I thinke he killed him self because he was ashamed of China. He was proud to be Chinese people and left USA, then he learned the truth about China and could not live knowing this.

If you get to the school and find that you need to be someone’s son-in-law or connection, that your work doesn’t matter, that people with far less qualification are put in all positions of responsibility, then not only do you get nowhere but the whole system is corrupt. This corruption varies from country to country, but the politics in academia are vicious and cruel. Highly intelligent people use their intelligence to do the most negative things to get a position or recognition and to demote others.

I have a friend teaching in China. I think the politics are even worse there due to all the reasons we can think of if we know much about China. This is a sad story.

Key, by the way, you’re doing a wonderful job on this website! I’ve been reading this blog from just when you started. I really like how you are actively involved with posting comments now.

A suicidal incident is not surprising. Everyday, thousands of people suicide in the world. But Dr. Tu’s death is not a simple case. It reflects something unfair that is still undisclosed.

The reported excerpt from his suicide note,

“At this moment, I think my original decision was made too rashly and I have never expected what had happened afterwards. I would like to thank friends for the advice before everything. The reality of the China’s academic circles: cruel, faithless and heartless, although I overlooked all of these because of my self-righteousness.”

calls to mind the adage “Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.”

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre’s_Law

“On 20 December 1973, the Wall Street Journal quoted Sayre as: “Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.” Political scientist Herbert Kaufman, a colleague and coauthor of Sayre, has attested to Fred R. Shapiro, editor of The Yale Book of Quotations, that Sayre usually stated his claim as “The politics of the university are so intense because the stakes are so low”, and that Sayre originated the quip by the early 1950s.

Many other claimants attach to the thought behind Sayre’s Law. The bitterness of academic life was memorably noted by Max Weber:

Academic careers are then sorely beset by chance. When a young scientist or scholar comes to seek advice about habilitation the responsibility which one assumes in advising him in heavy indeed. If he is a Jew, one naturally tells him: lasciate ogni speranza [Canto III, line 9 of Dante’s Inferno, sometimes translated as "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here."]. But the others, too, must be asked with the utmost seriousness: “Do you think that, year after year, you will be able to stand to see one mediocrity after another promoted over you, and still not become embittered and dejected?” Of course, the answer is always: “Naturally, I live only for my calling.” But only in a very few cases have I found them able to undergo it without suffering spiritual damage. These things have to be said about the external conditions of the academic career.
—Max Weber, “Science as a Vocation”, translated by Edward Shils

According to Arthur S. Link, Woodrow Wilson frequently complained about the personalized nature of academic politics, asserting that the “intensity” of academic squabbles was a function of the “triviality” of the issue at hand. Harvard political scientist Richard Neustadt was quoted to a similar effect: “Academic politics is much more vicious than real politics. We think it’s because the stakes are so small.” In his 1979 book Peter’s People and Their Marvelous Ideas, Laurence J. Peter stated “Peter’s Theory of Entrepreneurial Aggressiveness in Higher Education” as: “Competition in academia is so vicious because the stakes are so small.”

Another proverbial form is: “Academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small.” This observation is routinely attributed to former Harvard professor Henry Kissinger. Justin Kaplan, editor of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, asked Henry Kissinger whether he had stated, “The reason academic politics are so bitter is that so little is at stake.” According to him, Kissinger, “foxy as ever, said he didn’t recall saying it but that it ’sounded’ like him. In other words, he didn’t say it but wouldn’t mind if we thought he did.” In fact, in a 1997 speech at the Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs at Ashland University, Kissinger said: “I’m going to say one thing about academic politics to which Mr. [Peter W.] Schramm referred. I formulated the rule that the intensity of academic politics and the bitterness of it is in inverse proportion to the importance of the subject their [sic.] discussing. And I promise you at Harvard, they are passionately intense and the subjects are extremely unimportant.”

Variations on the same thought have also been attributed to scientist-author C.P. Snow, professor-politician Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and politician Jesse Unruh.”

******************* ******* ******** ********** ********* ***************
Although this should not discourage anyone from seeking an academic career, one should be prepared to face the reality of academic politics. There are many seekers and only few positions and resources available, and talent does not rise naturally to the top.

Here’s what I think. He’s a bright, loyal family guy. He returns to China to be a professor. He’s not doing it for the money, he wants to make China a better place. He starts teaching and it was not what he expected. He also did not expect to fall in love with a student. The female student wants him to leave his wife and family. He doesn’t know what to do and cannot talk to anyone about his situation. He has ashamed and disgraced his family. He goes home daily to see the wife he no longer loves. Depression occurs. He takes drugs which only make him more sad. The vicious cycles repeat over and over again until something deep within his intellectual head SNAPS.

What do you guys think?

But as the other poster pointed out, the position he holds now will teach him more about how things need to get done now, and will allow him to be inthe position to make changes when the time comes. Making immediate changes is noble and idealist, but probaby not to teh best interest of teh company and its employees as he (and you I assume) wishes they would be.

It’s sad even a story like this brings out the china bashers.

The vast majority of people in Zhejiang who make 3000 RMB a month, no matter if even in Wenzhou, live decent, respectable and dignified lives.

As far as studying abroad giving one “perspective”, I fail to see how that helped this young man. One might surmise that, far from being made independent by Northwestern, he was coddled there, as they provide a cushy environment. And the world of U.S. academia is every bit as cut-throat and merciless as that of China, with the benefits (for the non-tenured) being decidedly lower.

So put away the violins, this man deserves no dirge played at wake. Sorry if that sounds cold, but if you want to commiserate, do so with those he left behind, not the departed.

China also has the highest rate of suicide among women.

The modern life is not fulfilling for most. It is just empty action after empty action. What is the goal? To be ‘better’ (whatever that means) or have more things than your neighbor or friends? No. Life is about having a real foundation, a real life compass. An important thing is to be content.