How to correct educational utilitarianism

How to go to college became a cruelly competitive marriage out of study occupying the stage of aristocratic society in the early 19th century described by British writer Jane Austen in “Pride and Prejudice” center. An excellent partner is a multi-purpose resource, either for class promotion, or for the continuation of a dynasty, or for satisfying personal emotions. Education and work are not channels to wealth and social status. The elites do not care about education and despise work. It is completely different now. The rich no longer despise work, but embrace it. The elites always brag about their workload. At the same time, education has become a channel for elite groups to guarantee income and pass on privileges to their children and grandchildren.

Entering the first 10 years of the 21st century, in the Forbes 400 richest American list, elite jobs occupy the high-income list. Half of the wealthiest 1% families in the United States are financial professionals, executives above vice president of listed companies, senior management consultants, law firm partners, and specialist physicians. The gateway to these high-income positions is through elite education. Today’s education is like a previous marriage. Students and schools face a tense two-way choice. On the one hand, almost all high-scoring students want to go to prestigious schools. On the other hand, all colleges and universities also want to admit high-scoring students. The fierce competition for students in universities is no less than the fierce competition among students for university admissions.

The most obvious flaw in competition is that only the privileged can reliably obtain the lifelong education needed to win. Together, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and Yale enroll more students from the richest 1% of families than from the entire bottom class. In addition, students will become distorted when choosing learning skills. They will choose those subjects that generate the highest returns or reputation, such as finance and law, while too few people choose education, nursing, and even engineering.

Just like the diversity of humanistic experience, the intrinsic value of education also has multiple dimensions. We need reform. Once wealth and social status do not depend on which university they go to, students can pursue their own interests, and the school can unload the burden and restore diversified educational strengths. The students and schools liberated from the educational hierarchy may fulfill the promise of education: to help people understand themselves and truly become themselves.

Colonel, the largest oil product pipeline company in the United States, was recently forced to shut down after being attacked by ransomware. The eastern coastal states collectively cut off supplies. For the first time in U.S. history, it entered a national emergency due to a cyber attack. According to people familiar with the matter, the attack was suspected of being manipulated by a cyber hacker group called the “Dark Side”. Just less than half a year ago, hackers used a loophole in the solar wind system of an information technology company to monitor important companies including the U.S. Department of Defense, State Department, Treasury, Energy, Homeland Security, Commerce, and National Nuclear Security Administration. The e-mail or data of the departmental commercial network has caused the most serious network security breach in the history of the United States.

Whether it is the solar wind incident or the oil supply pipeline incident, we have repeatedly reminded us that even the United States, which has the strongest cyber security capabilities, the most complete system, and the most complete system in the world, cannot stand alone. The global cyberspace security is in fact out of control and disorder.

Taking advantage of its unique advantage in cyberspace, the U.S. government has long pursued an offensive cybersecurity strategy and has always focused on the development of offensive cyber weapons. It has seriously overestimated its ability to control cyber offensive weapons, and underestimated it. The difficulty of realizing cyber defense. Focus on intensifying conflicts with China, Russia and other countries, and seriously underestimate the power of non-state actors. Overestimated the security benefits obtained through offensive strategies, and seriously underestimated the destructiveness and cost of losing control.

In those days, the older generation of Internet people in the United States upholds an open mind and made the birth and globalization of the Internet. After entering the 21st century, the United States has “transplanted” traditional geopolitics and Cold War thinking into cyberspace, and has continuously upgraded its strong offensive cyber security strategy. On May 12, 2017, the ransomware WannaCry broke out on a large scale, attacking nearly 100 countries around the world, and the virus locked the data and files of tens of thousands of users’ computers. It was the largest intimidation and blackmail operation in history. The hacker tool “Eternal Blue” used in cyber attacks was leaked from the US National Security Agency’s cyber arsenal. The U.S. offensive cybersecurity strategy not only makes itself a hardest-hit area for cybersecurity, it also directly endangers all countries in the world. According to statistics, as many as 61% of companies will be hit by ransomware in 2020, and more than half of the victims have paid the ransom, but only two-thirds of them will be able to recover data.

The fuel pipeline incident triggered a national emergency in the United States, marking that the threat of cybersecurity incidents to critical social infrastructures related to the national economy and people’s livelihood has reached a new level, which means traditional cybersecurity technology and institutional systems, and even U.S.-led cybersecurity The offensive strategy and defensive paradigm are again facing a disruptive impact. As the global netizens break through the 5 billion mark and digital technology penetrates into all levels of society, countries in the world are becoming more and more integrated, and there is an urgent need to form a global cybersecurity governance system and linkage mechanism in which all countries participate in an efficient linkage.

First of all, the United States’ offensive strategy of “self-reliance” has become the biggest troublemaker. The United States continues to mold China, Russia and other countries into rivals, creating fragmentation and division in cyberspace. With the continuous rise of supranational non-international actors such as Internet super-platforms and transnational hacker organizations, it is simply difficult to build a complete defense system by relying on the United States alone or a group of “allies.”

Secondly, as the leader of a country’s public power and public resources, the government should become the “gatekeeper” of network governance and network security. But for a long time, in order to maintain its strategic advantages, the United States has always excluded other governments from playing an important role in cyber security, and has also resisted allowing the United Nations mechanism to play a leading coordinating role in global cyberspace. Coupled with the interests of some hacker organizations due to political interests, as well as the leakage of the security department’s weapon arsenal, the US cyber security strategy has created increasingly larger “negative externalities” for the world, which inevitably caught fire.

Therefore, every cyber security incident in the United States and the world is an escalating warning. This is the result of long-term attempts by hegemonic countries to gain their own selfishness in cyberspace, promote politicization and militarization, and divide and split global cybersecurity cooperation forces. In the Internet age, the requirements for building a community with a shared future for mankind are more urgent. Only when national actors strive to become the “positive energy” of cyberspace, can global cyberspace establish a basic order, effectively combat various cybercrimes, and have common security. If the U.S. government does not change its course, it will be impossible to reduce cyber threats, and it will be difficult to reverse the trend of deteriorating cyber security. Only to truly get out of the narrow geopolitical logic and “Cold War” mentality, to get out of the zero-sum dilemma that makes “one country safe and other countries insecure”. It is possible to achieve breakthrough improvements in cybersecurity issues in the United States and the world. Only open cooperation is the way out to network security.