Thank you for your comments, Turnoi. A breath of fresh air among the many negatives.

The form of society in China today is, I know, completely different from the previous dynastical societies upon which China rode for a few thousand years. Those societies had culture - but I am also aware that some of them were violent and every bit as autocratic in their way(s) as is the present Chinese society now. But the dynastical rulers knew no better. They were isolated from the rest of the world for all sorts of reasons and had absolute power over their people. But they had highly developed cultures - this can still be seen all around us today, art, music, dress, literature, architecture, entertainment and decoration to name a few examples.

I am aware that culture does not excuse excessively bad social behaviour but the point I was making was that the present Chinese society has no culture whatsoever, yet so many idealistically minded people seem to think that it does. Remember that beginning in 1912 and before, culminating in 1949, the Chinese cut themselves adrift from the old style societies. Whether that was a good or a bad thing I do not know, nor much do I care - the society now is what it is.

I repeat that modern-day China has no culture but instead relates itself to the illusion of culture via the many cultural trappings that are still extant from the society they despised and got rid of, They preserve many of the various buildings and other cultural relics which is a good thing, but to imply (as they do) that the culture those buildings and relics represent is shared by present Chinese society is wrong and is a sign of their social dishonesty.

The present regime has only been in control of China for 61 years which historically is a mere blink of an eye. But it is unlikely they will ever develop any recognisable culture in the foreseeable future.

My central point when I first posted in here is the issue of clandestine surveillance. I have read the various attempts to not only to justify this but to actually dignify it! But it cannot be justified, much less dignified, for the practice is illegal in present Chinese society (unless there are reasons to believe that someone is plotting some other criminal or unacceptable activity - in which case such surveillance can be right and proper for the protection of society as a whole). But if (I repeat: 'f') the telephone business in my university is to enable the management to check on students' whereabouts, conversations, and who they call or receive calls from, then it is nothing to do with Chinese culture. Instead it will be an illegal and dishonest activity on their part. It will be wrong, morally, socially and legally.

I wonder what the other contributors here - my detractors - would do if their employers required them, tomorrow morning, to accept new mobile telephones from their employers and sign agreements to the effect that they would henceforth stop using their own mobile phones and only use their employer's phones. I doubt very much that any of them woud accept such an imposition. So why do these people support such a practice when it is imposed on a few hundred students? If it is right that such underhand surveillance should go on in China, then it must also be considered right to apply it to foreign teachers too. My point in saying this is to put the complacent brigade in the same boat as the students. How would THEY react if the same were to be imposed on them? Or are they the elite who would howl blue murder?

Thank you again for your comments and for the even-handed way in which you wrote them

Dave