As many foreigners — especially the foreign students on Chinese university campuses — in China already know, Chinese students are required to undergo a sort of “basic military training” as part of their education. It involves dressing up for the part with military fatigues while learning and rehearsing a bunch of marches, chants, and drills. Think boot camp…but not quite boot camp.
Somewhat in line with the National Day Parade rehearsal photos Min posted yesterday, the following video on Youku has been making the rounds on the Chinese internet over the past week, having amassed over a million viewings, 6000 comments, and about four votes “against” (踩) for every vote “for” (顶)…giving you a general idea of what most Chinese viewing the video think of this part of their education system. Brace yourselves:
If you couldn’t make it all the way through the video, you’re not alone. It’s pretty long and, personally, it become unbearable with each successive scene of the school principal inspecting the various regiments (classes?) of assembled students, hollering “同学们辛苦了！(Students, you’ve worked hard! )” It was like Bill Murray’s Groundhog Day, but a lot less funny…if at all. Skip forward in the video and you’ll eventually come to scenes of the students, both boys and girls, rehearsing martial art forms — oh my god, were those real knives they were holding?!? — and even choreographed sparring matches. It wasn’t just the incorrect or exaggerated stances that were laughable, but the entire premise behind it all.
But then that’s exactly what we would think, wouldn’t it?
No, actually, I think there’s sufficient support to declare, admittedly with an appeal to majority fallacy, that all of this is a gratuitous waste of the kids’ time, ridiculously silly, and probably persists to this day only to serve as porn for someone in the Chinese government’s propaganda department to masturbate to.
However, I guess when you boil it down, this really isn’t fundamentally different from something like the Pledge of Allegiance or singing the Star Spangled Banner before a baseball game (for Americans). Wait…do American schoolchildren still say the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of class these days? Or have the atheists legislated it out of accepted practice in public schools already? “One nation, under God, indivisible…” and all?
Yet, beyond basic patriotic indoctrination education socialization, I’m sure these mandatory military training exercises for China’s students served a semi-practical purpose at one point in the PRC’s history…probably when Mao still had it in his head that the New China was liable to be invaded at any time…and the notion of breeding more Chinese than could be killed, then training them in basic hand-to-hand combat, seemed like a damn fine idea.
These days, however, when pretty much no one would seriously dick with China militarily, we can only conclude that all of these exercises, that suppress individuality to express group-think and group-identity, serve no other purpose than that aforementioned patriotic socialization.
…and to scare the living shit out of many a dumbfounded foreigner watching from afar.
Okay, not quite, since more often than not, that foreigner isn’t actually scared but rather just thoroughly constipated with disgust for the nationalism being “brainwashed” into the innocent but ever-so-impressionable youth. Get them while they’re young, right?
But with a 4:1 踩-顶 ratio, I wouldn’t worry too much.
-
David: @kenworker agrees: being a host is hard because you’re never assured if the content is good or not. But today, we’ve good stuff! Introduction...
-
“…Chinese see their history through the lens of chaos/order with the forces of the latter fighting a constant battle against the former.” Jeremiah...
-
Chinese high school students have the longest study hours compared to counterparts in Japan, the United States, and Korea according to a recent CYCRC survey.
Students 2.0 at CNBloggerCon 2008 
Quote: Jeremiah Jenne on What Chinese Fear 
Chinese Students: The Most Stressed In The World 
I have yet to speak to a single current or former Chinese college student who had anything positive to say about their two weeks of military training after their second year. Most of them thought it ridiculous to expect that two weeks, once in their life, would teach them any useful military skills. Most thought it was a complete waste of time.
In fact, most of them were highly resentful of the fact that, whenever Chinese officials need a large number of “volunteers” for something such as a parade or some kind of opening ceremony, college students were the first to be pressed into service — because they lack any means to protest.
As for your comparison with singing the national anthem before US sporting events… If the singing of the anthem lasted for two weeks, I suspect that not many people would attend games. :-)
If put to popular vote, students would also vote 4:1 against the College English Test Band 4 as the BA/BSc/BEng prerequisite (bye bye you foreign English teachers…), or 4:1 against any exams for that matter.
The reality is, the current education system is indeed quite ritualistic. I don’t ever recall many of my mandatory Math courses being put into practical use in all my career. And my (US university) professor actually said this: “The qualifying exam is like the hazing to join the fraternities. It’s not like it’s useful in anyway. The whole point is to make you suffer.” I guess that’s exactly the reason for this military training thing.
If I remember correctly, the real large scale training started only in 1987, after the 1986 anti-Capitalist freedom movement, when (I guess) Deng wanted the students to suffer a little bit and realize their real position in the society. We freshmen were sent to the barracks for one whole month and went through the same basic training a new soldier had to go through (OK, much watered down, we don’t have to run 5 kilos with full gears every morning, 1 kilo maybe, but still a lot to swallow for us 4-eyed 文弱书生) . One month passed and almost all of us cried at the faraway party, some kept contact with their Sergeants thereafter. But many accidents happened that year and a number of students died, which apparently was and still is a big deal. The next year the training across China were much more watered down. However in 1991 after the TAM and Deng said the biggest problem was education, the training strength for the top university students were vastly increased. PKU students had to do it for a whole year in barracks and I heard many students would avoid PKU/Tsinghua/Fudan etc for that reason. It was again much watered down after a few years. Students can do it on campus, which practically turns it into a joke. But as long as it’s there, you don’t know when it would bite again.
Kai,
I’d say the nationalism brainwash theory is quite a stretch. No one with the right mind would ever think that can be achieved in 2 weeks. Indeed, Fenqings are made in a long process.
The rationale, I think, if put in the positive light, may be based on the following:
… 故天将降大任于是人也，必先苦其心志，劳其筋骨，饿其体肤，空乏其身，行拂乱其所为，所以动心忍性，曾益其所不能。…
然后知生于忧患，而死于安乐也。
Not that the training actually goes any closer to achieve this. But imagine for many elite students it is the first time in their lives that they’ve got to observe the position of the others and form a straight line while marching. I can’t stop laughing recollecting a classmate of mine who couldn’t coordinate his arms and legs while marching and constantly tripped the others. The sergeant gave him quite some 1-on-1 during the after hours but in the end had to kick him out of the parade. You may laugh as you want when watching the video, but that could be quite something for many who actually performed it.
From: http://www.humanistictexts.org/mencius.htm
“Thus, when heaven is about to confer a great office on any man, it first exercises his mind with suffering, and his sinews and bones with toil. It exposes his body to hunger, and subjects him to extreme poverty. It confounds his undertakings. By all these methods it stimulates his mind, hardens his nature, and removes his incompetence…
From these things we see how life springs from sorrow and calamity, and death from ease and pleasure.”
CnInDC, first, thanks for sharing your personal experience and story above.
Second, that this military training is political education (“brainwashing nationalism” when we want to be mean) is not only not a stretch, it’s undeniable. Of course, I’m not suggesting that this will train fenqings or that fenqings are trained in the span of two weeks, I’m just saying this is one of the elements of China’s education system designed and maintained with political socialization in mind, just as the Pledge of Allegiance is (albeit, as Anderson pointed above, there’s no 2 week training period for that, but as I maintain, is still fundamentally similar). This doesn’t diminish the many other personal lessons that arise from this for the participants, such as learning marching rhythm, but I think it is a stretch to suggest that the entire program was designed first and foremost to teach youth the concept of “hardship”.
Erh, if you meant to say the brainwashing is pervasive I would happily agree. If you have to look it that way, I guess the more suitable analogy would be the similarly pervasive American Dream hypnosis, a.k.a., cookie cutter houses, SUVs, iPhones, glass-walled skyscrapers, fat acronyms and other longer than 20-character fancy words, then implying/reasoning/believing all these goodies attribute to the freedom and democracy we enjoy, and that’s the way it was/is/will be and should always be etc etc.
But I don’t think the military training is particularly more brainwashing than the others. The thing is, in China they don’t seem to shy away from calling the propaganda and the political education exact that so I don’t see the necessity to camouflage it with some other fancy (or dull) terms.
There are indeed modules in the military training reserved for that, when the Political Representatives would talk full hours on the Three Rules of Discipline and Eight Points for Attention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Rules_of_Discipline_and_Eight_Points_for_Attention) and why the party should/must command the military and some war history bull. But you seem to take that too seriously. From the viewpoint of designing the curriculum, these modules serve the clear purpose of giving the physically exhausted trainees some hard-earned breaks. We mostly dozed over those hours as we did in all similar circumstances. It’s extremely difficult not to and the speakers understand that so they seldom even try to make them less boring. Comparing to the other political education courses we’ve got to take, what’s new in these trainings is that most of us have never in our lives being asked to stand still at attention for full 15-minute slots under the baking sun. We’ve never experienced more stricter disciplines and have never before fired any firearms. So if it’s called military training, even vastly watered down, it’s at least meant to be military training.
CnInDC, eh…I’m not really feeling your American Dream analogy but I’m willing to listen to you explain more. I just don’t see how mandatory military training/exercises/performances is sufficiently similar to the American Dream. It sounds like you’re making a point about material wealth being attributed to national values of “democracy” and “freedom” but I fail to see how this is being tied to military training as required in China’s education system.
Like you, I don’t think the military training is necessarily effective “brainwashing”. I think it has some effect, but I wouldn’t really agree with anyone who think it automatically makes people hyper-nationalists. To me, the vast majority of students just see it as a requirement to be fulfilled, like GE courses in the States. Sure, they might learn or feel closer to something, but it’s not going to erase their self-identity and make them automatons, which is an exaggeration I think some people are inclined to indulge in.
I’m not sure if I’m taking the political education too seriously, I think I’m just poking fun at it and being forward with what a lot of people think (indulging, in some ways, in the exaggerations I mentioned above). We both agree that the CCP is actually quite forward with calling political education for what it is but we both also know that political socialization can be both blatant and subtle. Moreover, what is blatant and what is subtle is different for different people.
However, I don’t agree that the political education classes or speeches were “designed” as “breaks”. I see them as intended for political socialization but locked in tradition or a stubborn refusal to adopt more effective or sophisticated modern socialization methods. I’m referring to what the government organizers have in mind here, not with how individual students perceive them. I have no doubt that many, even the majority, of students doze through them and couldn’t really give a rat’s ass about what is being taught or told to them. I see the speakers not bothering to make them more interesting more as them not knowing how or themselves not being personally interested in doing so, instead of some altruistic or sympathetic understanding of how weary the students may be.
Kai,
I can’t agree more on “what is blatant and what is subtle is different for different people”. What you see as heavy doses of political socialization seems like nothing to me. Maybe for the same reason, what I read/listen/feel everyday as the blatant American Dream hypnosis is invincible to you too. The analogy arises from here. It’s hard to explain. The closest thing I can think of to describe the phenomenon is using Soma in the Brave New World.
Anyway a long-lasting theme of my discussions here is to point out there aren’t many things in China being so uniquely ideologically Chinese that you can simply laugh at without looking at the mirror. The purpose is not to shutting people up on criticizing China, but to challenge many simplistic diagnoses. I think in some way you seem to agree with me on this. Just to give you some perspectives on this military training topic, try google “闾光日”, or just check out this page:
http://cid-2d5dae611aab2506.skydrive.live.com/browse.aspx/.res/2D5DAE611AAB2506!195
I think everything you said could apply there too.
As for the purpose of these political education classes, I think we may be both right. At least the Political Rep in my regiment was so worried about the physical conditions of us (already a number of students fainted on the spot and hospitalized) that for a number of times he called off trainings on the hottest days and replaced them with these long boring but at least indoor lectures. I don’t think that wasn’t simply altruist. He didn’t want accident, esp life-threatening accident happened to top school freshmen entrusted to him. That could easily cost him the next promotion.
CnInDC,
LoL, Soma! Alright, I think I understand why I don’t quite see your analogy and it is because, respectfully, your analogy is off. I don’t think “mandatory military training” is analogous to “the American dream” as “the American dream” is analogous to “Soma in Brave New World”.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you’re suggesting that the American Dream is essentially an opiate of the American masses, a set of material and lifestyle goals premised upon acceptance and promotion of another set of ideological and philosophical principles. It even sounds like you feel this premise is faulty, as those material and lifestyle goals do not necessarily require those ideological and philosophical principles, yet people are taught that they are, and the people hold onto that, even confusing the two in terms of premise and conclusion.
To me, this would be more analogous to something like “Chinese nationalism”, which itself could be called an opiate of the masses, an ideology or mentality not unlike religion that serves to give an amorphous hope/reward in the future in return for acquiescence to the now. I’d argue that the “mandatory military training” may contribute to fostering “Chinese nationalism” but it itself is not “Chinese nationalism” and thus not analogous to “American Dream”.
We can say American media and pop culture that reinforces and promotes tenets of the “American Dream” is more similar in their potential effect upon Americans to the effect “mandatory military training” has upon Chinese university students. But, there’s still the difference between choosing what to watch or read and being forced to go through military training and political education before being able to graduate.
I absolutely agree! That’s why I made references to the Pledge of Allegiance and Star Spangled Banner in my post. To me, political socialization is certainly not unique to China or the Chinese. It’s easy to disagree with the ideology being socialized or even remark about how blatant it seems to us, but it should be difficult to suggest that we or others are not subject to the same socialization, just with different ideologies and/or methods, often much more subtle.
Agreed. I just tend to view people as being inherently self-interested so I’m more likely to conclude a person did something because it served his self-interest in some way rather than because he was just really sympathetic. As you say, the guy probably didn’t want to bother with having more kids fainting under his watch, and if he had the power to re-arrange the schedule to minimize the risks without failing to fulfill what he had to do, it was all the better for him. I’d of done the same thing too!
Cheers for discussion, CnInDC.
Kai,
We can certainly agree to disagree on some points but I’m happy to see some of my points had resonated to some degree. The discussion atmosphere is certainly good that I can’t resist the temptation to point out the effects (as seen in my eyes) of the hypnosis in your response “…choosing what to watch or read …”
I think this is just one variation of the often used antidotes against the accusation of the western media bias, that at least by constitution the freedom of speech is protected in the west and that even if the major media channels are biased at least the non-biased alternative channels are allowed to flourish so that the bias can somehow be counter-balanced, etc etc.
I’d like to remind people who think that way of the analysis on the GFW filtering strategy. Does GFW bother to filter everything negative? No, because it relies on the human nature that the less concerned people won’t go the extra mile to search for the truth. The same principle applies here. As long as the major media channels saturate the information space with bias, the constitutional rights and the alternative channels have negligible effects on the political processes.
Another point on the media bias is that the western countries and their media have been strong enough to fend off the assaults in the information wars. CCP and China do not enjoy such luxury therefore have to take a more brutal but also more effective way. If, by any chance, the enemy gets hold of the key to sway people’s emotion, censorship in the west will take a more blatant form, as we’ve already seen during 911 in the US and on the neo-Nazi issue in Europe.
The point is, while you may think of your media environment as fundamentally healthy and much better than that in China, I see them as fundamentally similar although with vast skill differences on sophistication and manipulations, and they currently are only taking in different forms under different circumstances, like a butterfly and a caterpillar.
CnInDC,
I think you’re painting our (you and I) differences as too black and white. I’m not suggesting that “choice” debunks, absolves, or serves as an “antidote” for Western media bias. Like you, I believe there certainly is Western media bias and I’ve pointed out what I felt were some particularly egregious examples in the past. I want you to be clear that I’m not defending or excusing western media bias, but I definitely do believe and argue that there are still appreciable and instructive differences even as we acknowledge undeniable similarities.
In some ways, I strongly agree with you, but in other ways, I disagree and I don’t think my disagreement is the effect of some American Dream hypnosis I’ve been subjected to. That sort of argument is the same as foreigners accusing Chinese people of disagreeing with them only because they’ve been brainwashed. It’s a disrespectful argument, to dismiss what another person thinks as not being genuine, used not to communicate with that person but to preach to the choir.
Now, I don’t think you meant it that way, but I just wanted to remind you (and others) as how similar it is to the “you’re just brainwashed” dismissal foreigners use on Chinese.
I think what is fundamentally similar between, let’s say, the West and China is that there will invariably be political socialization and the media will always be involved. I have said before and thus agree that there is clearly a difference in each side’s current and respective sophistication/manipulation (i.e. blatant vs. subtle).
What I think is NOT fundamentally similar is some of the values that are socialized or invoked to support or justify what is socialized. Yes, SOME values (like national unity and allegiance) may be fundamentally similar and shared, but I think there are other values that are given differing import. A simple example would be American allegiance to the very system of constitutional democracy (or republicanism if you wish) versus the Chinese allegiance to maintaining Party control of the state and nation. These are two very different things though political socialization will happen from both instances all the same.
I understand your grievance with people defending the Western media as “fundamentally healthy” and “much better” than China. Understanding your caterpillar and butterfly analogy, I also warrant many of the media “woes” China is assailed for might likewise appear in Western media given different geo-political (even economic) circumstances.
But I think it is safe to say at this point in time, from an individual’s perspective, that I feel more comfortable with the Western media environment than I do with China’s. Likewise, I feel more comfortable with the amount, form, and content of political socialization in the American education system than China’s education system. Moreover, I feel more comfortable with a shared “American Dream” that is hypnotized into me by the Americans behind American pop culture media than I would with having to go through mandatory military training and political speeches/lectures I consciously don’t want to be subjected to before I’m allowed to graduate in an emphasis that may have absolutely nothing to do with Chinese national politics.
I feel this conversation has evolved into a different topic by now, albeit quite naturally and enjoyably, but I do want to make a note of my sentiment about this here. I think if we’re going to start talking about “the American Dream as equivalent to Chinese nationalism in being socialized as a method of fostering and maintaining allegiance”, we need to be clear about that so we can frame our future thoughts appropriately.
Most people, anywhere, buy into the system they were raised in, whether it’s an American Dream or Chinese one. Those dream systems are all built on the same thing, personal gain. Very few people really look at the values and life they’ve committed to and even if they ever change systems, somehow, are actually still involved in the same orignal base pursuit. It would be great if more people looked at their situation and instead of assuming it’s special, with certain “local characteristics”, realized that it’s really just the same, just with a different name.
A better example of how the US is just as, if not far more so, militarialy/patriotically indoctrinated would be the ROTC. Most US highs schools and colleges have them. The students/cadets are often super gungho, uber Patriots, who wave the flag and love to shoot guns. How many Chinese universities have representetives of their armed forces in class? Can you see an active army colonel, possibly even in uniform, in a regular Qinghua classroom? In Yale you could. Yet, those seemingly mindless soldiers often become scholars, with balanced world views, not centered on the US but on global egalitarian principals and ethics.
I’m rambling…
The pledge of allegiance is not mandatory though. One can refuse the pledge based on religious grounds, like Jehovah Witnesses. In addition, homeschooled children obviously don’t have to say the pledge. I am uncertain though about private and chartered schools though.
Ugh, last post’s grammar is horrid. It’s getting late, my bad.
JqUH, no worries, I understood your comment. I know that different states have different laws or regulations for the Pledge of Allegience, and I know that the custom of saying it (and the wording itself) has changed over time. I know for certain that young children have not always been informed of — nor do they necessarily have the mental maturity to appreciate — the significance of reciting or not reciting the pledge.
Chinesepod.com has an advanced lesson dialogue titled “军训” (http://chinesepod.com/lessons/军训) which debates whether military training is 魔鬼训练营 (training camp hell) or a 友情培养基地 (place to build camaraderie). There are some interesting views there, especially the observation that female students tend to have more positive experiences of military training because the buff soldiers are good to look at, while being friendly to the girls but tough on the boys.
One (presumably female) commenter on the Chinesepod.com discussion page linked above wrote, “我认为军训的过程是“痛并快乐着”的，有苦也有甜，但是就像学生时代的许多事情一样，回忆起来的时候，还是甜的多一点。” (“I think the military training process was painful and happy. It was bittersweet, but like a lot of experiences during student days, when looking back on it, it seems more sweet than not”).
When I think of the typical student in China today going through first-time military training, I can’t help but think of this thrilling training scene:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK7XwLbd-oI
And considering the fact that South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore all have mandatory military conscription ranging from 16-24 months, a few weeks during the school year in China is not so bad in comparison. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_service#Countries_with_mandatory_military_service)
I agree with Kai that military training is meant to be a means of indoctrination/socialization. But this is not necessarily a bad thing.
Great stuff Kai…
Has anyone figured out where this is? It doesn’t seem to be a major university. Even though all tertiary institutons do the military training for the first few weeks of school, the big ones that I have attended, lived in, and taught at, never made it such a huge spectacle as this.
It’s funny when stuff that used to have a meaning and real purpose, physical fitness, team work, people’s militia, detachments of red women, becomes just formalized displays of inanity and bland pomp. Though it’s obviously political education, it can’t be a very effective form of it. The instructors likely aren’t rousing them to vigorous passionate love of the motherland by telling them to mimic killing the capitalist invaders ie “imagine you’re stabbing an American running dog”; these kids would likely find that a hilarious joke. It’s really just a waste of time that 99.9% of college students and educators find completely useless.
I’ve seen the military training at Chinese Universities and it seems kind of pointless to me.
What is the official explanation/justification for it?
Also, is it fair to compare saying the pledge of the allegiance or singing the national anthem (which takes like 2 minutes) to weeks of boot camp?
Two weeks of basic military training is OK for the girls, many people, especially women, think in Europe that boys should spend at least six months in the military (the new German government has decided to cut conscription time to 6 months from 9 months). They consider that boys need some kind of rite of passage, besides being taught to get up early in the morning, clean the barracks, wash and iron their clothing, learning to obey orders from male and female drill instructors (a good way to eliminate macho behavior), physical training etc.