It’s been a whole week since Joseph Lam, or Lam Chok 林作, was arrested in Hong Kong for his alleged involvement in what is known as the JPEX scam. Since I am no expert in finance and the police are still investigating the case, I would not comment on its legal issues. I have found the netizens’ reactions to his arrest highly amusing though: “All that education…” they cried. Some saw what seems to be the downfall of an Oxford graduate as a sign that an Oxford education, of which Lam has always boasted, carries little value if one’s character is bad. It is not even a sign of intelligence or accomplishment, or he would not have broken the law and got himself in trouble, so they said. Others said Lam’s conduct tainted his alma mater’s reputation.
In fact, a couple of years ago, a Hong Kong director surnamed Cheung (who later emigrated to the U.K.), mocked Lam Chok’s character on his YouTube channel (Coincidentally–or perhaps not–Cheung’s father-in-law is an infamous tycoon in Hong Kong). Back then, Lam had already gained fame as a notorious self-promoter who bragged about his Oxford degree, connections, and earning power, and who weaponized his academic credentials to make outrageous comments on current affairs and sometimes even on people’s appearances–celebrities and commoners included. Due to his reputation the film industry, Cheung also has a large following. In response to the video, many of his followers used Lam’s Oxford alumnus status to attack the widely-held belief that an education from a prestigious institution has tremendous intrinsic values. “Many Oxbridge graduates cannot get along with people and fail to advance themselves and go far in their professions.” “Well, I’ll take employees from non-brand name universities over mediocre Oxbridge graduates any day.” “Some of them do not appear to be arrogant–they just hide their arrogance well. Deep down they are arrogant!” It’s no surprise that many Hongkongers rejoiced at Lam’s arrest last week. Lately, some netizens on “LIHKG,” a popular Chinese forum, said Lam’s Oxford credential isn’t proof that he’s intelligent: the reason they gave was that he majored in Math, not a “prestigious” subject like Law.
The hatred and derision towards Lam is understandable. Lam’s behaviors–not just his boastfulness about his Oxford degree but also his earning power and designer fashion, for instance–do not reflect well on him. Yet many of Cheung’s followers need a lesson in Logic 101. That Lam is an Oxford graduate, or that many arrogant jerks graduated from Oxbridge, does not mean all, or even most, Oxbridge graduates are arrogant and incompetent, or that such degrees do not hold tremendous intrinsic values. By asserting that many Oxbridge graduates do not go far in their careers, these people are holding others to their worldly standards–something that they have set out to criticize. Advancement in careers is arguably worldlier than academic accomplishment. They also seem to be projecting their own feelings onto those graduates and find fault with them even where no fault is to be found. In addition, why should anyone be concerned about how graduates from prestigious universities think and feel about their own accomplishments as long as these graduates remain civil and professional towards others? It is reasonable to suspect that people’s hostility towards Oxbridge graduates and their desires to monitor others’ secret thoughts and feelings, which are none of their own businesses, indicate their own insecurity. (It is not to say that anyone should feel insecure in the first place!) In fact, their seizure of Lam’s Oxford degree–or any graduates’ degrees–as ammunition against him/them could have been fueled by such feelings of insecurity and resentment.
It is never wrong to feel pride for one’s accomplishments. One is entitled to take pride in whatever accomplishments one made. I nursed my kitty with congenital kidney disease back to health and felt extremely proud of myself as a first-time cat owner. Except for royalties and the ultra-wealthy, most people gain admission to Oxbridge by hard work, something that they should be proud of, intelligence, and some luck. At top institutions, Math (and many other subjects) is as competitive as Law: this is a fact that many in Hong Kong–a twisted and materialistic society–have failed to grasp. It is also understandable to feel strong attachments to these lovely campuses long after one’s graduation. Pride is not arrogance. The need to suppress a socially-acceptable and positive feeling is born of a hypocritical society full of jealous, insecure–and arrogant–people who won’t hesitate to tear down others’ accomplishments and attack accomplished people out of pettiness and jealousy.
It is also extremely hypocritical of these critics to mock the worldliness of university prestige while measuring the worth of graduates of prestigious universities by even worldlier standards of career advancement and money-earning ability. I met freshers at Cambridge who planned on becoming grade school teachers. I could picture them becoming well-qualified and competent teachers whom students would be lucky and honored to learn from. Teaching is by any measure a respectable profession, though not lucrative or prestigious in the eyes of money-minded Hongkongers. Fine people with real substance and outstanding work ethic remains so regardless of their material wealth. In addition, stories abound of people who obtain jobs or promotions by bribing or appeasing their superiors or by sleeping their way up. Perhaps no university admission system is entirely fair. Briberies also happened. However, I have yet to hear of people sleeping their way into Oxbridge or earn their degrees through immoral means.
I like the saying, “Today, I am proud of my school. I hope that my school will be proud of me one day.” To be the pride of one’s alma mater, Oxbridge no less, would be a great feat that few can accomplish. It should nonetheless serve as the motivating force for one’s conduct.
No, Lam does not give a bad name to Oxford. Oxford produces many outstanding graduates every year–bright, moral, and humble–more than many of Hong Kong’s petty critics in their little world realize. To even suggest that he gives a bad name to Oxford so would be to overestimate his power and influence over this great institution. His downfall has been his fault, not Oxford’s. What will happen to him–whether he will be taken to court and what the verdict will be–remains to be seen. One can only hope that he will use his intellect and credentials properly and wisely and in ways that are beneficial to himself and society for the rest of his life.