US losing to China in scientific research!

southsiderosie

Remy13 wrote: »

while the United States embraces Palinish anti-intellectualism, dumbs down textbooks so Texans can read them, and debates creationism as historical fact, China is spending billions on becoming the leading scientific powerhouse in the world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/27/AR2010062703639.html?hpid=moreheadlines

I'm writing this from Hong Kong, where from my one side of my window I can see dozens of cargo ships lined up in the harbor, and the other side a massive high speed rail complex under construction - not to mention the overwhelming sense of optimism and energy everywhere I go. I hate to say it, but Spacedog is absolutely right. I hope we can turn things around in the next 20 years, but every time I go home, I am less sure that it will happen.

To be honest, while I find the Texas school board/evolution crowd appalling, that debate has been going on in the US for a century, and in the meantime, innovation rolled on, unabated. However, innovation and risk-taking in the US has always relied heavily on absorbing the cream of the crop from other countries, whether it was letting in Jewish refugees from Europe, or welcoming the world's best graduate students and researchers with open arms. Frankly, if we had to solely rely on the native population - especially in tech industries - we'd be toast, which is why our current immigration policies for highly skilled workers and graduates are particularly galling.

That said, I think the Chinese case is troubling for several reasons. First, as the article points out, there is little concern for ethics, whether it is respecting human subjects norms, patent laws, or clinical trial procedures. Anecdotally, several of my housemates in Boston were biomedical researchers, and questionable practices and plagiarism were a constant problem with China-based researchers. Second, funding for basic research is an issue: in the US, we have totally bought into the idea that the private sector will do everything, but the reality is that in the 1950s and 1960, a lot of basic lab research was government funded through universities, and then private interests figured out how to take these ideas to market. The Chinese (and the Koreans, and the Germans, etc etc) unabashedly see scientific research and education as something that is in the national interest, and that the government should be involved in. Related to that point is the issue of how grant writing works in the US today: because everything has to be measured via 'metrics' and is overly rationalized, researchers are basically expected to know their results when they are applying for grants - which is of course impossible. So instead of funding creating opportunities for innovation and experimentation, it instead narrows the focus of research agendas, which is extremely detrimental in the long term. The fact that in China the guidelines for grants are less rigid makes it an attractive place to do research - but then of course you run into the issues mentioned above.

I still think that the business environment in the US is far superior to that in China, especially when it comes to setting up a business and intellectual property laws; there have been a spate of recent articles chronicling the misadventures of Indians and Chinese who were educated in the US, worked there for a while, and then returned home to a nightmare of red tape and poor infrastructure. But we are rapidly losing a lot of tacit knowledge within the manufacturing industry, and increasingly losing the engineers and entrepreneurs who form the backbone of the tech industry. And unfortunately we think it is better to debate whether or not Obama is a fascist Marxist Muslim rather than having a broader debate about the future of the economy and America's role in the world in the 21st century. I think every member of Congress should have to spend a month in Asia and maybe Northern Europe to get a sense of what our competitors are doing - then maybe they could begin to start thinking about the national interest, rather than what will play well on Fox News or the blogosphere. Unfortunately, if they aren't willing to engage these issues, an increasing number of skilled workers and industries, both American and foreign, will simply vote with their feet.

southsiderosie

PopeUrbanII wrote: »

Your characterization of America is considerably inaccurate. Furthermore, I doubt the Chinese will remain fixated on math and science once they gain political and social freedom. Nothing erodes tradition faster and more thoroughly than popular capitalism and freedom of speech.

Yes, because capitalism and freedom of speech have killed math and science achievement in South Korea and Japan (and Eastern Europe, for that matter). :rolleyes:

demonspawn

It's only a matter of time before the Japanese take over the world with their robot army. I for one welcome our new Japanese robot overlords.

monosharp

FISMA wrote: »

(1) America's Chinese are smarter than China's Chinese.

... what ?

(2) Any of China's people that get an opportunity to make $$$'s in the US leave and never return

Apart from the Chinese that get an opportunity to make money in other countries and leave and never return.

Almost similar to the Americans that get an opportunity to make money in other countries and never return, one might say.

Black Swan

John Naisbitt predicted that China would surpass America someday in Megatrends Asia: Eight Asian Megatrends That Are Reshaping Our World (1996) over 14 years ago. What's new?

ynotdu

Lanaier wrote: »

Guy in China here.

Type my views about China (and how much it can suck) online all the time.

Ah yeah but You did not mention that You have to go throgh a proxy!:P
BTW,what is the URL of China's version of Boards?;)

Though I actually agree with most of your points.

Well Thank You so much,I am used to the fact that usually nobody ever agree's with Me on boards and most think i am on drugs!:)

Just wanted to make sure you in the wonderful west know that there is such a thing as propaganda even:P

Don't believe all that Propaganda You hear in China about the West;)
Seriously,great to have someone living in China posting,hope You post more.

---

Southsiderosie:
What an excellant post,not for the first time is Your outstanding intelligence evident.I envy Your prose and ability to make such coherant arguements.
Not to nit-pick but before Englands 'Lease' of Hong Kong came to an end Chris Patton negotiated a deal with China that Hong Kong would remain as it was with the Chinese Leadership,a deal China has honored.

Taiwan and the Tibetans don't see China quite in the same light though.
BTW,from America to Spain to Ireland and now Hong Kong......erm exactly what Crime did You commit and Who is after You:eek:

---

Demonspawn: One way America or at least its Multinationals has shot itself in the foot is opening hugh plants in China with Dorms were people from all over China come to Live eat and work at a fraction of the wage an American could live on.There are some safeguards against cloning,one i know for a fact is that Intel will only allow its older chips to be manufactured in China.The newer ones are at least officially kept secret[like that would stop anyone:)]]
One thing that has been fairly quietly reported is that just in the past two weeks China has overtaken Japan and is now officially the Worlds second biggest economy next only to the US.

I have to say and it is only from My perception of China from Tv Docs and reading is that on a local Human level the west could learn a lot about how to care about others and value the extended family concept of care for the weaker members of its family from Chinese Culture.

in closing can i just ask SOUTH,Monosharp,Demonspawn&Lanaier.......erm,Why are You's talking to Yourselves? Hav'nt You's seen the word BANNED under PopeUrbans name?:pac::pac::)

southsiderosie

ynotdu wrote: »

Not to nit-pick but before Englands 'Lease' of Hong Kong came to an end Chris Patton negotiated a deal with China that Hong Kong would remain as it was with the Chinese Leadership,a deal China has honored.

True, but most of the shipping through Hong Kong is coming from the mainland these days; almost all of the manufacturing has moved across the border. And Beijing is pouring money into infrastructure here; I'm right next to the construction site for the new high speed rail link to the mainland. Unfortunately, I also know I'm in China based on the smog.

ynotdu wrote: »

BTW,from America to Spain to Ireland and now Hong Kong......erm exactly what Crime did You commit and Who is after You:eek:

LOL!!! Let's just say I am voting with my feet - as have many of my friends and family, who now have lovely apartments in far flung places...Lucky for me, they like having visitors.

ynotdu

southsiderosie wrote: »

many of my friends and family, who now have lovely apartments in far flung places...Lucky for me, they like having visitors.

Hey I want a piece of that!Can i send them a friends request?

nyarlothothep

hmmm, china is a totalitarian state, I find nothing particularly laudible about its rise and rise, in fact its worrying. In spite of its unprecedented economic growth I don't think Chinas ascension to numero uno superpower status is inevitable, firstly its still a developing nation, secondly boom and bust cycles will delay its growth, thirdly the future progression of events is not linear, America/Europe/India may catch up.

I would hope not either, there are no democratic institutions in China, human rights are flagrantly disregarded, the education system exists merely to indoctrinate its citizens, (much like the US), the government has consistently ignored international law, see the current rejection of the UN condemnation of shark hunting (where they cut off the fin and leaving the shark die a slow and horrible death). America while also being authoritarian to some extent at least has semi functioning democratic institutions and was founded on Enlightenment values which I think are important as they can help in the progress of humanity. I wouldn't like to see a step backwards towards further authoritarianism in the next few centuries.

Lanaier

ynotdu wrote: »

Ah yeah but You did not mention that You have to go throgh a proxy!:P
BTW,what is the URL of China's version of Boards?;)

Haha, sorry my friend, no proxy needed here.
Though its true that you'll need one if you want to access Facebook or youtube.
Many people use a VPN to do so.....and in fact it is faster than when those sites were not blocked so perhaps little difference?

I will find some threads with interesting examples of expressing opinions about China for you.

monosharp

nyarlothothep wrote: »

hmmm, china is a totalitarian state,

How so ?

Could you explain to me what's more totalitarian about China than the US for example.

I would hope not either, there are no democratic institutions in China,

All depends on what you consider to be democracy.

human rights are flagrantly disregarded,

Unlike others for example the US ?

the education system exists merely to indoctrinate its citizens,

And produce nobel prize winning academics including 4 in physics, the last one in 2009.

I'm currently half way through my PhD with a Chinese girl who just moved abroad for the first time. Doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the education she got.

the government has consistently ignored international law,

Again, unlike others ?

see the current rejection of the UN condemnation of shark hunting (where they cut off the fin and leaving the shark die a slow and horrible death).

Do you agree with the concept of Halal meat ?

America while also being authoritarian to some extent at least has semi functioning democratic institutions and was founded on Enlightenment values which I think are important as they can help in the progress of humanity.

But again it all depends on what you mean when you say democratic. I'd consider the US to be a authoritarian republic with a pinch of oligarchical politics thrown in.

I wouldn't like to see a step backwards towards further authoritarianism in the next few centuries.

The way I see it the more time passes the more authoritarian all countries are becoming. A step backwards (at least in Europe/US) would give more freedom, not less. Whereas in China the opposite is true.

Big Brother is watching you.

southsiderosie

monosharp wrote: »

How so ?

Could you explain to me what's more totalitarian about China than the US for example.

It is a single party state that does not allow other political parties. It frowns upon the existence of independent civil society organizations. It censors what its citizens can read about its own country. The government has limited tolerance for media that criticizes the central party (and dissent is generally allowed if it is blowing steam at local politicians).

I'm not one of these people who thinks that everything the Chinese government does is terrible, and I would not call them totalitarian, but the comparison of Chinese and American political systems is patently ridiculous.

monosharp wrote: »

I'm currently half way through my PhD with a Chinese girl who just moved abroad for the first time. Doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the education she got.

Interesting. If we are going to drift into anecdote-land, my experience with Chinese PhD students that were born and raised in mainland China is that they are smart and hard workers, but they can come a bit unhinged when it comes to critiquing the Chinese government, and in discussions about politics can't seem to think beyond a state-centered solution to anything.

monosharp wrote: »

But again it all depends on what you mean when you say democratic. I'd consider the US to be a authoritarian republic with a pinch of oligarchical politics thrown in.

If that is the case, then I would question your definition of what qualifies as a "republic" and as "authoritarian".

monosharp

southsiderosie wrote: »

It is a single party state

It is effectively a single-party state. Opposition parties are not banned and some exist. Many members of the lower congress are independents or members of other parties.

Of course this situation is far from democratic and in reality almost all control in the PRC is by the Communist Party. But there is opposition and the system has slowly been changing to allow more freedom in political choice.

Out of curiosity why is this worse than a two party state such as a the US ?

that does not allow other political parties.

Yes it does.

It frowns upon the existence of independent civil society organizations.

What exactly is 'frowning on' something got to do with anything ? Doesn't the USA 'frown' on some organisations within it's borders ?

It censors what its citizens can read about its own country.

So does other countries, like the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States

http://www.serendipity.li/cda.html

The government has limited tolerance for media that criticizes the central party (and dissent is generally allowed if it is blowing steam at local politicians).

The US has limited tolerance for what the media says as well. See above.

I'm not one of these people who thinks that everything the Chinese government does is terrible, and I would not call them totalitarian, but the comparison of Chinese and American political systems is patently ridiculous.

You haven't shown it to be ridiculous yet. I'm waiting.

Interesting. If we are going to drift into anecdote-land, my experience with Chinese PhD students that were born and raised in mainland China is that they are smart and hard workers, but they can come a bit unhinged when it comes to critiquing the Chinese government, and in discussions about politics can't seem to think beyond a state-centered solution to anything.

Whereas Americans don't when you criticise their party ? :pac:

From my own personal experience and from the threads here and from the media and the internet, (Many) Americans are extraordinarily politically blind when it comes to their parties.

I don't even feel the need to support this as I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with this. Just see any thread on Obama or Palin. Look back at any media coverage of the last presidential election.

If that is the case, then I would question your definition of what qualifies as a "republic" and as "authoritarian".

A republic is a form of government in which the people or some portion thereof retain supreme control over the government, and in which the head of government is not a monarch.

Authoritarianism is a form of social organization characterized by submission to authority. It is opposed to individualism and democracy.

cheesehead

Sorry I'm late to the conversation, but I just got access to my computer.

You see, I was making my way back to Beijing on China National Expressway 110 when I hit the worst... traffic... ever! The back-up must have stretched at least 60 miles. It took me over 11 days to get through...

Overheal

Oh yeah? Well, Tri-county Link has Internet Hotspots on all its vehicles now.

http://www.ridetricountylink.com/aboutUs/pressReleases.html#07082010

So take it. :pac:

USA 1 China 0

southsiderosie

monosharp wrote: »

It is effectively a single-party state. Opposition parties are not banned and some exist. Many members of the lower congress are independents or members of other parties.

Of course this situation is far from democratic and in reality almost all control in the PRC is by the Communist Party. But there is opposition and the system has slowly been changing to allow more freedom in political choice.

Out of curiosity why is this worse than a two party state such as a the US ?

What exactly is 'frowning on' something got to do with anything ? Doesn't the USA 'frown' on some organisations within it's borders ?

Yes it does.

So does other countries, like the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States

http://www.serendipity.li/cda.html

The US has limited tolerance for what the media says as well. See above.

Given that Fox News is still on the air (and MSNBC stayed on the air during the Bush administration) I would question the assertion of

You haven't shown it to be ridiculous yet. I'm waiting.

If an opposition party in China formed today and said the kinds of things that Republicans say about the current administration, do you think the central government would allow them to exist?

Do you think a Tea Party-type political movement would be allowed to emerge in China today?

Would a Fox News-type television station opposed to the Communist Party be allowed to exist?

Would members of the Roman Catholic Church be allowed to have an open mass in Tiananmen Square?

If you can honestly answer yes to any of these questions, then maybe we can begin to have a conversation about individual and political freedom in the US and China.

monosharp wrote: »

Whereas Americans don't when you criticise their party ? :pac:

From my own personal experience and from the threads here and from the media and the internet, (Many) Americans are extraordinarily politically blind when it comes to their parties.

I don't even feel the need to support this as I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with this. Just see any thread on Obama or Palin. Look back at any media coverage of the last presidential election.

As an American ex-pat, my experience with Americans who actually study and live abroad is that they are far more critical of the US government than people living in the US. Comparing Americans on internet boards to Chinese PhD students (the observation in the earlier post) is comparing apples and oranges.

monosharp wrote: »

A republic is a form of government in which the people or some portion thereof retain supreme control over the government, and in which the head of government is not a monarch.

Authoritarianism is a form of social organization characterized by submission to authority. It is opposed to individualism and democracy.

Given how hyper-individualistic American society is (which is reflected in the political culture), especially in contrast to Asian societies, your definition of authoritarianism is not applicable at all.

____

The US and China are both large economically important countries who are prickly about their image, are more nationalistic than most Western European countries, and who are convinced that their way of doing things is the best way, both when it comes to politics and economics. There are legitimate reasons to criticize US policy when it comes to overreaching government, overly-cozy relations with industry, etc. But I don't think that the US and China have comparable political systems at all - and the fact that they don't and they represent two different models of political economy, is one key reason behind their growing rivalry from an international relations standpoint.

But to bring it back to the original point - China and innovation - the fact that the Chinese have a centralized authoritarian system means that they can really push through initiatives that they see as being in the national interest, including national and regional high-speed rail networks, an emphasis on science and technology education, and generous funding of basic scientific research. Much of this is left solely to the "market" in the US, in part because of our historic skepticism of government and emphasis on local and states rights. Hell, the fact that whenever there is some kind of attempt at centralized planning of educational or transport policy you hear cries of 'communism'! from certain quarters in the US should be a strong signal that China and America are NOT operating under the same system!

monosharp

southsiderosie wrote: »

If an opposition party in China formed today and said the kinds of things that Republicans say about the current administration, do you think the central government would allow them to exist?

Of course not. But this isn't the same thing as what you've previously said.

Saying opposition cannot exist and saying opposition which takes an american style attitude and goes all out against the party are two different things.

Do you think a Tea Party-type political movement would be allowed to emerge in China today?

Absolutely not and furthermore I wouldn't want it to form either.

Would a Fox News-type television station opposed to the Communist Party be allowed to exist?

Nope.

Would members of the Roman Catholic Church be allowed to have an open mass in Tiananmen Square?

Nope but as you probably well know the Roman Catholic Church is not allowed in China. They have their own Catholic Church.

If you can honestly answer yes to any of these questions, then maybe we can begin to have a conversation about individual and political freedom in the US and China.

How so ?

All you have shown is that China restricts freedoms, bans political parties it sees as dangerous to the stability of the state and controls the media.

All countries in the world do the above, the difference is to what extent they do so.

As an American ex-pat, my experience with Americans who actually study and live abroad is that they are far more critical of the US government than people living in the US.

Never been to the states so I can't really compare except to say that many of the American Republican/Democrats I've met were far more politically blind than any other nationality I've ever met.

Comparing Americans on internet boards to Chinese PhD students (the observation in the earlier post) is comparing apples and oranges.

No, my observation in the earlier post was meeting Americans in many different ways, not just on the internet.

Given how hyper-individualistic American society is (which is reflected in the political culture), especially in contrast to Asian societies, your definition of authoritarianism is not applicable at all.

I completely disagree. (Most) Americans are individualistic until they band togeather under one flag (such as a political party/idea) and then they are mindless automatons who might as well be working at the ministry of truth in Oceania. They swallow whatever nonsense is put to them in this state. For example, Obama's citizenship by the Republicans or any Democrat propaganda.