偶然间发现,我是在离开这座城市之后才喜欢上她的. 就象人们说的那样,许多美好的事物,都是在你失去她的时候,才发现她的价值. 也许平日忙忙碌碌的生活在那里,早忘却了去体会一下她深厚的历史积淀,浓郁的文化气息.......最近,几幅老北京的胡同素描,让我又从新的发现了她. 那种弥漫在胡同里的强烈生活气息让我找到了家的温馨........忆起当年在成府胡同里的日子,竟然是最有生活韵味的时光, 每当夕阳西下, 缕缕的炊烟四处弥漫着,很庸懒但也是很惬意的感觉, 夹杂在胡同里,稀稀落落的酒吧和小书店吸引着形形色色的人们来到这里......记得一个学人类学的朋友说过,每个城市都是有灵魂的,但需要你去发觉她的美. 所以每每她到一个新城市,都要撤撤底底的去发掘一下,这个城市的历史,文化,有意思的街区,雅致的酒吧和咖啡馆,听着各式各样的人去讲诉这个城市的过去. 她过的很充实也让人很羡慕, 忽然间发觉自己忙忙碌碌的追寻着所谓的理想,竟然错过了很多很多. 现在才明白, 其实生活是需要用心来体验的, 不是吗?

1. The Crisis of Higher Education: I don't support every university should focus on research. The major purpose and social responsibility for Eucation to take is to nurture average people not only for elites but as many civilian as it can. Much resources and energy should be put into improve education access and teaching the basics. On the contrary, I strongly agree more and more liberal arts college and technology college should be established, whose major job is to broaden the view of students and teaching but not so called academic research. We need more and more really good teachers to nurture the people. Now days, it's really too hard to find a really good teacher.........

   ---

2. The Crisis of Disparitiy: The disparity issue is so prominent in China. Between rural area to urban, between poor and rich, beteen female to male, between so called "key" schools to ordinary schools. Small group of people can enjoy the majority advantages of the system and most resources. In terms of funding, I need to do more research about exact numbers, but I believe far less money have been effectivelly invested into the primary and secondary education system especailly undeserved regions. Small amount of universities eat up too much system resources. One othe function for education is to mobilize social "class" so the poor can change, the middle can upgrade. Without such mobility, the poor is poorer, the rich is richer, the system weill be unstable and subject to collapse.

   ---

3. The Crisis of Methods: What we can really learn from the offical education channel after years education? Only the ability to solve some artificially designed problems. We're lack of ability to cooperate, to learn, to creat, to communcate. All important skills to survive in the future is not fully developed. Those rigid system will exterminate the creativity of students and interests. I'd like to promot more real team participation project, more real problem solvings other than to tackle those questions from tutor textbooks. In all, it's due to an unjustified system to evaluate student success. Only the student can get higher score are called achiever and winner. In fact to evaluate a student, we have to measure different issues...........Although it hard to change current college entrance examination system, we'd better to find other alternatives.........

   ---

4. The Crisis of Principles: Some aspects are even not dicernable. I feel the current social standards are changing. Students are lack of religion, lack of belief, lack of judgement, lack of  correct values. The change of those principles are difficult to recover if they have grassroots established. It's not the fault of students but the system. Students are under too much pressure and unnessesary burden. They should be freed. Learn what interests them. To set up the social standards have to start from the primary eduation and secondary education, when students get to college, most worldviews and principles are formed. Also the tradiational dictation is not functional, we should learn from real. Learn how to respect, how to cooperate, how to communcate, how to be honest, how to be nice from real team work and community services.

   ---

5. The Crisis of Universities: What's the soul for univeristy? To whom the university should serve? Students. Now days, I can hardly find any university take students seriously. They even don't respect students at all. There are no students rights. Most desicion makings from excecutives of unviersity are no consideration about students and they don't think in the perspective of students. Without students, I cannot image what the unviersity should be. Also, on the other perspective of teachers, they're also ignored by the executives. I don't see any transparancy, don't see the efficient administration. It should be changed. We need real good presedents of universities who know how to respect, how to manage, how to make a change. More and more buildings are finished, but more and more people corrupt. Too much attention on the hardware but too less appreciation on the software. 

1. The Methodology used in Education research and practice field. Where to acquire relavent information, where to lean how to start a project, where to lean how to structure an independent study project? How to learn the basics as soon as possible?
2. Learn about US education sytem from her. Hopefully, I can get a breif overview about US eduation system. Especailly I'm interested in primary and secondary education, also the higher education. Since she is from Harvard, I can also learn about something about ivy league from her. Well, I believe I should try to find another guy who are specializing in Education but from Williams or Wellesley College so as to know much about liberal arts college.
   
3. Learn how to improve education through NGO's functions...........

I found a very good article analyzing why there is Iraq war. It's by John J Mearsheimer, professor from U of Chicago, a Realist.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy-americanpower/morgenthau_2522.jsp

From realist point of view, they not only opposed the Vietam war but also the Iraq war, but right now the popularity of neo-conservatism in statemen made US foreign policy more lean to kinda of Wilsonianism with teeth, which description is so impressive to me. He further alleged that the "The theory has an idealist strand and a power strand: Wilsonianism provides the idealism, an emphasis on military power provides the teeth"

The power strand means US process the unique military power right now and can reshape the world according to their interests, so AFP is unilateralism not multilateralism, they abandoned UN aside and make their own efforts in the international relations conflicts. The Idealist strand is from Wilsonianism to promot Democracy around the world especailly in middle east, in which they believe that the Democracy is the best way to make peace since there hardly is a war between countries with Democracy. But why they fire the Iraq? Because of oil and economic interest? Because Iraq tempted to develop MDW? Why they support Isarial? because of so much Jewish power in the US? Not at all, it's because they want to forcely spread the Democracy in middle east, a region is lack of Democracy for years. and they believe there is domino theory behind, if the Iraq falls, the other countries in middle east and in the world will be freezed by the power of US and be afraid to be next hit by US , so as to stop developing nuclear weapons and the Democracy government in Iraq will spread the effect around. Step by step, US can turn the Middle east to the heaven of Democracy, then there will be no more major conflict or wars..........Iran, Syria and North Korea will follow the dominic theory to bow to US.........Democracy and Military Power are the arms employed by Bush.

Well, I totally agree on the above points, but is it no consideration about economic interests at all? No oil deal behind it? I think it has such interests but that will fall into side effect and second layer. In all, it's international relations issues not international economic issues. US can never dominate all the resources in Iraq even they win the war easily since they claim to be the Democracy and free market. I cannot think of any solution behind that US can obtain more economic interests through the war. In one hand, the supply and production lines in Iraq are badly damaged, US cannot expect to aquire more oil interests from the war. In the other hand the profits from oil trading or reconstruction will not compensate to the cost of the war. The new generation of wars are so expensive. and the troops have to be well maintained overseas, which are a large amount of budget compare to the uncertain interests afterwards. So I believe the major reason for US to lauch the war is kind of more like to trigger domino effect and spread the Democracy. Additionally, it's kind of being abused by their formidable power.

After cold war, the system turns to be no more bipolarity but unipolarity. Such unipolarity will give too much ambitions to US and they'll be abused by their power. Anyhow, the Republican and neo-conservatism are so powerful in Bush Administration right now, they'll keep to follow the Wilsonianism with teeth strand and there will be more effort to export their Democracy around the world until they fall from the peak. PS. From Realist point of view, there are the balancing of power among states, and every states major goal is to survive, to maximize their power, if they're scared by the power of US, the best way is to develop their power, the nuclear weapons, there will no domino effect after Iraq's fall but more effort towards the development. From the facts of Iran and North Korea, you'll see the Realists are right not only in the history of Vietam war but also the war of Iraq.

Actually, I want to know more about the Realist Guru, Hans Morgenthau, but happened to see a nice introduction about Henry Kissinger. Because he is so exceptional among all realists, he is almost the only one supporting for the Vietnam and Iraq war. Quite interesting story. Some of Kissinger's critics accuse him of having committed war crimes while in government in Nixon and Ford presendency. Inonically, He is the Winner of the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize. This also proves that the so-called "Classical Realist and Neorealist" are not absolute and it's not so well definced according to different person's view. Not all reallists behave the same, they have their own opinions but share some common values though. Finally, I realized who Henry Kissinger is!!! He is the so called "基辛格", hehe, a pretty familliar name for Chinese. Well, he is a Jewish immigrant during WW2. He pioneered in the policy of Detente, reduction of the tension between US and USSR in60s and 70s , also pionneered in normalization relations with China in 1972. After 80s, he was out of the active stage of Republican because of the neo-conservatists forces rising and abandoned the "Detente" policy during the Carter and Bushes' presendency. While, one interesting point is that different presendency represent different groups of thought schools in Republicans or Demoncrats in US, and such school of thoughts are so dominated in the states, the Amrican Foreign Policies are adjusted according to the extent of those forces in congress or think tank of the presedent. Right now, the Bush administration is pretty dominated by Neo-conservatists, who are kind of anti-communist and would worry badly about "Rising China"........ So, they'll try their best to check the growth of China and make a balance power regionally either through Japan or Taiwan.

Well, I believe in different period of time, different thought will dominate the US statemen, but how the different views interact and evoleves are quite intriging! Perhaps, during the cold war, the realists and neorealists can provide the effective explaination and solutions for the bipolarity system and make recommendations, so those schools are rapidly developed, step by step the .liberals and conservatisists are rising. Although I understand from Realists point of view, why US want to make normalization relations with China in 70s, but I'm quite puzzled why Kissinger supported the Vietnam war........seems most Realists criticize about it..........Maybe some constraits from the government?

It's so odd, there are so few mature theories for International Relations, Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism......... what else? First of all, Why we need theories? The simple answer is Coz we want to discribe, explain and predict International Relations.........The theories are also quite different from the reality coz in order to make a theory, you have to layout certain assumptions and make certain hypothesis and simplifications from the realities for your analysis. Otherwise, you'll never get out, you'll be meshed by the large amount of information and never know why it happens and how it happens, the theory can help you organize a set of disconnected realities and phenomona to make logical reasonings and conclusions.......Although Realism theory seems the earlist developed one, I always feel it's quite arbitrary and extreme, but believe it or not, now days, quite a few statemen in US still buy their points. That's why we can hear about all the headlines on "China is the biggest threat for US" blabla........I'm sure my point is kinda biased, but Why the mainstream theories don't take as much emphasis on cultures and religions as they should to explain the issues in international relations? The culture and religion are so negiligible in those issues?

I belive I need more readings to develope a reasonable argument.........

Finally, I convinced myself to launch somthing here. Although Drupal (www.drupal.org) seems a much better tool for bloggers, but It's too complicated to me........ After all, I'm lazy........

Since it's a big progress evolutionarily for Human Beings to make records, why not contribute to the history and share the experiences and thoughts with others? It'll be a more positive way to live on the earth........After all, It's a world dominated by Homo Sapiens.........