BEIJING, July 12 (Xinhuanet) -- When Zhu Xueqin, a celebrated historian and public intellectual, gets bracketed with his academic opponent, Wang Hui, in the press and online, the irony is hard to miss. The two antagonists were accused of the same sin - plagiarism, an academic death penalty.
First it was Wang, a political theorist at Tsinghua University and Chinese New Left pioneer. He was accused of plagiarism in his doctoral dissertation Against Despair. Now it is Zhu, the exponent of contemporary Chinese liberalism who is also suspect.
By the current academic definition of plagiarism, they both displayed misuse of footnotes and citations, which could make readers believe that some quotes are their original works. Although their work was done during the 1980s when there were no explicit regulations for Chinese academic writing, they are not free from responsibility, as this is 2010 and the evidence is still there in their books. However, for the same reason that 1980s was not a decade with fine regulations, it may be too harsh to make those two pay the full price.
The whole story may be downplayed as a partisan battle between different academic schools, namely, between the New Left and Chinese Liberalism. There was similar specu-lation three years ago when Wang Hui was removed as editor of Dushu (Reading) magazine. The left interpreted the incident as liberalism's conspiracy, as was Wang's plagiarism this time, and it is said that Zhu's exposure is a backlash from the left.
Nonetheless, it is true that Wang Binbin, the first scholar who charged Wang Hui with academic misconduct himself is close to the left. The campaign was to combat academic misconduct, and we believe further exposure of Wang Hui's academic opponents help cleanse the academic atmosphere. Given the ubiquity of plagiarism in China's social science academia, it would be beneficial if we can make scholars comply with standards.
But it would be helpful to proceed gently - to prevent the ongoing discussion from turning into a truly partisan clash. Following Wang Hui's mishap, a number of scholars as well as academic fans have formed two opposing groups. One group unreservedly supported Wang, denying basic facts, while the other group sought to totally tar Wang, ignoring that Wang's lapse is in part due to the lack of clear regulations.
To the public, plagiarism and the battle against it may appear remote. However, social science scholars are no less supported by public funds; and they should earn credit by honest means and produce work of reasonable standard. It is important to clean up the academic atmosphere without delay. Otherwise, this will be another polluted arena.
(Source: Global Times)
