Yan Xuetong, a professor at Tsinghua University, made controversial points, including redefining the effectiveness of patriotism and surrender in maintaining peace. These views have sparked heated discussions among netizens, whether they are for or against? Check it out!
Quite a controversial point of view
As Chinese people, we are all taught patriotism, but recently, Yan Xuetong, a professor at Tsinghua University, has made some controversial points.
Professor Yan Xuetong said that surrender is the most effective way to maintain peace, and patriotism does not need to be cultivated.
As soon as such remarks came out, they immediately sparked a huge controversy on the Internet, with some netizens believing that such views were too extreme, while others agreed with Professor Yan's remarks.
Professor Yan makes this view because he believes that true patriotic feelings should be spontaneous and inward-looking, rather than imposed through external education or propaganda.
Professor Yan stressed the need to encourage independent conjecture rather than blindly inculcating patriotic ideas.
He believes that the current patriotic education deviates from the essence and only plants the concept of "patriotism" in people's minds, without paying attention to people's real feelings in their hearts.
Many people are "patriotic" on the surface, but when they are really faced with a moment of crisis, they are often in a hurry to escape.
Professor Yan pointed out that such patriotism is irresponsible.
Surrender is the most effective way to maintain peace
In addition to reorienting patriotism, Professor Yan also made the argument that surrender is the most effective way to maintain peace.
He said that in some cases, surrender may be a more rational and effective option to avoid greater conflict and losses.
This view undoubtedly challenges our long-held notions of war and peace.
In the long-standing concept of war and peace inherited by the great powers of the East, war is often regarded as a just war to resist aggression and defend national interests.
Under such a concept, we tend to see those who surrender as betrayers, traitors, and spurn them.
However, Professor Yan looks at the act of surrender from a different perspective, and he believes that in some cases, choosing to surrender can be exchanged for peace, in exchange for the safety of more people's lives and property.
There are even times when we choose to surrender to avoid greater losses from the war, such as Japan's unconditional surrender in 1945.
This not only prevented more innocent people from dying as a result of the war, but also avoided more unnecessary casualties among Japanese soldiers.
From this point of view, surrender also seems to be a good option.
epilogue
Professor Yan's remarks have sparked deep conjectures from all walks of life to re-examine the concepts of patriotism and surrender. Perhaps we need to be more open-minded to different points of view, because there is no one-size-fits-all answer to complex questions of international relations and war. What do you think? Leave a comment to share your thoughts!