In recent weeks, under the guidance of official state media, China has launched a nationwide campaign to crack down on academic misconduct. Following the Chinese Communist Party’s familiar playbook, the authorities have begun the campaign by making examples of several high-profile figures.
The first prominent target was young author Jiang Fangzhou. On July 5, following a real-name complaint alleging plagiarism in Jiang’s master’s thesis, state-run Xinhua News Agency cited a preliminary investigation by Renmin University of China, reporting that “no academic misconduct had been found.” However, just days later, the case took a dramatic turn.
On July 13, Xinhua prominently published another statement from the university announcing that, after a renewed review, Jiang’s master’s thesis was found to contain multiple passages substantially overlapping with other works without proper attribution. The university concluded that academic misconduct had occurred and decided to revoke Jiang’s master’s degree.
Such an abrupt reversal—where an official media outlet effectively contradicted its own earlier reporting within a matter of days—has been relatively rare in the past. The authorities’ willingness to publicly reverse themselves suggests that powerful forces behind the scenes attached great importance to the case and were eager to establish an official conclusion.
Another high-profile target
Had this been an isolated incident, the controversy might have quickly subsided. Instead, another high-profile figure soon became the next target: Jia Qianqian, daughter of renowned writer Jia Pingwa and an associate professor at the School of Chinese Language and Literature at Northwest University. Jia had long faced online accusations and criticism, but official authorities had previously refrained from taking a clear position.
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
Once again, however, Xinhua News Agency stepped in. On July 15, it reported that, following a review of relevant materials and a professional assessment by an expert panel, Northwest University concluded that Jia had committed plagiarism and that the allegations of academic misconduct were substantiated. The university announced that it would revoke her title of associate professor, terminate her teaching qualifications, revoke her master’s degree, approve her resignation, and formally end her employment.
The two incidents occurring one after another were highly unusual, and some internet users dubbed the episode “Fangzhou Run Aground” (方舟搁浅), a play on Jiang Fangzhou’s name.
Unusual developments
Objectively speaking, academic fraud has long been a widely recognized problem in China’s academic community. It has also been a phenomenon frequently criticized by Chinese netizens. In principle, academic misconduct is indeed an issue that requires rectification.
However, what makes these developments unusual is that the handling of academic misconduct cases normally falls within the administrative domain of universities themselves. In this case, the Chinese authorities have intervened—directly and publicly. Not only have they intervened, but they have done so with a high level of publicity. Furthermore, judging from the coordinated release of multiple official announcements concerning similar cases in succession, it appears to be a deliberate arrangement by the official propaganda system.
Clearly, this latest “academic fraud crackdown” has gone beyond the simple goals of upholding academic integrity and improving campus standards. It has become a campaign led by the authorities, with apparent planning and coordination.
The question, therefore, is: Why are the authorities doing this? What are they trying to achieve?
‘Criticism of the Study of Dream of the Red Chamber‘
In the view of someone like me who specializes in the history of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), this pattern employed by the authorities feels strikingly familiar. It reminds me of a political campaign personally initiated and led by Mao Zedong in 1954: the “Criticism of the Study of Dream of the Red Chamber” (关于《红楼梦》研究问题的批判).
In 1954, renowned Chinese classical literature scholar and authority on Dream of the Red Chamber studies Yu Pingbo published works including A Brief Discussion of Dream of the Red Chamber, continuing to use the textual research methods of his mentor Hu Shi for academic study. This traditional approach of textual scholarship, which was not strongly ideological in nature, conflicted with the CCP’s effort at the time to unify intellectual thinking across China under Marxism-Leninism and dialectical materialism.
At that moment, two very young and previously unknown scholars—Li Xifan, a graduate of Shandong University, and Lan Ling—published an article titled “On A Brief Discussion of Dream of the Red Chamber and Related Issues” (关于〈红楼梦简论〉及其他) in Shandong University’s academic journal Literature, History, and Philosophy (文史哲). From the perspective of Marxist class struggle theory, they sharply criticized Yu Pingbo’s views as representing “bourgeois idealism.”
What had originally been a normal academic debate soon became a tool for Mao Zedong to launch a political campaign. On Oct. 16, 1954, Mao personally wrote a letter to the CCP Politburo and leaders responsible for cultural affairs—the well-known “Letter on the Study of Dream of the Red Chamber.” In the letter, Mao highly praised Li Xifan and Lan Ling for launching “the first serious attack against the erroneous views of the so-called authoritative scholars of Dream of the Red Chamber studies.”
Mao elevated what had been a literary and academic discussion into a life-and-death struggle between “bourgeois idealism” and “proletarian materialism.” He used the campaign to sharply criticize cultural propaganda officials such as Zhou Yang and others. The deeper target, however, was believed to have been the bureaucratic faction within the Party associated with Liu Shaoqi.
In my view, the actions of the CCP’s Central Propaganda Department and state media in the “Fangzhou Run Aground” (方舟搁浅) episode bear similarities to Mao’s method of “using a small issue to achieve a larger political objective, and using techniques to advance political goals.”
Academic crackdown may signal ideological tightening
The likely purpose is to use intervention in high-profile academic controversies to strengthen official authority over ideological and moral spheres. This raises concerns that the campaign may signal a new round of ideological tightening and intellectual discipline.
Today’s Central Propaganda Department appears to be skillfully drawing upon Mao-era political methods, transforming public dissatisfaction with privilege and anger over perceived injustice into tools for reinforcing ideological control by the authorities.
This political strategy of “building the appearance of an academic fraud crackdown while pursuing ideological discipline behind the scenes” raises a broader question: does it indicate that a new phase of “Cultural Revolution-style” ideological campaigns may be advancing further?
That possibility may be a more significant development to watch than the “Fangzhou Run Aground” controversy itself.
※ Wang Dan (王丹) is a Chinese pro-democracy activist and one of the best-known leaders of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests.
This article represents only the author’s personal views and does not necessarily represent the views of Vision Times. Translated from the original Chinese and republished with authorization from Up Media.
