ON APRIL 5, Thomas Jefferson rolled over in his grave. Yang Jiechi, the ambassador to the United States from the People's Republic of China, strutted down the University's red carpet and delivered an address in Jefferson's Rotunda.
That Yang came to present his views should excite many at the University. Indeed, the speech filled the Rotunda Dome Room with supporters, opponents and students of Chinese policy. As George Gilliam, Director of Special Programs for the Miller Center (the event's listed sponsor) said, it benefits the University to invite different speakers to present their sometimes-controversial points of view. "Promoting discussion among well-informed people is important," he said. And as history professor Chen Jian put it, "The visit represents a good opportunity to learn about the world. Especially because the dynamic between U.S.-China is arguably the world's most important bilateral relations, the University is completely legitimate in inviting the ambassador to talk about Chinese policy."
Indeed, the University should invite speakers with expertise and interesting perspectives. But by hosting Yang, the University has crossed an important line between pursuing educational interests and currying the favor of a despotic regime.
Yang's visit to the University is indicative of the University's attempts to gain status with the Chinese government, which ultimately controls its country's academia. In 1977, the University was the only American college to receive Chinese officials on a high-profile visit. Yang represents the latest in a series of Chinese Ambassadors to the Unied States that University presidents have officially invited. Some notable Chinese academics have studied or taught at the University, which conducts various programs in China. And the University is pursuing an even friendlier relationship. As stated in the findings of the Virginia 2020 program committees, the University is aiming at greater internationalization. Wang's visit reflects this official intention.
To pursue it, the University kissed up to the official agent of a notoriously oppressive government. Though today's ruling class of educated technocrats has long reneged on Maoism, China's current rulers still insist on one holy principle: the absolute authority of the Communist Party of China.
The case against this government hardly has to be made. Not only does it lead the world in judicial executions while making no due process assurances, it also enchains prisoners of conscience for both political dissidence and religious expression. The rulers of China do not value the mission of our University. The Communist Party rules with an iron fist.
And precisely because of the government's stranglehold on its academia, the University pampered one of its top officials. Before the University let him speak in Jefferson's Rotunda, Yang was brought to Carr's Hill, where he dined and rubbed shoulders with University President John T. Casteen, III, among others.
Various organs within the University rolled out the red carpet with the express purpose of improving relations between the University and the Chinese government. The University sought to demonstrate that it was happy to work with these despots. Of course, we could never exchange for the students killed in 1989 at Tiananmen Square. We can never learn from the scholars who have disappeared for criticizing too strongly, gone to prison worshiping too freely, or punished for having too many children. Last week, University smiled and turned a blind eye to the Chinese government's infringement of every principle upon which Jefferson founded this institution.
The University has correctly assessed Yang's educational value. As Chen said, "Inviting Ambassador Yang here does not mean we endorse his government's policies completely." But we cross a crucial line when we give star treatment to its agents explicitly in order to become its pet American university. We have shaken hands with them and lent them our imprimatur. Representatives of such an unabashedly horrendous regime deserve no more respect than common courtesy would dictate, much less celebrity treatment.
The University's hypocrisy stood in relief when Yang responded to certain rude interruptions of his address by noting his respect for Jefferson's legacy in general, and freedom of speech specifically. In fact, the University's flirtation with Yang and his government violates Jefferson's most important premise for this school, which he built to "be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind." If the University deals so happily with a government opposed to this principle, it has distanced itself from its own liberal foundations.
In many ways, the University perceives its mission appropriately. It should improve cultural understanding, internationalize, host controversial speakers and pursue knowledge. But it should not, as it has done here, sell its soul in the process.
Michael Slaven's column usually appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at mslaven@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
HARBATH: Compulsory attendance policies are harmful to students
By Julie Harbath | YesterdayBy permitting a return to antiquated, inflexible attendance policies, the University is jeopardizing student health and wellness.
ARRAS: The cavalier tendency to say “I do”
By Aoife Arras | 6 days agoIn continually promoting marriage-mindedness, the University and student organizations actually undermine the educational mission of this institution.
VAN DE SOMPEL: “Rules are Rules”
By Mo Van de Sompel | May 27, 2024In reality, rules are contextual, and enforcement is selective.
