<!--[endif]-->The US is supposedly the undisputed leader in terms of scientific output. However, there is supposedly also "a threat" of losing this position. To counter this, there are suggestions like giving out more US visas to foreign scientists and engineers. Even stuff like “don’t make Americans scientists, make scientists American” passes as valid argumentation.

I am reminded of attending seminars at a physics department of a US university, the “US professors” originating from Australia, Norway, Turkey, Japan, Germany, Poland, Great Britain, Russia, India, and Israel – I might have forgotten some - with a similar make-up of the attending graduate student body, and postdocs. Americans educated in the US? I remember few and the circumstances were often mysterious – “social engagement” can go a long way, so can being an athlete. So this is scientific leadership then: Save money on educating your own population, which you keep at a bible thumping level for the required political system, and just buy the best brains from all over the world.


Take a good look at the enemy of science – scary isn’t it?


Sure, that works, but does leadership not also according to US Judeo-Christian Anglo-Saxon culture imply something about being a role model to follow, for others to follow the lead? The US is not known for shying away from exporting its own way of life. If the world followed this leadership, if all countries were to just abandon proper science education and instead buy the brains from somewhere else, where would “somewhere else” be after about one generation? Somebody explain this scientific leader mathematics to me please.


Of course, leadership can be understood as merely being the despot already for whatever historical reasons and to keep exploiting the rest. Is this what is meant, the good ol' US American way of life, merely another instance of arrogant double moral?


Bible, quran, L. Ron Hubbard’s writings, those are the world leadership in books; the numbers are undisputed, but they do not lead me. If you pick the right numbers, China is not yet the scientific leader, but in Chinese physics departments, the people are almost all Chinese. Japanese kids know maths, maybe not the scientific leadership type, but still. My maths is not the leading type I guess, but I have reasons to believe that Asia is already the scientific leader.


Much of this discussion about keeping in scientific leadership position is driven by sheer fear and ugly patriotism. What is so scary about China being the leader in scientific output? Science is scary and bad if yellow people do it? Discussions about keeping the US at the top are, if not straight identification of science with military might defending imperialism, about keeping the scientific leadership from yellow people. More US visas to foreign scientists and engineers however means that yellow people turn good on holy land. It is thus about politics, about ideology, a war.


History, with all its distorted lessons, cannot teach much except for a few general insights about that some “leadership” leads nowhere, some down a path we should not follow. White “leadership” has failed the world; it is hardly possible that yellow can perform worse. It is time for the on average more intelligent people to take over; I am glad that they get a chance at the helm. Go Asia!

Shi Yigong resigned from Princeton University and became the dean of life sciences at Tsinghua University in Beijing.