No. Many governments have or have had programs to spread understanding of their language, including paying for teachers at times, as well as paying for radio stations, TV channels, web sites.
Some of these are or have been blocked by various countries at various times because they didn't like the political views espoused, sure, so it's not like one should assume that there are never political motives (and that goes for all "sides" - the US has done this as much as everyone else).
But it is also important for commerce, diplomacy etc. to ensure a good supply of people with an understanding of language, and "seeding" interest for later language studies by introducing it earlier is a good solution.
> I know, I know. I must be some "conspiracy nut" just to be asking whether the Chinese Communist Party completely financing and sending trained and educated Chinese Communist Party members to the US to teach poor american children to speak Chinese and understand modern Chinese perspectives defined by their government in order to "prepare for 2050" is a strange thing. It's safe to disregard these "crackpot ideas", right? Or is it.
Do you for a second believe that the curriculum won't be read by someone in these schools prior to use? Someone who is pretty much guaranteed to hold viewpoints sufficiently far from any devout supporter of the Chinese regime to react quickly to blatant misrepresentations?
It's not like these teachers will be let free on a class with no follow up. I very much doubt the Chinese regime is interested in risking their promotion of Chinese language and culture by adding controversial political content. Not least because ideology has long been a secondary priority for the Chinese leadership after economic growth.
What do they care if American school children agree with their policies? What they do care about is that American school children grow up to be useful when Chinese companies want to do business with American companies and need people who understand both languages and cultures.
No. Many governments have or have had programs to spread understanding of their language, including paying for teachers at times, as well as paying for radio stations, TV channels, web sites.
Some of these are or have been blocked by various countries at various times because they didn't like the political views espoused, sure, so it's not like one should assume that there are never political motives (and that goes for all "sides" - the US has done this as much as everyone else).
But it is also important for commerce, diplomacy etc. to ensure a good supply of people with an understanding of language, and "seeding" interest for later language studies by introducing it earlier is a good solution.
> I know, I know. I must be some "conspiracy nut" just to be asking whether the Chinese Communist Party completely financing and sending trained and educated Chinese Communist Party members to the US to teach poor american children to speak Chinese and understand modern Chinese perspectives defined by their government in order to "prepare for 2050" is a strange thing. It's safe to disregard these "crackpot ideas", right? Or is it.
Do you for a second believe that the curriculum won't be read by someone in these schools prior to use? Someone who is pretty much guaranteed to hold viewpoints sufficiently far from any devout supporter of the Chinese regime to react quickly to blatant misrepresentations?
It's not like these teachers will be let free on a class with no follow up. I very much doubt the Chinese regime is interested in risking their promotion of Chinese language and culture by adding controversial political content. Not least because ideology has long been a secondary priority for the Chinese leadership after economic growth.
What do they care if American school children agree with their policies? What they do care about is that American school children grow up to be useful when Chinese companies want to do business with American companies and need people who understand both languages and cultures.