Remind me - who was it that said "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere?" No one is saying LBJ needs to "focus" on what's going on in China. No one is even asking him to make it his "battle." He's been given the chance to speak on it, multiple times, and he's remained silent every time. He's had plenty of time to educate himself, and he's either refused to do so or refused to speak about his findings. You can comment on something without making it your focus or battle. If LBJ truly cared about social justice, he wouldn't tuck his tail between his legs and run the other direction any time China comes up. He's about social justice when it helps his brand/bottom line, but not when it hurts his brand/bottom line.
15 minutes of research leads to an unequivocal "[uck fay] China". Unless you are chasing those sweet, sweet yuans.
I believe it would instantly make China become the focus, and then help to undermine the other focus. In some ways, it's becoming the focus now. But it doesn't matter, because someone else can focus on China, so it isn't an injustice anywhere issue.
I disagree completely. Him choosing NOT to speak up is making it become the focus now. Had he just said what he should have said a long time ago, it likely would have never come up for him again. But he knew it would cost him $$$, so he kept quiet. And now Enes Kanter is going to be wearing shoes that show Xi Jinping putting a crown on LeBron's head during their game tonight. Again, it's much more the focus now because he's chosen not to speak up.
And it's his fault it's now extremely in focus? And this is a bad thing? I think you've over simplified the issue, and are now mad for it arriving where you want it to be.
He could have made a choice to prevent it from becoming extremely in focus. He didn't make that choice. So, yeah, it's kind of his fault. I don't think it's a bad thing he's being called out, if that's what you're asking. I think it's a bad thing that he won't speak about it because he is scared of losing support in China and the dollars associated with that. Okay. I think you just like arguing with me for the sake of arguing. I'm not "mad" about anything. As a noted fan of LBJ, I'm bothered by LBJ only speaking out on social issues when it positively impacts his bank account and intentionally avoiding the topic when it negatively impacts his bank account.
And I think you are minimizing the difficulty of being a high profile anything, and having a platform. You can think it is all monetary related, but that takes a negative view. But you're a very negative person, so it is at least characteristic. He's taken a local stance. And it's been highlighted. His noncommittal nature on a global thing has been highlighted, and by taking no stance, highlighted even more. I see a lot of gain here, for a lot of parties, and none that help China.
China's success at home isn't based on their ability in school so much as their political capital. I'm not sure what the purpose of this opinion piece is, but, I can sum up the counter for their author fairly succinctly: "we're different, and not trying to be similar."
In my experience of having taught at least over a dozen Chinese nationals as undergrads and having had a handful of Chinese nationals as graduate student peers, I think we're doing fine and while they may have a trick or two to share, we have a lot we could show them as well. Creativity and problem-solving are not emphasized. Expediency seems to be over-emphasized. JMO, from my personal experience with Chinese nationals in an education setting.
This was exactly a point I was going to emphasize. The rote memorization stuff is heavy in places like India, as well. There are about a million things to say about education, but we aren't doing quite as poorly as people think, even if there are some very needed structural changes.
I have been, yes. And 11, 10, and 9 year old kids, who, if I'm not mistaken, are also considered elementary school age.
Out of curiosity, and if you are willing to share, when was your experience teaching at least over a dozen Chinese nationals as undergrads, and when were you graduate student peers with a handful of them? I ask because the author seems to be pointing to trends that have really started to surface in the last 3-5 years.
Teaching: 2 to 4 at a time, as regular students and exchange students in general education classes of 30 to 100 in an American university, between 2010 and 2014. Peer: University of Tennessee, in the late 00's.
