甘地，六十年

© Henri Cartier-Bresson / Magnum Photos，1948

1948年1月31日，“圣雄”甘地遇刺身亡。

Does Max Planck Hobble Universities?

Thanks to Harrison's reminder, I picked up the news on Science horribly titled as Max Planck Accused of Hobbling Universities. Is Max Planck going to be sentenced?

It is an interesting piece of news, but far from good enough in argument, in
my opinion. The author made a mistake at the very first step as she/he quoted the international university rankings to prove the problem of Germany's education. It is nonsense for European universities, as it is an invention of US style. However, I don't intend to deny the trouble the Germany's universities face and has been argued for a long time. In fact, The "problem" that is talking about is a consequence of globalization rather than a problem of Germany, or any other country. And it is never an independent trouble of the education and research system.

The institution of Germany, or more generally, Europe, is largely different with that of US in many an aspect, among which the distinction in welfare system, including education, may be most significant. For example, in the recent documentary film 'Sicko', Moore compared the health insurance system of US and France. Generally speaking, along the dimension of equality and freedom, US often shows propensity to
individualist, while the European continent prefers egalitarian to some extent. I believe the institutions evolved via different paths historically, and fit well in their own niches for some time, until the parts of the world merge together.

By the same token, the education systems start with different points. For US, it is biased to meritocracy, that is, the universities open for the rich and the clever. While for Europe, the colleges serve the public, and everybody, either rich or poor, clever or stupid, as long as she is willing to, has the opportunity for higher education. The result is that the former wins in efficiency, of course. And once the borders are open, the clever flow to US, since they can benefit more than average there. Will the transformation of Max Planck reverse the trends? I believe not.

The situation is like two Nash equilibrium strategies, each of which is stable itself. But if placed in the same playground, one invades another. However, it is too early to conclude that one is better than another. Suppose in the prisoner's dilemma the defector dominate the cooperator but leads to a worst outcome. That is it.

To sum up, I'd like to quote the former core, that this article is "too simple, sometimes naive".

PS: If we further include China's education in this debate, where should we place it? I'd prefer to identify it as much more extreme than US in utilitarian. The poor have no way to receive good education, and the universities are in a hurry to copy certifications rather than to culture youth and do science. As a result, we are obviously among the most efficient, but as to quality, I'm not sure. Will more fundings boost China's universities? I have to be pessimistic.

Anyway, it is somewhat ironic for me now to consider two offers from Max Planck and Stanford as once a very "bad" bachelor student in Tsinghua.

2008:选举与旁观

刚刚开始的2008年，也许在中国媒体上出现最多的词语将是“奥运”，但如果放眼世界，新年的主题无疑应是“选举”。当然，别人选举，我们是看客。

当今的世界唯一超级大国美帝的总统初选今天即将在Iowa州打响；再过些日子海峡对岸那个“省”也要选他们的非法领导人了；还有我们的友好邻邦巴基斯坦计划中也要选出一个能够对炸弹免疫的穆萨拉夫的继任者（如果不打内战的话）……

虽说“闲事莫管，吃饭三碗”，可毕竟这些国家的政局动向对于中国的影响都是不可忽视的，所以也不能完全算是闲事。根据经验，届时定然会有不少“家事国事天下事事事关心”的国人紧盯新闻快报的，而其中绝大部分又不得不被官方媒体所引导，不自觉地倒向中央制定的某一派，尽管选举的实际情况往往与官方评论员的大嘴差之千里。

更多的人还会在抱着胳膊看热闹的同时冷嘲热讽几句，比如今天中午在食堂的饭桌上就听见有人说亚洲人不适合民主选举制度。当然，这也算是当下在民间很流行的一种观点，毕竟也有充足的论据：台湾的“伪总统”选战劳民伤财且丑态百出，严重破坏和谐。所以既然我们要建设和谐社会，就应该引以为戒，不要再梦想民选——亚洲人做惯了奴才，学不来民主，还不如安心当奴才。

听说《阿Q正传》要从中学课本上删掉了，以后就不用再担心后来人会再骂我们阿Q了，很好，很和谐。