Jump to content

Confucius Institute: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
moved soft power into lead
→‎History: name significance
Line 28: Line 28:
==History==
==History==
After establishing a pilot institute in [[Tashkent]], [[Uzbekistan]], in June 2004, the first Confucius Institute opened on November 21, 2004 in [[Seoul]], Republic of Korea and many more have been established in other countries, such as the [[United States|U.S.]], [[Germany]] and [[Sweden]], where Chinese enjoys an increasing popularity. The first Confucius Institute in [[South Eastern Europe]] was opened in August 2006 in [[Belgrade]], [[Serbia]].<ref>[http.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-08/28/content_5016167.htm Article "State Councilor Tang meets Serbian deputy PM" at Xinhua Online]</ref> As of July 2010, there were 316 Confucius Institutes and 337 Confucius Classrooms in 94 countries and regions.<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/culture/2010-07/13/c_13398209.htm</ref><ref>http://www.confuciusinstitute.net/ky_en/ky_info.html</ref> The Office of the Chinese Language Council International plans to set up 500 Confucius Institutes worldwide by 2010 in view of the fact that 100 million people oversees may be learning Chinese.<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-12/06/content_7212089.htm</ref> Hanban aims to establish 1,000 Confucius Institutes by 2020.<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-10/02/content_5521722.htm</ref>
After establishing a pilot institute in [[Tashkent]], [[Uzbekistan]], in June 2004, the first Confucius Institute opened on November 21, 2004 in [[Seoul]], Republic of Korea and many more have been established in other countries, such as the [[United States|U.S.]], [[Germany]] and [[Sweden]], where Chinese enjoys an increasing popularity. The first Confucius Institute in [[South Eastern Europe]] was opened in August 2006 in [[Belgrade]], [[Serbia]].<ref>[http.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-08/28/content_5016167.htm Article "State Councilor Tang meets Serbian deputy PM" at Xinhua Online]</ref> As of July 2010, there were 316 Confucius Institutes and 337 Confucius Classrooms in 94 countries and regions.<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/culture/2010-07/13/c_13398209.htm</ref><ref>http://www.confuciusinstitute.net/ky_en/ky_info.html</ref> The Office of the Chinese Language Council International plans to set up 500 Confucius Institutes worldwide by 2010 in view of the fact that 100 million people oversees may be learning Chinese.<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-12/06/content_7212089.htm</ref> Hanban aims to establish 1,000 Confucius Institutes by 2020.<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-10/02/content_5521722.htm</ref>

Several authors have noted the incongruity of naming the institutes after [[Confucius]] (551-479 BCE), who was reviled during recent Chinese history, with [[Chen_Duxiu#Anti-Confucianism|anti-Confucianism]] ranging from the 1912 [[New Culture Movement]] to the 1973 [[Criticize Lin, Criticize Confucius]] campaign.<ref>Starr (2009), p. 68.</ref> "One of the great ironies of the peaceful co-existence of the Confucius Institute and the China Institute is that at the beginning of the 20th century, [[Hu Shi]] believed that "the way of Confucianism is unsuitable to modern life."<ref>Will Wachter (2007), [http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/IE24Ad01.html The language of Chinese soft power in the US], Asia Times Online, 2007-5-24. </ref> In Western terms, the CI name is a [[Brand#Global brand|global branding]] issue; Confucius has internationally positive associations with teaching and Chinese culture. A recent academic study found many similarities between the operations of the CIs and multinational businesses.<ref>Hsi Chang Li, Sam Mirmirani, Joseph A. Ilacqua, (2009), [http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ857101 Confucius Institutes: Distributed leadership and knowledge sharing in a worldwide network], ''The Learning Organization'' 16.6, 469-482.</ref> Chen Jinyu, Vice-Chairperson of the CI Headquarters, explained, "With regards to the operation of Confucian Institutes, brand name means quality; brand name means returns. Those who enjoy more brand names will enjoy higher popularity, reputation, more social influence, and will therefore be able to generate more support from local communities."<ref>Starr (2009), p. 69.</ref>


==Controversies==
==Controversies==

Revision as of 23:27, 22 December 2010

Confucius Institute
Founded2004
TypeEducational Organization
FocusChinese culture, Chinese language
Location
Area served
Worldwide
MethodEducation
OwnerThe Office of Chinese Language Council International (also known as "Hanban")
Websitewww.confuciusinstitute.net

Confucius Institutes (simplified Chinese: 孔子学院; traditional Chinese: 孔子學院; pinyin: kǒngzǐ xuéyuàn) are non-profit public institutions that aim to promote Chinese language and culture and support local Chinese teaching internationally. The headquarters is in Beijing and is under the Office of Chinese Language Council International (colloquially, Hanban (汉办)). Many scholars characterize the CI program as an exercise in soft power where China "sees the promotion of its culture and its chief language, standard Mandarin, as a means of expanding its economic, cultural, and diplomatic reach."[1]

History

After establishing a pilot institute in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, in June 2004, the first Confucius Institute opened on November 21, 2004 in Seoul, Republic of Korea and many more have been established in other countries, such as the U.S., Germany and Sweden, where Chinese enjoys an increasing popularity. The first Confucius Institute in South Eastern Europe was opened in August 2006 in Belgrade, Serbia.[2] As of July 2010, there were 316 Confucius Institutes and 337 Confucius Classrooms in 94 countries and regions.[3][4] The Office of the Chinese Language Council International plans to set up 500 Confucius Institutes worldwide by 2010 in view of the fact that 100 million people oversees may be learning Chinese.[5] Hanban aims to establish 1,000 Confucius Institutes by 2020.[6]

Several authors have noted the incongruity of naming the institutes after Confucius (551-479 BCE), who was reviled during recent Chinese history, with anti-Confucianism ranging from the 1912 New Culture Movement to the 1973 Criticize Lin, Criticize Confucius campaign.[7] "One of the great ironies of the peaceful co-existence of the Confucius Institute and the China Institute is that at the beginning of the 20th century, Hu Shi believed that "the way of Confucianism is unsuitable to modern life."[8] In Western terms, the CI name is a global branding issue; Confucius has internationally positive associations with teaching and Chinese culture. A recent academic study found many similarities between the operations of the CIs and multinational businesses.[9] Chen Jinyu, Vice-Chairperson of the CI Headquarters, explained, "With regards to the operation of Confucian Institutes, brand name means quality; brand name means returns. Those who enjoy more brand names will enjoy higher popularity, reputation, more social influence, and will therefore be able to generate more support from local communities."[10]

Controversies

Despite their rapid international growth and popularity, CIs suffer from controversies and obstacles. Critics, frequently educators and journalists, accuse CIs of being a propaganda vehicle for the Communist Party of China, threatening academic freedom, and restricting freedom of speech over topics such as the Dalai Lama. Defenders, frequently CI employees and Chinese diplomats, deny that CIs have nefarious purposes and insist they only further international understanding about the culture of China. A recent European Journal of Education study divides criticisms of CI programs between "insiders" with practical concerns about "finance, academic viability, legal issues, relations with the Chinese partner university, and long-term support from their own institutions", and "outsiders" with ideological concerns about "improper influence over teaching and research, industrial and military espionage, surveillance of Chinese abroad, and undermining Taiwanese influence as part of the reunification plan."[11]

In Australia, university teachers have objected to CIs. When the University of Sydney was negotiating to establish a Confucius Institute, some professors called for it to be segregated from the Chinese studies department. Jocelyn Chey, a visiting professor at Sydney and former diplomat with expertise in Australia-China relations, criticized CI "as a propaganda vehicle for the Chinese communist party, and not a counterpart to the Goethe Institute or Alliance Française."[12][13] Considering the close links between the CI, Chinese government, and Communist Party, Chey warned "this could lead at best to a "dumbing down" of research and at worst could produce propaganda."[14] When a CI was established at the University of Melbourne, members of the Chinese studies department objected to it being located within the faculty of arts, and the CI was set up away from the main campus.[15]

In Canada, a declassified intelligence report by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service says, "Beijing is out to win the world's hearts and minds, not just its economic markets, as a means of cementing power."[16] In Toronto, The Globe and Mail claimed, "Despite their neutral scholarly appearance, the new network of Confucius Institutes does have a political agenda." For example, teaching with the simplified Chinese characters used in the PRC rather than the Traditional Chinese characters used in Taiwan "would help to advance Beijing’s goal of marginalizing Taiwan in the battle for global influence.”[17] Yan Li, Confucius Institute director at the University of Waterloo and former Xinhua News Agency reporter, disagreed with western reporting about China's role in the 2008 Tibetan unrest and organized her classes to fight the Canadian media. Professor Yan wrote, "Under her influence, some Canadian students bravely debated with anti-China elements on the Internet, some wrote to television stations, and newspapers to point out that their reporting was not according to the facts.” One Canadian television station reportedly apologized for its coverage.[18]

China has responded to overseas criticisms of Confucius Institutes. An Asia Times Online article explained that under Mao Zedong the Chinese Communist Party criticized Confucian teachings as "rubbish that should be thrown into the 'historical dustbin'" while the 21st-century CCP uses Confucianism as "an assistant to the Chinese god of wealth (and a representative of Chinese diplomacy), but not a tutor for Chinese soul." An American official admitted that Chinese universities are far less receptive to America’s cultural-promotion efforts than vice versa, but "if you’re in a system that’s that paranoid, your soft power is self-limited."[19] A China Daily editorial accused opponents of hypocrisy for not calling "Goethe Institutes, Alliances Francaises or Cervantes Institutes as propaganda vehicles or tools of cultural invasion".[20] Despite notorious censorship in the People's Republic of China, CIs also face domestic criticism. Some Chinese critics worry that "the government’s support for the CIs’ budgets detracts from domestic spending" when the Ministry of Education "budget for domestic compulsory education remains inadequate." Other critics point to the potential for corruption and conflict of interest within the HanBan, which is supposedly a non-profit organization but operates CI-related companies for profit. "For instance, in November 2009, HanBan launched a new company, which won the bid for over five million U.S. dollars from the Ministry of Finance to operate the CI’s website; the person in charge of this company is also the deputy director of Hanban."[21]

In Germany, a Der Spiegel article about threats from China's soft power criticized Beijing for using Confucius Institutes "in hopes of promoting what it views as China's cultural superiority".[22]

In India, the Government rejected the idea of Confucius Institutes in schools, and called them "a Chinese design to spread its 'soft power' – widening influence by using culture as a propagational tool."[23][24]

In Israel, Tel Aviv University officials shut down a 2008 student art exhibition about the oppression of Falun Gong in China. A Tel Aviv District Court judge ruled the university "violated freedom of expression and succumbed to pressure from the Chinese Embassy, which funds various activities at the university, and took down the exhibit, violating freedom of expression." The decision noted administrators feared losing funding for the Confucius Institute.[25]

In Japan, like in the United States, CIs are reportedly having trouble getting approval from top-tier universities. "Of the more than 17 CIs launched in Japan since 2005, all were at private colleges" instead of at more prestigious national universities. "Chinese culture traditionally holds significant influence in Japan, but people remain concerned by the potential ideological and cultural threat of Chinese government-run projects such as CIs."[26]

In Sweden, faculty at Stockholm University demanded the separation of the Nordic Confucius Institute from the university. Their claims that the Chinese Embassy in Stockholm was using the CI for conducting political surveillance and inhibiting academic freedom were rejected by an independent assessment. This issue was taken up in the Swedish parliament; Göran Lindblad compared the CIs to Mussolini’s Italian institutes of the 1930s,[27] and asked whether the Chinese government should be subsidizing Western educational institutions when, "i Kina är tio miljoner barn utan en ordentlig skola" (China has 10 million children without a proper school).[28][29] Stockholm's Institute for Security and Development Policy described the founding of CIs as "an image management project, the purpose of which is to promote the greatness of Chinese culture while at the same time counterattacking public opinion that maintains the presence of a 'China threat' in the international community."[30]

In the United States, controversies began in 2004 when the University of Maryland established the first CI. The Economist quoted Li Changchun, the 5th-highest ranking member of the Politburo Standing Committee, that the Confucius Institutes were “an important part of China’s overseas propaganda set-up”.[31] The University of Maryland's CI Director Chuan Sheng Liu said, "We are an American university, and the most important value is academic freedom … We don't want anything to interfere with that, and we stand very firm on that ground."[32] Addressing the 2009 opening of a Tibet photo exhibit at the University of Maryland CI, Xie Feng, Deputy Chief of the Chinese Embassy in Washington D.C., denied the violation of human rights in Tibet and "so-called destruction of religion" by the Chinese government, and proclaimed, "The freedom of religious belief and normal religious activities of the Tibetan people are protected.”[33]

Several top American universities have opposed hosting Confucius Institutes, and "there is no Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, or Columbia." [34] Faculty at the University of Pennsylvania decided not to negotiate with CI. According to G. Cameron Hurst III, the former director of the Center for East Asian Studies, "There was a general feeling that it was not an appropriate thing for us to do. We feel absolutely confident in the instructors that we train here, and we didn't want them meddling in our curriculum." In contrast, Stan Rosen, the director of the University of Southern California's East Asian Studies Center stated, "It's a very long term strategy to get people to appreciate Chinese culture. They steer away from those kinds of political issues, just to teach straight language. Because they know this is exactly what critics of China might be looking for."[35] At the University of Hawaii-Manoa in 2006 and the University of Chicago in 2010, the Faculty Senates formally complained that CIs had been established without proper approval, violating shared governance in higher education. Over 170 faculty members signed a letter to University of Chicago president Robert Zimmer that called CIs "an academically and politically ambiguous initiative sponsored by the government of the People's Republic of China." It said the university had proceeded "without due care to ensure the institute's academic integrity" and had risked having its own reputation used to "legitimate the spread of such Confucius Institutes in this country and beyond."[36]

After school board members of Hacienda La Puente Unified School District opposed establishing a Confucius Institute, history teacher Jane Shults described their criticisms as "... jingoistic, xenophobic, not overly rational and it’s really shades of McCarthyism all over again."[37] A San Gabriel Valley Tribune editorial compared this Confucius Classroom program as "tantamount of asking Hugo Chavez to send his cadres to teach little American kids economics."[38] The Washington Times quoted opposing opinions. Nicholas J. Cull, a University of Southern California public diplomacy professor, said, "I'm sure this will become a standard dispute. People in America are very suspicious of ideas from the outside." Chen Zhunmin, an education director at the Los Angeles Chinese Consulate, insisted the program was unrelated to communism, "I feel that the concerns of the neighbors are mainly caused by lack of understanding of Chinese history and culture."[39] An article in the Christian Science Monitor critically framed the CI question, "Let's suppose that a cruel, tyrannical, and repressive foreign government offered to pay for American teens to study its national language in our schools. Would you take the deal?"[40] USA Today reported that in 2009 the Confucius Institute at the University of Nebraska received $270,000 from the Hanban. While some critics view the CIs as "mostly a vehicle for propaganda",[41] the CI director David Lou said "There are no strings attached." An Asian Survey article about soft power described CIs as a potential "Trojan horse" for the loss of academic freedom.[42]

List of Institutes

Listed by alphabetical order according to country of location.

Argentina

  • National University of La Plata
  • University of Buenos Aires

Armenia

Australia

Austria

Bahamas

Bangladesh

Barbados

Belarus

Belgium

Brazil

Bulgaria

Canada

Chile

Colombia

Costa Rica

Cuba

Czech Republic

Egypt

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Iceland

India

Indonesia

Iran

Ireland

Israel

Italy

Jamaica

Japan

Jordan

Kenya

kenyatta university

Lebanon

Malaysia

  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University-Global Hanyu & Culture Center
  • Kongzi Institute,Universiti Malaya

Mexico

Morocco

Nepal

The Netherlands

New Zealand

Nigeria

Norway

Pakistan

Peru

Philippines

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Russia

Other locations of Confucius Institutes in Russia :

Rwanda

Serbia

Singapore

South Africa

South Korea

Sweden

Spain

Thailand

Turkey

Ukraine

United Kingdom

United States

In 2007, The University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) established the first Confucius Institute in the state of Texas. It was initiated under funding from the Chinese government, and has grown largely due to the close partnership between co-founder China Three Gorges University and UTD.[50][51]

On January 31, 2008, Wayne State University opened its new Confucius Institute, becoming the second one in Michigan (the first is Michigan State's).[52][53]

On March 26, 2009, San Diego State University unveiled the Confucius Institute for southern California and Baja California. Zhou Wenzhong, the Chinese Ambassador to the U.S., and the Chairman of Xiamen University attended the unveiling ceremony at SDSU, .[54]

On September 11, 2009, The University of Washington and Seattle Public Schools were proud to establish The Confucius Institute of the State of Washington, the first statewide Confucius Institute.

On November 5, 2009, The University of Michigan celebrated the opening of its Confucius Institute.

A second Confucius Institute in Alabama is being planned for the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa.

See also

2

References

  1. ^ Schimdt (2010).
  2. ^ [http.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-08/28/content_5016167.htm Article "State Councilor Tang meets Serbian deputy PM" at Xinhua Online]
  3. ^ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/culture/2010-07/13/c_13398209.htm
  4. ^ http://www.confuciusinstitute.net/ky_en/ky_info.html
  5. ^ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-12/06/content_7212089.htm
  6. ^ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-10/02/content_5521722.htm
  7. ^ Starr (2009), p. 68.
  8. ^ Will Wachter (2007), The language of Chinese soft power in the US, Asia Times Online, 2007-5-24.
  9. ^ Hsi Chang Li, Sam Mirmirani, Joseph A. Ilacqua, (2009), Confucius Institutes: Distributed leadership and knowledge sharing in a worldwide network, The Learning Organization 16.6, 469-482.
  10. ^ Starr (2009), p. 69.
  11. ^ Don Starr (2009), Chinese Language Education in Europe: the Confucius Institutes, European Journal of Education Volume 44, Issue 1, pages 78-79.
  12. ^ "Confucius deal close despite concerns", The Australian, August 22, 2007.
  13. ^ Jocelyn Chey (2008), "Chinese 'Soft Power' – Diplomacy and The Confucius Institute podcast, Sydney Papers Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 33-48.
  14. ^ Harriet Alexander (2008), Sydney is China's new friend, Higher Education Reporter, Sydney Morning Herald, June 18, 2008.
  15. ^ Geoff Maslen (2007), Warning – be wary of Confucius institutes University World News, December 2, 2007.
  16. ^ "CSIS say: Confucius part of Chinese bid to win over western hearts", The Chronicle, May 27th 2007.
  17. ^ Geoffrey York (2005), "Beijing uses Confucius to lead charm offensive” The Globe and Mail, 2005-8-9. Quoted by Sheng Ding and Robert A. Saunders (2006), "Talking up China: An analysis of China’s rising cultural power and global promotion of the Chinese language," East Asia, 23.2, p. 21.
  18. ^ Matthew Little (2010), Confucius Institutes: Getting Schooled by Beijing. Chinese regime uses academic institutes to expand its soft power, Epoch Times, July 16, 2010.
  19. ^ Confucianism a vital string in China's bow, Jian Junbo, Asia Times Online, 09 Oct 2009.
  20. ^ Chang, Liu (2010-08-12). "No need to fuss over Confucius Institutes". China Daily. Xinhua. Retrieved 2010-08-14.
  21. ^ Ren Zhe (2010), Confucius Institutes: China's Soft Power?, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, June 2010.
  22. ^ Erich Follath (2010), The Dragon's Embrace: China's Soft Power Is a Threat to the West, Der Spiegel 07/28/2010.
  23. ^ No Chinese in India, says government news, Domain-b, 08 Oct 2009.
  24. ^ How to be a cultural superpower, Times of India, 22 Nov 2009.
  25. ^ Abe Selig (2009), Court backs students in TAU row over Falun Gong exhibit the university removed, Jerusalem Post October 1, 2009.
  26. ^ Ren Zhe (2010).
  27. ^ Starr (2009), p. 79.
  28. ^ Starr (2009), p. 66.
  29. ^ Riksdagens snabbprotokoll 2007/08:46 (in Swedish)
  30. ^ Xiaolin Guo (2008), Repackaging Confucius, Institute for Security and Development Policy, Stockholm, Sweden, July 2008.
  31. ^ A message from Confucius; New ways of projecting soft power, Economist.com, 22 Oct 2009.
  32. ^ Schmidt (2010).
  33. ^ Xie Feng (2009), Remarks at the Series of Events on Western China at the Confucius Institute at the University of Maryland, 04/10/09.
  34. ^ Starr (2009), p. 73.
  35. ^ China expands language institutes at US colleges, Christine Armario, Associated Press, October 30, 2009.
  36. ^ Peter Schmidt (2010), U. of Chicago's Plans for Milton Friedman Institute Stir Outrage on the Faculty, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 06/01/2010.
  37. ^ Chinese government classroom grant divides S. Calif. community suspicious of motivation, Associated Press, 24 Apr 2010.
  38. ^ Our View: Cancel 'Confucius Classroom', San Gabriel Valley Tribune 02/11/2010.
  39. ^ School activists rail against 'Confucius Classroom', Washington Times, April 27, 2010.
  40. ^ Jonathan Zimmerman (2006), Beware China's role in US Chinese classes, CSMonitor.com, September 6, 2006.
  41. ^ Mary Beth Marklein (2009), A culture clash over Confucius Institutes. USA Today, Dec 7, 2009.
  42. ^ James F. Paradise (2009), China and International Harmony: The Role of Confucius Institutes in Bolstering Beijing's Soft Power, Asian Survey 49.4: 647-669.
  43. ^ Dells, Alicia (27 September 2009). "Stronger link". Barbados Advocate. Bridgetown, Barbados. Retrieved 27 September 2009. The acting Prime Minister added that Barbados looks forward to welcoming the Guangdong Art Troupe to the island next month and noted that Barbados was keen on having a Confucius Institute for the teaching of Mandarin and Chinese history at the UWI Cave Hill Campus in the near future. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |trans_title= (help)
  44. ^ Nurhayati, Desi (2007-09-28). "China to establish language, cultural center". Jakarta Post. Archived from the original on 2007-12-14. Retrieved 2007-09-28.
  45. ^ Government Office (13 February 2009). "Confucius Institute Opens at the UWI". Kingston, Jamaica. Jamaican Information Service. Retrieved 27 September 2009. A Confucius Institute, the first of its kind in the English-speaking Caribbean, was officially launched at the University of the West Indies (UWI), Mona, today (February 13). A plaque was also presented to Vice President of the People's Republic of China, His Excellency Xi Jinping, who is in the island on a four-day official visit. {{cite news}}: Check |authorlink= value (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |trans_title= (help); External link in |authorlink= (help); line feed character in |quote= at position 176 (help)
  46. ^ http://www.kansaigaidai.ac.jp/special/confucius/
  47. ^ http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=7402; http://www.ur.umich.edu/0910/Nov09_09/19.php
  48. ^ Carol Cain, "WSU to open Chinese center Jan. 31" Sunday Free Press (Detroit) January 13, 2008: 6G
  49. ^ Staff, "Grand Opening January 31" The Analect: The Confucius Institute at Wayne State University 1 1 May (2008): 1
  50. ^ http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/columnists/rmiller/stories/DN-miller_30bus.ART.State.Edition1.35aff49.html
  51. ^ http://www.utdallas.edu/news/2008/10/15-001.php
  52. ^ Carol Cain, "WSU to open Chinese center Jan. 31" Sunday Free Press (Detroit) January 13, 2008: 6G
  53. ^ Staff, "Grand Opening January 31" The Analect: The Confucius Institute at Wayne State University 1 1 May (2008): 1
  54. ^ George Bao, "[1]" March 2009: 1
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Confucius_Institute&oldid=403783932"