9/01/26. Heritage, customs and traditions.

Hi, I'm Vietnamese.

I want to organize an online workshop on Google Meet this Sept to share about the Vietnam' culture for about 10-20 listener.

This will be free but if you want, you could give me some donation for it.

The workshop will share about the Dan Kim and the Dan Ca Tai Tu of the Southern Vietnam, hope you being interested in it, see yah.

PM for me to booking for the slot.

Some people say that romance is written by women, for women, and about women. So what do you make of guys who enjoy reading romance novels?

Recently, Chinese cultural scholar Zhong Shu (仲树), also known as Zhuge Yiyang (诸葛一杨), who frequently speaks on social media and shot to fame after interviewing Nolan, the director of the highly anticipated film *The Odyssey*, has become embroiled in a plagiarism controversy. Some people have cited numerous instances of plagiarism in her podcasts and articles, particularly cases in which she “Sinicized” the statements of foreign scholars/bloggers into Chinese and then presented them to her own readers as her own views.

Zhong Shu herself has denied the accusations of “content laundering” and plagiarism, instead attributing the controversy to people “destroying an idol after creating one.” However, based on comparisons presented by multiple parties between Zhong Shu’s works and the content of the original creators, Zhong Shu has indeed extensively plagiarized the statements and views of others. Rather than engaging in reasonable, standardized, and transparent referencing and citation, she has clearly passed off the creative achievements of others as her own original work. In addition, Zhong Shu has been criticized for relying excessively on AI assistance in her writing rather than writing entirely by herself.

As an emerging young scholar widely regarded as well versed in Western history and philosophy, the discovery of plagiarism, imitation, and other such practices in Zhong Shu’s work has surprised many people. Previously exposed plagiarism scandals involving well-known writers such as Jiang Fangzhou (蒋方舟) and Jia Qianqian (贾浅浅) were relatively easy for people to accept because it was comparatively easy to judge their writing to be of a relatively low standard. But the fact that a cultural scholar like Zhong Shu, who appears to be highly knowledgeable about philosophy and intellectually profound, is also suspected of plagiarism and has suffered a collapse of her public image has left even more people surprised and disappointed.

But for those with a deeper understanding of China’s humanities and social sciences, as well as its cultural and educational environment, this is not particularly surprising. For the past several decades, China’s fields of thought, culture, science, education, and others have consistently lacked vitality and innovative capacity, while rigidity and dogmatism have permeated them, and imitation and plagiarism have become commonplace. In such an environment, it is difficult for people capable of independent thought and creativity to emerge, and naturally difficult for original, novel, and groundbreaking new ideas, new culture, and new research achievements to appear.

Contemporary China not only lacks humanities masters comparable to those of the flourishing periods of ancient Chinese civilization—the Han, Tang, and Song dynasties—or the modern-era Republic of China (中华民国) period; ordinary scholars and intellectuals are also generally better at imitation than innovation, possessing knowledge but lacking ideas, resembling mechanical puppets rather than autonomous living human beings.
This situation is the combined result of China’s political system, educational model, social environment, and other factors. Plagiarism has also become habitual behavior for most Chinese intellectuals, as well as an ingrained practice in academia and even throughout society as a whole.

China’s system is deeply averse to, wary of, and repressive toward people’s independent thinking and autonomous activities. Those in power do not want the people, especially intellectuals, to think independently or rebel intellectually, because this can easily lead to dissatisfaction with those in power and resistance in the real world. The social environment and the environment for cultural creation have consequently become lifeless as well. From the political system to the broader social environment, everything shapes, encourages, and implicitly instructs people to be obedient and compliant and to follow established conventions, while thoughts and behaviors that deviate from predetermined tracks are regarded as “heretical and rebellious” and suppressed and stifled through a combination of coercive and non-coercive means.

It is precisely for the purpose of indoctrinating and disciplining people that China’s education system is also based on cramming and rote memorization and does not encourage creativity. Everyday learning emphasizes memorization while neglecting understanding, and examinations likewise focus on assessing how well students remember knowledge rather than the results of divergent thinking. The orientation and formative influence of the education system have an extremely profound impact on people during childhood and adolescence, when their ideas and modes of thinking are taking shape. An education that suppresses independent thought and autonomy extinguishes the spirit of children and the vitality of adolescents, generally producing “new people” who lack creativity and merely recite from textbooks, cling to convention, and behave like marionettes.

Of course, China’s education itself is insufficiently developed and open. Even when some schools and teachers hope to cultivate students’ creativity, they often lack the corresponding capabilities and methods. Meanwhile, pressures such as performance evaluations also make education more utilitarian, emphasizing quantitative output while neglecting qualitative improvement.

The social environment, including that of the humanities and social sciences, likewise suppresses creativity. People are required to complete complicated workloads and undergo quantitative performance evaluations, while innovation and creativity receive little attention. Although innovation is sometimes nominally included as an evaluation criterion, in practice there are neither adequate standards for measuring the level and value of innovation nor sufficiently attractive mechanisms for rewarding it, so these efforts ultimately become mere formalities. Even various supposedly innovative assignments and projects end up becoming a “plagiarism competition.” People have become accustomed to mechanically following established formulas and precedents; their minds, trapped by habitual patterns of thought, have become too lazy to think divergently or create things that their predecessors did not.

When Chinese people grow up from childhood to adulthood in an environment that constrains thought, disciplines behavior, encourages plagiarism, and suppresses creativity, the overwhelming majority of potential ideas and innovations that might otherwise have emerged are directly stifled. People develop fixed patterns of thinking based on following old precedents and become fundamentally unable to imagine unique new things that transcend existing knowledge; their minds become incapable of generating creative ideas. Not only do people find it difficult to produce creative achievements, they gradually even become reluctant to write independently, instead becoming accustomed to extensively quoting the statements and writings of others. Some are sometimes willing to identify their sources, while at other times they intentionally or unintentionally conceal those sources and dress the material up as their own original writing.

When people are already enthusiastic about copying homework and plagiarizing papers during their student years, and such behavior is widely tolerated, they naturally carry these habits into their adult working lives. Many people work in cultural fields without having a genuine passion for them, and plagiarism is of course far less time-consuming and laborious than racking one’s brains to create something original. Even among cultural figures who genuinely enjoy writing and have achieved some modest success in the humanities and social sciences, most cannot avoid appropriating the writing of others because of the broader environment, habits developed since childhood, and a lack of sensitivity to the problem of plagiarizing other people’s work.

Zhong Shu belongs to the category of young Chinese scholars who possess a certain degree of knowledge and achievement. She has attained a certain level of expertise in Western philosophy, theology, and history, and there are genuine elements in her academic accomplishments; they are not entirely fabricated. But her works do indeed contain instances of plagiarism and appropriation of other people’s work, while her personal image has also been packaged and embellished. If her actual level were quantified as 10, then after packaging herself through methods such as turning other people’s achievements into her own, her output and the level she appears to possess in the eyes of others would reach 30–50.

More specifically, Zhong Shu’s plagiarism represents a relatively easy-to-overlook yet typical practice among Chinese scholars: exploiting the information gap and linguistic differences between China and foreign countries to “Sinicize” large quantities of foreign academic research and foreign-language works, publish them under her own name on Chinese-language media platforms, and “transform” other people’s achievements into her own original results. Because of the information barriers and linguistic differences between China and the outside world, this kind of plagiarism and appropriation is relatively concealed and difficult to detect. Even when it is discovered, there remains considerable room for sophistry—for example, denying that plagiarism occurred on the grounds that one was merely “introducing foreign academic achievements into China and processing and transforming them.”

One reason Zhong Shu’s plagiarism was discovered this time is that she had long been embroiled in various ideological controversies and online disputes, such as conflicts between the American left and right and debates over the Israel–Palestine issue. Her interview with Nolan then made her “go viral,” attracting attention and support while simultaneously bringing greater scrutiny, which led more people to uncover her suspected plagiarism of English-language works by foreigners. Had Zhong Shu not become involved in various controversies and not become famous, then, like the millions of scholars and doctoral students at other universities and research institutions, her plagiarism probably would never have been discovered—or, even if discovered, would not have attracted attention. This is because such plagiarism is simply too widespread and commonplace. People have grown accustomed to it, and it is difficult to identify, report, and address every case individually. Even among those who participated in reporting Zhong Shu’s plagiarism, at least some have themselves plagiarized or appropriated other people’s works in their own writing.

The widespread lack of creativity among Chinese people and the prevalence of plagiarism in the humanities and social sciences, as well as in many other fields, have already become pervasive and deep-rooted maladies that are extremely difficult to eradicate. Merely catching and criticizing a few celebrities suspected of plagiarism is nowhere near sufficient. Because members of universities, research institutes, and other institutions engage in various forms of plagiarism to differing degrees with excessive frequency, while creativity remains weak, universities and the government are both unwilling and unable to comprehensively investigate plagiarism and punish those responsible.

Although the well-known science writer Fang Zhouzi (方舟子), the online publication *New Threads* (《新语丝》), and other individuals and media outlets frequently work to expose fraud and misconduct, criticize falsification in academia and society, and reveal plagiarists, their strength is limited and amounts to a drop in the bucket, making it difficult to curb the pervasive decay of academia.

Although plagiarism is widespread in China, it would be equally wrong and inappropriate to stigmatize Chinese people on this basis and assume that Chinese people are inherently prone to plagiarism or genetically lacking in creativity. In addition to the reasons mentioned above, Chinese people’s lack of creativity and tendency toward imitation and plagiarism have more complex historical and contemporary causes.

Since the beginning of the modern era, China has long suffered from domestic turmoil and foreign threats. From the Qing court’s autocracy and “literary inquisitions” (文字狱), to the wars of the Republic of China era, the Japanese invasion, and the prolonged and repeated political campaigns after 1949, Chinese people have lived in harsh environments characterized by instability, material deprivation, and vulnerability. Apart from brief periods of flourishing during the Republic of China era, largely confined to a small number of elite intellectuals and writers, China for a century—and indeed for an even longer period if traced further back—was immersed in suffering and despair. Moreover, even that brief flourishing was subsequently destroyed by foreign invasion and domestic repression.

For Chinese people who grew up amid poverty, pressure, and trauma, developing and maintaining curiosity, intellectual vitality, and creativity has been far more difficult and far less likely than for people living in affluent and stable societies. Many people struggled even to preserve their lives and lived in constant fear, making it extremely difficult for them to have the energy and conditions necessary to think calmly and create something new. The pressure of survival left people with little time to consider anything beyond their basic livelihoods, while traumatic experiences damaged their vulnerable minds. People generally became numb, utilitarian, and short-sighted.

These problems are not innate to Chinese people but are instead the products of acquired circumstances and choices forced upon them by reality. The influence of the political system and educational model on Chinese people’s ideas and ways of thinking is likewise something that most Chinese people find difficult to resist. Chinese people who have endured multiple forms of misfortune should not be subjected to excessively harsh demands, nor should the possibility of their creativity be denied on the basis of genetics or origin. Chinese scientists such as Tsung-Dao Lee (李政道), Chen-Ning Yang (杨振宁), Samuel C. C. Ting (丁肇中), and Charles K. Kao (高锟), who came from the Republic of China era and settled abroad, demonstrate that Chinese people are fully capable of making pioneering achievements, and particularly demonstrate the importance of the environment in which people develop.

Over more than four decades of Reform and Opening Up (改革开放), some Chinese people have become affluent, and living conditions have also improved greatly. Yet the lingering effects of survival pressures and trauma continue to trouble most Chinese people, including most intellectuals, while anti-intellectualism remains rampant. Against a historical and contemporary background characterized by a longstanding lack of creativity, achieving groundbreaking new accomplishments in the fields of thought and culture is not easy.

Although China since Reform and Opening Up has experienced less poverty, materialistic temptations have made people restless and impatient for quick success and immediate benefits. Plagiarism and appropriation, meanwhile, provide convenient and effective means of producing results and acquiring fame and fortune. Even glamorous celebrities are no exception. Indeed, part of the reason some of them became famous in the first place was precisely their reliance on disreputable methods such as plagiarism.

When plagiarism becomes a prevailing practice and everyone is doing it, each individual plagiarist no longer feels ashamed; it may even become a sign of “fitting in.” Once plagiarism becomes second nature, people easily and unconsciously “appropriate” the achievements of others for every article, every program, and every topic. Zhong Shu is no exception. Taking advantage of her strong English skills and familiarity with cutting-edge foreign academic research and topical discussions, she “Sinicized” such material into Chinese, packaged it as the product of her own thinking, and incorporated it into her own works and programs.

As a scholar familiar with academic norms and ethics, Zhong Shu of course understands that plagiarism is wrong. Yet she clearly has no fundamental aversion to plagiarism; otherwise, she would not have appropriated other people’s words as her own statements on such a large scale and with such proficiency.

Zhong Shu’s plagiarism also exposes the reality behind China’s emerging generation of young scholars: limited knowledge, widespread plagiarism, and an impressive exterior that conceals substantive shortcomings. Some people believe that the new generation of young scholars will be more knowledgeable than the older generation, more professional and observant of academic norms, more creative, and capable of producing more original achievements. In reality, although many young Chinese scholars possess a certain degree of knowledge and ability, their level is not particularly high. Their self-fashioned or externally constructed image often exceeds their substance; image outweighs ability, and sophistication overshadows character. They have been overestimated and excessively praised.

These young Chinese scholars do indeed possess some understanding and knowledge of the fields they study and research, as well as some thoughts and achievements of their own, but these are quite limited, and it is difficult for them to achieve intellectual transcendence or genuine innovation. Naturally, it is even more difficult for them to make epoch-making breakthroughs or become master scholars who establish pioneering achievements.

Contemporary young Chinese scholars also often lack seriousness and a sense of responsibility, which is another reason they become accustomed to plagiarism without feeling ashamed. Many humanities and social sciences students and young scholars treat academia as something that is merely “fun.” This certainly facilitates a more relaxed and comfortable approach to learning and research, but the side effect of diminishing seriousness is an inability to approach knowledge and ideas with rigor and a commitment to truth, while treating the “borrowing” of other people’s achievements as something harmless.

Nor do they understand the integrity expected of intellectuals or their responsibility to shoulder weighty obligations toward society and the world. They lack convictions and ideals and instead adopt a cynical attitude toward life. This inevitably affects their attitude toward academia and the rigor with which they pursue scholarship. Plagiarists also do not believe that appropriating other people’s achievements entails any significant moral or legal responsibility. They feel neither shame nor revulsion toward plagiarism and may even take pride in completing works and gaining fame and fortune through plagiarism, congratulating themselves on their cleverness.

In short, the severe lack of creativity among Chinese intellectuals and the prevalence of plagiarism have complex and diverse causes and have become deeply entrenched problems that are extremely difficult to reverse. Although the development of the internet has led to the frequent exposure of plagiarism scandals, with those involved sometimes facing punishment and setbacks, this cannot fundamentally change the broader environment or longstanding practices. Personally, I do not have any “magic cure” for these problems either. However, I do believe that intellectuals—especially senior intellectuals with higher status and abundant resources—should engage in greater reflection and make changes, because they have better conditions for improving themselves, innovating, and avoiding plagiarism, as well as a greater responsibility to uphold academic integrity, rigor, and fairness.

Although falsehoods are now rampant in academia and its hidden misconduct is pervasive, making genuine purity impossible, there is still room for some pragmatic improvement: less plagiarism and fewer lies, and more achievements that, however limited, are genuine and sincere.

(The author of this article, Wang Qingmin(王庆民), is a Chinese writer and international political researcher based in Europe.)

The girls of Balochistan and the beauty of Balochi culture 🇮🇷
Balochistan is a land of rich traditions, colorful clothing, warm hospitality, and a culture deeply rooted in history. The women and girls of Balochistan are an important part of this beautiful heritage, carrying traditions, art, and identity from one generation to the next. ❤️
Discover the beauty of Iran beyond the well-known destinations and experience the diversity of its people and cultures.
#Balochistan #Iran #IranianCulture #BalochiCulture #BalochCulture #BalochistanIran #IranTravel #TravelIran #VisitIran #IranianWomen #BalochiWomen #BalochiGirls #TraditionalCulture #CulturalHeritage #PersianCulture #ExploreIran #BeautifulIran

Ya sika

When you were visiting some countries... Which food the most delicious.

You could mention more countries and which food you enjoyed the most in here.

Im from Czechia, have you ever tried traditional like Candle Sauce for example?

I want to visit Greece soon, is there something really interesting to eat?

🌍 I want to know where my music is reaching!

If you watch my new clip “Ils veulent m’enterrer”, tell me in the comments: 🇨🇩🇫🇷🇺🇸🇧🇪🇨🇦🇬🇧🇿🇦… which country are you watching from?

And most importantly, give me your honest opinion: 🔥 What did you think of the vibe, the flow and the visuals?

I’m an independent artist from DRC 🇨🇩, building my universe step by step and connecting with people beyond borders. 🌍🎶

🎬 Watch the clip → https://youtu.be/MF7Sste88IE

Don’t just watch… tell me what you felt. 🖤🔥

#DRC #CongoleseArtist #AfricanMusic #NewMusic #MusicVideo #HipHop #Rap #IndependentArtist

NEW SOUND — “ILS VEULENT M’ENTERRER” 🔥

From the streets of the DRC to the world 🌍

If you’re into dark vibes, raw energy and real stories, give this track a listen.

🎧 Listen on Audiomack: https://audiomack.com/exaumakxo/song/il-veulent-menterer?share-user-id=213751547

Don’t just listen… feel the message. 🖤🔥

#NewMusic #HipHop #Rap #Drill #AfricanMusic

Most of parents over the world have taught to their kids that the person who did that has to apologize to others, when a mistake was done. however, It is unavoidable that they do a mistake, like scolding kids too much or ignoring what a child do well. then, if parents did a mistake, do parents in your country apologize to their kid often?

As someone was born in South Korea, and have lived there, I can answer 'No'. Even if I don't live in a messed up home, but sometime, I have ever faced this situation, and disappointed several.

This is one of examples, When I was 12, My dad got mad because I broke a phone charge down. Even it is not that serious thing, but he shouted and sweared, using the word '썅 (Ssyang)', means f-word as an interjection. I was scared that he got annoyed for me all of sudden, so I cried in my bed.

I felt unfair, and my mom also said that my father went so far. but he just yelled like that, 'What did I something wrong?

It's maybe too personal, however, following my friends' saying and the social perspective there, I think that not to apologizing to their kid is not only my case

Hi! I'm a Japanese high school student who wants to share the beauty of Japan and learn about other countries too! 🌏

Let me share one topic about Japan.

In Japan, many junior high and high school students wear school uniforms. For many students, it's a normal part of everyday school life. 🇯🇵

How about your country? Do students usually wear school uniform