Club Lunch - The Dean of Shandong: Confessions of a Minor Bureaucrat at a Chinese University

On January 1, 2017, Daniel Bell was appointed dean of the School of Political Science and Public Administration at Shandong University―the first foreign dean of a political science faculty in mainland China’s history. In The Dean of Shandong, Bell chronicles his experiences as what he calls “a minor bureaucrat,” offering an inside account of the workings of Chinese academia and what they reveal about China’s political system. It wasn’t all smooth sailing―Bell wryly recounts sporadic bungles and misunderstandings―but Bell’s post as dean provides a unique vantage point on China today.
Bell, neither a Chinese citizen nor a member of the Chinese Communist Party, was appointed as dean because of his scholarly work on Confucianism―but soon found himself coping with a variety of issues having little to do with scholarship or Confucius. These include the importance of hair color and the prevalence of hair-dyeing among university administrators, both male and female; Shandong’s drinking culture, with endless toasts at every shared meal; and some unintended consequences of an intensely competitive academic meritocracy. As dean, he also confronts weightier matters: the role at the university of the Party secretary, the national anticorruption campaign and its effect on academia (Bell asks provocatively, “What’s wrong with corruption?”), and formal and informal modes of censorship. Considering both the revival of Confucianism in China over the last three decades and what he calls “the Communist comeback” since 2008, Bell predicts that China’s political future is likely to be determined by both Confucianism and Communism. Moderated by FCC Vice President Jennifer Jett.

[@tanxiao1007]

kudos to Professor Bell for what he's contributed academically🎉

[@barrywong4327]

Impressive discussions. A few thoughts:
1, It’s always refreshing to hear the perspectives of westerners who have lived in China for an extended period of time. Almost without exceptions, their views are rational and nuanced.
2. A common theme is that these people all have accepted China as it is. They are not obsessed with the notion of what China should be (according to the west). It’s humility at work. That allows them to understand and appreciate China to the full.
3. It should be clear to the west by now that China is happy with the system it has. It’s not perfect and in fact requires constant adjustments. It has worked very well for the country. China has no reasons, zero, zilch, to copy the west’s inferior and flawed system.
4. The professor is right that the west’s overt and irrational hostility towards China only strengthens the hands of the political hardliners in China.
Why is it that there are so so many China watchers and think-tanks? All China has done is grow and develop itself to better its people, in a peaceful manner. On the contrary, the west, the US in particular, has engaged in all sorts of destruction, destabilization, military and economic intimidation around the world for decades, yet nobody seems to give a damn.
What’s wrong with the picture?

[@user-yi1wy5dc7b]

早在百家争鸣时代. 学术大家们就已经在探讨人与世界的关系. 有自由主义，共产主义，资本主义，个人主义，市场经济. 人与自然. 国家治理. 等等问题. 今天的人和百家争鸣时代并没有什么区别. 从历史中能得到一些答案. 比如外儒内法的治理形式， 也有很多需要继续探索的问题. 比如我是谁，从哪里来，到哪里去的问题.