Some of us can sniff out a hub-zone opportunity a mile away. Mike Rowse, in the SCMP, suggests that Hong Kong host a branch of Harvard University, to accommodate the international students Trump has decided to turn away after the school incurred his wrath…
To show that our offer is serious and not a passing whim, we should be prepared to offer Harvard a long lease of the land at a nominal premium, say 50 years with an automatic right of renewal for a further 50 years without payment of an additional premium – the same model adopted for Hong Kong Disneyland. This would send a clear message that we want them here permanently.
We could also give assurances on the issue of student visas. There would be no reason for our immigration authorities to turn away a bona fide Harvard student from any country. Post-graduation employment opportunities could also be discussed. In return, Harvard would have to give comprehensive and binding undertakings on issues such as the deployment of faculty and sharing research findings.
The Disneyland comparison is inevitable. As a civil servant Rowse was, of course, instrumental in putting that deal together over 25 years ago. It is also unfortunate: the Disney resort massively squandered land and money in exchange for attracting tourists we neither need nor want.
There is also something apt about it. The idea of luring this new high-profile US brand name is another frantic, almost panicky, attempt to find a role for Hong Kong. Like Savannah College of Art and Design (now closed) or the University of Chicago’s campus (still around?), and numerous other attempts to attract glitzy events, sports stars as residents, and company HQs. Why does Hong Kong have to come across as so desperate? Why do its policymakers seem to have so little confidence in their own city? Why not identify and fix that underlying problem?
Another predictable thing about this proposal: there has to be a real-estate angle. One microsecond after wondering if Harvard would want a campus here, and we’re already talking leases and premiums. Can anyone think of something that doesn’t involve land handouts? Why not?
Also, we must assume, Trump will not be around forever, and in a few years Harvard will once again be able to accept overseas students and do its other stuff – long before work begins on a pokey little annex in the New Territories.
Then there is the issue of whether NatSec-era Hong Kong and Harvard would really want each other. Old-style former civil servants might crave a glamorous American institution setting up shop here. But the city’s new leadership might not be so keen. Chief Secretary Eric Chan is more interested in patriotism and national security, and portraying the West as a threat…
[Chan] said the country is coming under attack from western countries led by the United States, in part because they’re envious of China’s many successes, such as in sports, car manufacturing and space endeavours.
…”The people recognise the country’s great success in sports, and that’s led to jealousy from the US and the West, or perhaps they’re worried about the impact from our nation’s strength – that’s why they’d caused so much trouble.”
This doesn’t sound like a warm welcome for the likes of Harvard.
The CS also suggests that Hongkongers spend their money in Shenzhen out of admiration for China’s economic prowess…
The rising number of Hongkongers visiting mainland China shows they are recognising its development, Chan said
“This is just like how many citizens, after realising the good quality and low prices in the mainland, enjoy going north to shop during holidays,” Chan said.
“It all begins with recognising the country’s development – only then do they ‘vote with their feet’ and understand how to show their support,” he added.
Can we be a ‘spending money overseas out of patriotism’ hub?
“The rising number of Hongkongers visiting mainland China shows they are recognising its development, Chan said”
Yup…nailed it. That is EXACTLY why they’re going to Shenzhen on the weekends for a good time. Nice to see, for once, a HK government official with a finger on the pulse of the people.
“Why not identify and fix that underlying problem?”
Seriously?
The problem is obvious, and any option for “fixing” it ended on paper in 1997 and in the real world around 2019. The security of the Party is paramount. Trivialities like “what HK wants” or “what might be good for HK” have long ceased to have meaning.
Can we just give Disney to Harvard and be done with it?
Incidentally, I see the commie rag is getting excited about the anti-tourism protests in Europe, but then running uncritical stories about ‘Golden Week’ visitor numbers here in the world’s most over-touristed city?
Does nobody at Times Square get the connection or are they not allowed to look out the window?
If we are so confident about our supremacy, why don’t we open a University of Heilongjiang campus?
Enticing Harvard to Hong Kong with a mega-property deal would be an exact re-run of buying the Disneyland brand at the absolute top of the market. Recent Harvard graduates now come with a giant “Do not hire” sign hanging around their necks.
The Harvard ‘brand’, as well as those of many of the prominent US universities, is tanking pretty fast. Dominated by leftist administrators, teachers and students the institute has entered a wokist death-spiral. There is little chance of it returning to its former standing (pre Year 2000). Hong Kong does not need this. With an initiative that will run for the next 100 years, it would be better to invite key mainland universities to set up campuses here (Tsinghua, Peking, Fudan, Zhejiang, Shanghai Jiao Tong, UST, Nanjing etc.). Also, they would focus on hard degrees, not the “blah-blah feel-good studies” cr4p that many institutes in Western countries nowadays specialize in.
Russian warship, go f**k yourself.
Trump and MAGA would be all for Harvard opening a campus in Hong Kong – on the stipulation that only “Studies” classes and degrees are offered. Any department run by Marxists that teach “grievance studies” can be taught. That way, the US would no longer be at a huge disadvantage of have grads run around thinking that capitalism is bad. But while they might not get an education worth two cents, at least they will be “credentialed”.
Saying Harvard is a place for “grievance studies” is the most MAGA, red pilled nonsense to find on a blog related to HK culture / goverance. Shit. Is it envy of smart people, or simple anti-intellectualism as personal philosophy that makes the uneducated so opinionated on education? Harvard does three things exceptionally well. They ‘educate’ politician-lawyers, award MBAs for pay, and churn out Nobel Laureates in:
– physics (20)
– chemistry (31, and more than any other)
– medicine (34, and more than any other)
They have one in literature, nine peace prizes and 27 in economics, by the way.
James misses the mark. The problem is not in science departments, but in the liberal arts Department. Read the whole thing.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/harvard-university-left-bias-trump-omar-sultan-haque
CJ: Do you still consider Harvard a university in the proper sense of the word?
Haque: Outside of fields where people use equations, Harvard is a non-sectarian university only in name.
Haque’s initial piece:
https://www.omarveritas.com/p/veritas-betrayed-wake-up-stand-up
@HK-Cynic
Exactly.
Two-generation Harvard family, up from the docks.
There will not be a third.
Veritas my ass.
Rensselaer Polytechic Institute (RPI) beats Harvard hands down.