Home 亚洲 Chinese Universities: A Grand Makeshift Troupe
亚洲

Chinese Universities: A Grand Makeshift Troupe

Share

By Lin Zhaoyuan

In China, the academic reputation of universities no longer rests on genuine scholarly foundations, but rather on the workings of power and publicity. Academic freedom has been replaced by layer upon layer of bureaucratic evaluation, and governance philosophies have been consumed by officialdom. The entire higher education system resembles a massive “makeshift troupe”—outwardly bustling, inwardly decayed, filled with leaders who feign competence and subordinates who blindly follow orders.

The Appointment of University Presidents:Academic Silence, Power Dominance

University presidents in China are not selected based on academic merit or scholarly achievement. Instead, they are appointed from above—by authorities often lacking expertise in the disciplines concerned. These decisions are frequently based on “perception” and “reliability”. Even more troubling is that once in office, these presidents swiftly assemble administrative teams chosen for loyalty and obedience rather than expertise and academic vision. The result is a profound erosion of academic authority.

The Plight of Deans:Professionalism Undervalued, Management Reduced to Formalities

Within such a system, many deans are not academic leaders but proxies of bureaucratic compliance. It is an open secret that some deans know little about the disciplines they oversee, yet they stand in judgment over others, managing departments and evaluating faculty. Bereft of the capacity for academic judgment, these administrators are incapable of establishing fair and just evaluation systems. They neither can nor care to assess professional qualifications—what matters most is obedience.

Coercive Evaluations:Universities Transformed into Bureaucratic Barracks

The central task of university management has become ensuring “ideological security”. Performance evaluations, promotions, and project assessments—supposedly academic processes—are now tightly controlled by administrative authorities. Faculty members are no longer dedicated to teaching and scholarship, but are trapped in endless cycles of documentation, result packaging, and project competition. Teaching becomes rote; research is riddled with vested interests. The academic ecosystem is in steep decline.

The Price of a “Makeshift Troupe”:The Spread of Frivolity and the Death of Scholarship

This system of “non-experts managing experts” has stripped universities of both academic judgment and long-term vision. Faculty focus only on passing evaluations; research is frequently inflated or fabricated. The much-touted “Double First-Class Initiative” has become a mirage of rankings. Universities compete to “overtake on curves,” but end up deteriorating together. The farce of the makeshift troupe is a tragedy for both education and scholarship.

Lament: Whither Chinese Universities?

Unless the power-driven absurdities of the current university system are faced and reformed, China’s academic quality and global reputation will continue to wither. Only by restoring professional authority and respecting academic principles can we escape this makeshift predicament and reenter a scholarly landscape worthy of the name.

Epilogue

If you find this article too radical, it likely means you do not truly understand the realities of Chinese higher education. Those within the system mostly remain silent—not out of agreement, but exhaustion; not due to comprehension, but helplessness. More worrying still is that society at large continues to live in a romanticized illusion of the university—as if it were a temple of knowledge, a high ground of thought—without realizing how far it has already deviated and declined.

The author is a retired faculty member from a Chinese university.

Related Articles

中美经济博弈2.0:“规则叙事”是关键

中美经济博弈正在从关税、产业和市场竞争,进一步转向国际规则与全球叙事的竞争,谁能影响规则、塑造共识,谁就可能在下一阶段竞争中占据主动。 作者:毕研韬 过去几年,中美经济博弈最引人注目的,是关税、出口管制、投资限制、科技封锁、供应链安全。双方直接采取措施,也直接承受对方措施带来的冲击。如今,一种更复杂的博弈正在出现:美国对第三国实施制裁,中国因为与这些国家保持正常经济往来而被卷入其中。 近期围绕伊朗的争议,就是一个典型案例。美国不断扩大对伊朗的经济制裁,并试图通过二级制裁影响与伊朗存在贸易关系的第三方。中国则强调,中伊正常经济合作符合国际法,反对美国以单边制裁干扰其他国家之间的正常经贸往来。 如果只把这看作一次中美外交摩擦,实际上低估了它的意义。更值得关注的是:中美经济博弈正在从1.0进入2.0。 一、1.0:中美争夺双边经济规则 中美经济博弈1.0的基本特征,是双方直接竞争。 美国提高对华关税,中国采取反制措施;美国限制向中国出口先进芯片,中国强化相关产业政策;美国限制中国企业投资,中国也对部分美国企业采取相应措施。 这一阶段当然存在规则和叙事竞争。美国会以“公平贸易”“国家安全”“供应链安全”等概念为自己的政策提供正当性;中国则强调自由贸易、反对单边主义和维护全球产业链稳定。 因此,1.0并不是没有规则竞争,也不是没有叙事竞争,但这一时期争夺的主要是双边规则。核心问题是:中美两国之间应该按照什么规则进行经济竞争?双方争论的对象主要是关税、补贴、市场准入、知识产权、出口管制、投资审查等。即使双方对规则的理解存在严重分歧,规则所直接约束的主要是双边经济关系。 因此,1.0的基本逻辑可以概括为:直接经济对抗→双边规则竞争→关乎规则正当化的叙事竞争。 二、2.0:从双边规则走向国际规则...

海南自贸港周边传播研究中心25日正式启动

8月25日,海南自贸港周边传播研究中心正式启动,由此海南省国际传播研究领域新增一支生力军。 作者:毕研韬 发布:2026年8月26日 海南自贸港周边传播研究中心由中国外文局亚太传播中心、北京大学周边传播研究中心和海南日报报业集团三方共建,由海南日报报业集团新闻研究所、《南海传播》编辑部、海南国际传播中心负责日常运营。 这种由新闻媒体参与共建并承担日常运营的模式,与党政机关在高校设立科研机构、由高校负责运营的模式相比具有明显优势。 前者将日常运营置于媒体体系之内,媒体可以对人员配置、资源投入、项目运行和成果产出进行较为及时的评估和调整,因而具有较强的过程控制能力。同时,媒体在选择高校共建负责人时,通常更注重其专业背景,因此一般会由相关领域的权威学者领导研究工作。 相比之下,党政机关在高校设立共建机构,往往由校领导或学院负责人担任机构负责人。如果负责人并非该领域权威专家,那么真正的专家就可能被边缘化。与此同时,党政机关投入资源后,对机构内部的日常运行、人员使用和成果生产缺乏实时掌握和调整机制。因此,这类共建机构存在较大的不确定性。 周边传播是北京大学新闻传播学院陆地教授提出的本土原创传播学理论,狭义指国家边界两侧的双向信息活动,广义指各类主体与周遭对象的信息交互。周边传播秉持近似易通、周边优先、由近及远的逻辑,重视民间、民生、民俗传播,强调双向互惠,为周边外交与对外传播提供本土理论支持。

伊朗攻击美国中东基地,这给亚洲国家什么警讯?

伊朗持续攻击美国在中东的军事基地,正在产生一个溢出中东地区的战略效应:美国传统的海外军事基地体系的安全性和持续作战能力正在受到重新检验。 作者:毕研韬  发布:2026年8月24日 这并不意味着美国失去了军事优势,也不意味着亚洲国家会因此转向中国。但对于长期依赖美国安全保护的亚洲国家而言,中东战争至少提出了过去不够突出的问题:美国的亚洲基地会比美国本土更容易被攻击吗?如果美国同时面对多个战略方向的危机,其军事资源和安全承诺还能否始终保持足够的稳定性? 一、固定军事基地可能不再是绝对安全的“力量支点” 过去几十年,美国海外军事存在的重要基础之一,是遍布欧洲、中东和亚太的军事基地。这些基地不仅承担驻军和后勤功能,也是美国进行远程军事投送的重要支点。伊朗的导弹和无人机攻击正在改变这一传统假设。 美国在海湾地区的一些大型军事设施距离伊朗较近,长期处于伊朗导弹和无人机的打击范围内。美国在此次战争中遭受的基地损伤,使华盛顿开始重新评估这些大型固定基地的战略价值。最新报道显示,美国国防部正在考虑战争结束后减少在波斯湾的军事存在,并重新思考是否值得按照过去的规模重建受损基地。 这并不意味着“基地无用”。真正发生变化的是军事基地的功能逻辑:过去强调的是集中、规模和持续部署;未来可能更加重视分散、机动、隐蔽和快速转移。 这对于亚洲尤其重要。因为美国在日本、韩国、关岛以及菲律宾等地,同样拥有大量具有战略价值的固定设施。随着精确打击武器、无人机、远程导弹和卫星侦察能力不断发展,亚洲国家需要重新思考一个问题: 如果发生高强度冲突,美国部署在亚洲的军事设施究竟是安全保障,还是潜在的打击目标? 这实际上是一个非常现实的安全困境。 二、美国的军事优势仍然存在,但“全球同时应对危机”的能力值得观察...

CCP and Govt Should Exercise Caution in Joint Institutions with Universities

Overall, the disadvantages of party and government agencies co-establishing research institutions with...