universities and colleges. Some of the best Chinese universities are endeavoring to learn from American counterparts, I observe the improvement is subtle without changing utilitarian social atmosphere and university educational system. There is still a long way to go if Chinese universities wish to compete against American colleges.

In some sense, the Chinese university system kills students. As written before, students may not get into their choice of major, but are placed into what their examinations scores reach. More disappointingly, the chances for major transferring are very limited, based on one’s GPA, a test for transfer and an interview. Except in Shanghai, there is no way for students to transfer to other universities, resulting in many ridiculous cases, such as students re-taking the National University Entrance Examination in order to get into another university or just another major.

Apart from personal interests, the reason why many students want to transfer is that most students dream of getting into those hot majors: business, management and law, which both society and parents assume would ensure students of getting well-paid jobs after graduation. Such majors have the highest score lines in the entrance exam, and the lowest opportunity for transferring into. In comparison, American students are practical as well, but at least one needs to go to a law school for a graduate education before becoming a lawyer, and many liberal arts colleges resist business major in the name of liberal arts education.

Most Chinese universities understand general education as more classes added to take outside one’s major, so there are many introduction courses opened to all students. Because of the introduction nature of the class, one may use a semester to learn the complete history of Chinese philosophy without reading one or two classical books. Not many students or teachers really take it seriously, as students have already concentrated on their majors, so more extra knowledge feels like a burden.

Fudan University has made much more progress than other Chinese universities in terms of general education. It has set up a Fudan College for freshmen especially. For the first time, freshmen share dorms not based on their majors. In the first year, there are not too many major required classes, leaving space for students to choose what they want to learn. Both my student discussion classes were in my general education class about Daoism. I appreciate what Fudan has improved, as I enjoyed my freshman year in many interesting classes with inspiring professors. However, many things are not easy to put through with only one university’s effort.

General education is not something new to the American college, as it has already put into practice for more than 100 years. Each school varies in specific classes, but shares common devices and the same goal: a well-rounded education. If it is not required to take math, I would not meet Prof. Seltzer, who used his body to illustrate a calculus concept and had tricky quizzes with random guessing bonuses. If not for small classes, I would never have had thought-provoking discussions, even debates, in class, until I took Revolutionary China and Education and Society.

Through general education, the American college helps students find what they want to learn, and motivates them to love what they learn. There are so many opportunities for students to take advantage of, such as “undecided” majors, self-planned majors, and transferring to other majors or schools, all supporting a search for the most suitable education. As a comparatively more flexible system, American colleges encourage students to explore their potential talents a great deal.      American general education is not without attack from professional trends, as some liberal arts colleges started to provide extra vocational programs. Ithaca College, which states itself as “blending liberal arts and professional programs of study” (The Ithacan), illustrates a good example. In theory it sounds perfect, while in reality it seems implausible. Many students on campus now are “disengaged from pursuing more fundamental subjects or current issues because their time is devoted to their specific major” (The Ithacan). Some students are aware of major concentration as a problem, as one said, “[we need to] be teaching a lot of different disciplines for more than just a reason than ‘this is a good career for me’” (The Ithacan), but others do not consider it a problem. Some alumni also said that the education was great for their jobs, but they wish they had taken a broader range of courses. Again, “the professional culture on campus is overwhelming, which isn’t necessarily a negative thing, but support for a culture of broad, liberal education is not as great” (The Ithacan).