Recently Zhu Houze died; he had been head of the Central Propaganda Department from 1985-1987 and a progressive who fell from power after the June 4th massacre. Trends magazine - which is banned in China - described his memorial service as a memorial to lost hopes for political reform:
Zhu Houze has taken with him the last hope of the Communist Party.
Zhu Houze's memorial service on the 11th of May was a rare and grand occasion with a style all of its own. The attendees lost no time in spreading the news from mouth to mouth, and everybody who should have been present turned up. Some described it as the largest meeting of democrats, including both system insiders and outsiders, in the 21 years since the June 4th massacre. Sadness at the departure of Zhu Houze mingled oddly with happiness as old friends renewed acquaintances, giving the occasion a special flavour. More importantly, they were saying goodbye to an era, to hopes which they had once held: Zhu Houze was a leading democratic thinker within the Chinese Communist Party; while Li Rui, Hu Zewei and others were also important democratic leaders within the Communist Party, Zhu's thinking on the existing system, on changing society, on China's future as well as on constitutional democracy within human civilisation was the most advanced. In an anti-intellectual, a reactionary one-party dictatorship, his theoretical training, strategic vision and maintenance of personal integrity despite the forces of the political whirlpool were beyond what most people can hope to achieve. He was considered to have combined the best qualities of both Hu Yaobang and Zhao Zeyang; he had Hu's selflessness, innovativeness and courage and Zhao's sharp wits，adaptability and prudence, so naturally he was seen as hope for the democratic faction within the Communist Party.
Before he died, Hu Yaobang said: "I don't care about my on resignation, I just feel that I have let down two people, that's Zhu Houze and Bai Jinian. Because Zhu Houze is someone who could have been General Secretary." Zhu Houze and Hu Yaobang were very close; in a manuscript commemorating the 20th anniversary of the death of Hu Yaobang, Zhu Houze wrote: " Comrade Hu Yaobang always complied with Communist Party organisational discipline but in his later years, his ideas were always ahead of other people, he truly and sincerely strove for reform, and adopted every possible method and even compromise to promose a transition, you could say he really spared no efforts...Hu Yaobang was the last person who tried to attempt a breakthrough within the traditional system without turning his back on the rules." The same could be said of Zhu Houze himself.
In the 20 years following the June 4 massacre, Zhu Houze and the ideas which he advocated were frozen; although Zhu Houze had already refocused his energy on to the (problems of) the lower levels of society, to constantly changing new technology and to the environment, the unstinting interest group in Zhongnanhai ( ie Chinas top leaders) complained that he was a nuisance and so he was hated, put under surveillance and prevented from travelling abroad; even after he died they insisted on covering his coffin with a Communist Party flag; Zhu Houze's whole spirit and body was unfailingly castigated and consumed by them. It's unfortunate that somebody so talented was shoved aside and those with far less ability took command.
Zhu Houze once said, " I'm somebody who grew up with revolutionary work, practically my entire life has been spent in the struggle, but the cruellest struggle did not come from the KMT, it came from within the Communist Party. The Communist Party's struggle against its own members is the most harsh, Chinese people's struggle against Chinese people is the harshest". Shortly before his death he raised his grave doubts about the cruel struggle and sacrifice of human rights of the so-called " Chinese Model" and forecast that this would become a great controversy in the 21st-century.
What made Zhu Houze different to others is that he had a very clear knowledge about himself and the Communist party's democratic faction and he warned " the survival of us old folks (meaning those inclined towards political reform) gives young people hope, but in fact there is no hope". He emphasised this saying: " There is no hope. The hope which you see is because you see us old folks are still alive so you have these fantasies. But we ourselves no longer have such fantasies." Some people describe this as Zhu's last political testament.
With the departure of Zhu Houze, all hope for political reform in China and all hope of internal democratisation within the Communist party is irrevocably destroyed. Hope that this system can improve itself and can transform itself is completely destroyed. Hopes that people like Hu Yaobang, Zhao Zhiyang and Zhu Houze can turn the tide with their herculean efforts is also lost. This is not just the tragedy of Zhu Houze, it is the tragedy of China and the whole world which has been kidnapped by the Communist Party. It is not surprising that someone was heard to sigh at the hemorial service: "I I fear this is the last meeting of its kind".
This is a translation of an editorial from this month's Trends Magazine.
2010年5月18日 星期二
Translation of some of Yuan Tengfei's comments on youtube
These videos have been censored and I can't find them with subtitles; here are my subtitles for one of his most controversial videos:
If you take China's population figures for 1959-1961
And subtract the normal mortality figures
And remove the "abnormal deaths"
You'll find that the China had negative population growth
People were so hungry they had no energy for procreation
Go home and ask your grand parents
In those days if you picked up a gnawed corn cob you were lucky
Or a cabbage root
People's heads were swollen from malnutrition
There is an old lady in my courtyard
her husband hanged himself
because he lost 30 grain tickets. That's how much life was worth then
People even starved to death in the cities
They did not just starve to death in the countryside
I've read the Communist Party's books about this period and figured it out
So by all means go and look at Mao's mausoleum, but remember it's China's Yasakuni shrine
Remember that the person in their has the blood of the people all over his hands
You can say the corpse is a fakeYou can visit, but don't worship Mao
I have been to the Yasakuni shrine
But you should not worship Mao
If you worship him you are a fascists
Personally I never go to Tiananmen Square
Tiananmen give me the creeps - 40 million people died
There should be a memorial there to the victims of the regime who died from 1949-1978
But don't repeat this; if you do, I'll deny I said it, China is not that liberal yet
If you take China's population figures for 1959-1961
And subtract the normal mortality figures
And remove the "abnormal deaths"
You'll find that the China had negative population growth
People were so hungry they had no energy for procreation
Go home and ask your grand parents
In those days if you picked up a gnawed corn cob you were lucky
Or a cabbage root
People's heads were swollen from malnutrition
There is an old lady in my courtyard
her husband hanged himself
because he lost 30 grain tickets. That's how much life was worth then
People even starved to death in the cities
They did not just starve to death in the countryside
I've read the Communist Party's books about this period and figured it out
So by all means go and look at Mao's mausoleum, but remember it's China's Yasakuni shrine
Remember that the person in their has the blood of the people all over his hands
You can say the corpse is a fakeYou can visit, but don't worship Mao
I have been to the Yasakuni shrine
But you should not worship Mao
If you worship him you are a fascists
Personally I never go to Tiananmen Square
Tiananmen give me the creeps - 40 million people died
There should be a memorial there to the victims of the regime who died from 1949-1978
But don't repeat this; if you do, I'll deny I said it, China is not that liberal yet
2010年5月16日 星期日
Han Han blogs about Yuan Tengfei :"Those spring onions which never get clean"
This is my corrected version of Han Han's recent blog post in which he comments on the fear of ideological discipline and the duty of teachers to their students.
Recently, Fujian released ten regulations on higher education. Of these, people focused mostly on the second regulation, which stipulated that: if in the course of teaching, educators spread erroneous statements in violation of the Party line, principles, policies, basic theory, or national laws and regulations, thereby adversely impacting students’ establishment of correct ideology and political beliefs, a “one-vote veto” will be carried out, and the offender will be dismissed.
What was comforting to me was that is that when I saw the regulations, I first thought they were implementing a policy of “executed with one shot,” but in fact it’s only “one vote veto” --much more advanced than in Mao Zedong’s time. As for what type of person can cast this one vote, I really don’t care. I only care that these principles, policies, and basic theories are really difficult to grasp. Those in power require ideological unity from all of us, but often they themselves are incapable of ideological unity. When I was young, I vaguely recall that my high school textbook talked about the separation of powers, and that my political textbook and politics teachers all said that separation of powers is a good thing. But recently, I keep seeing essays and statements from officials saying that the separation of powers is wrong. You know that I only have a high school diploma; my politics courses stopped at high school. I just feel very perplexed. I am worried what will happen to those teachers and textbook editors who spread those erroneous ideas. They are always reading the documents the leaders gave them; if they make a mistake, they will be disciplined by the authorities, simply because they were reading last night's documents- when their leaders woke up this morning, they changed their ideas.
I read somewhere pithy description of what this feels like …a man gets in a car, signals to turn right, but actually turns left, and then unexpectedly does a U-turn. If you are unlucky you can get killed by such a driver.
News reporters who search for the truth; history teachers who narrate history; authors and scholars who write a little truth; movie directors who film reality; some cases are treated as ideological errors; serious cases are treated as crime. But as soon this happens, people start speculating: was so-and-so taken for questioning by the police, or were they censored or arrested? In the end, even though often nothing really bad happened to the person- at most the "criminal evidence" has been deleted - people still feel worried about themselves. They feel that maybe that person was let off because he was too well known, so the government was hesitant to take action - whereas in my case would the government have those kind of concerns? What kind of deeply rooted image is this? How do things come to such a pass?
In any age, brains are washed just like vegetables, and there are always a few onions that just won’t come clean. Before, people wanted to cut the dirty heads off these onions to make them clean, but as times changed, people only expect those few dirty onions to mind their own business without spreading their dirty ideas. If they do try to tell other onions, they will immediately be pulped.
Many people believe that the document was sent out by the Fujian Education Bureau because there have recently been a few history teachers and university professors with pretty big mouths. Of course, I also saw today’s news. It is said that history teacher Yuan Tengfei is being disciplined, the same day Tianshangrenjian nightclub was being closed. But I believe it’s not due to these [political] reasons. When the Sensitive Department has not given orders, the government doesn’t respond so rapidly, nor do departments coordinate this well. It is just a coincidence, a routine regulation of the Department of Education. Every sector has regulations like this, it’s just expressed differently. It’s like all lotteries have the same rules, but it's up to the lottery organizer to decide how to explain them. But I don’t want to probe into who or what has the power to pass judgment on whether another person’s thoughts are correct or incorrect. This type of topic is meaningless, because it is obvious who has this power. Of course, powerful people have the power. Anything that benefits their interests and power is, of course, correct; anything that doesn’t benefits their interests or power is, of course, wrong. As long as you master this rule, you don’t have to worry about what is a right or wrong judgment.
To the majority of history, language, and political science teachers: what sort of future role do you see yourself playing in the teaching of history, language, and politics? How do you think you will be appraised? Perhaps you are a vegetable in spite of yourself, but each one of your students is your seed. Try to be a real teacher; teach your students common sense and reflection, independence and justice. That way, when you are old, you will be able to tell your children that once, when you were in this profession, your heart felt pride, and was not full of shame.
Recently, Fujian released ten regulations on higher education. Of these, people focused mostly on the second regulation, which stipulated that: if in the course of teaching, educators spread erroneous statements in violation of the Party line, principles, policies, basic theory, or national laws and regulations, thereby adversely impacting students’ establishment of correct ideology and political beliefs, a “one-vote veto” will be carried out, and the offender will be dismissed.
What was comforting to me was that is that when I saw the regulations, I first thought they were implementing a policy of “executed with one shot,” but in fact it’s only “one vote veto” --much more advanced than in Mao Zedong’s time. As for what type of person can cast this one vote, I really don’t care. I only care that these principles, policies, and basic theories are really difficult to grasp. Those in power require ideological unity from all of us, but often they themselves are incapable of ideological unity. When I was young, I vaguely recall that my high school textbook talked about the separation of powers, and that my political textbook and politics teachers all said that separation of powers is a good thing. But recently, I keep seeing essays and statements from officials saying that the separation of powers is wrong. You know that I only have a high school diploma; my politics courses stopped at high school. I just feel very perplexed. I am worried what will happen to those teachers and textbook editors who spread those erroneous ideas. They are always reading the documents the leaders gave them; if they make a mistake, they will be disciplined by the authorities, simply because they were reading last night's documents- when their leaders woke up this morning, they changed their ideas.
I read somewhere pithy description of what this feels like …a man gets in a car, signals to turn right, but actually turns left, and then unexpectedly does a U-turn. If you are unlucky you can get killed by such a driver.
News reporters who search for the truth; history teachers who narrate history; authors and scholars who write a little truth; movie directors who film reality; some cases are treated as ideological errors; serious cases are treated as crime. But as soon this happens, people start speculating: was so-and-so taken for questioning by the police, or were they censored or arrested? In the end, even though often nothing really bad happened to the person- at most the "criminal evidence" has been deleted - people still feel worried about themselves. They feel that maybe that person was let off because he was too well known, so the government was hesitant to take action - whereas in my case would the government have those kind of concerns? What kind of deeply rooted image is this? How do things come to such a pass?
In any age, brains are washed just like vegetables, and there are always a few onions that just won’t come clean. Before, people wanted to cut the dirty heads off these onions to make them clean, but as times changed, people only expect those few dirty onions to mind their own business without spreading their dirty ideas. If they do try to tell other onions, they will immediately be pulped.
Many people believe that the document was sent out by the Fujian Education Bureau because there have recently been a few history teachers and university professors with pretty big mouths. Of course, I also saw today’s news. It is said that history teacher Yuan Tengfei is being disciplined, the same day Tianshangrenjian nightclub was being closed. But I believe it’s not due to these [political] reasons. When the Sensitive Department has not given orders, the government doesn’t respond so rapidly, nor do departments coordinate this well. It is just a coincidence, a routine regulation of the Department of Education. Every sector has regulations like this, it’s just expressed differently. It’s like all lotteries have the same rules, but it's up to the lottery organizer to decide how to explain them. But I don’t want to probe into who or what has the power to pass judgment on whether another person’s thoughts are correct or incorrect. This type of topic is meaningless, because it is obvious who has this power. Of course, powerful people have the power. Anything that benefits their interests and power is, of course, correct; anything that doesn’t benefits their interests or power is, of course, wrong. As long as you master this rule, you don’t have to worry about what is a right or wrong judgment.
To the majority of history, language, and political science teachers: what sort of future role do you see yourself playing in the teaching of history, language, and politics? How do you think you will be appraised? Perhaps you are a vegetable in spite of yourself, but each one of your students is your seed. Try to be a real teacher; teach your students common sense and reflection, independence and justice. That way, when you are old, you will be able to tell your children that once, when you were in this profession, your heart felt pride, and was not full of shame.
2010年5月15日 星期六
Censorship successful during Expo week kindergarten massacre
Western media like the BBC and the San Francisco Chronicle are still repeating official versions of the Taizhou kindergarten massacre which say that none of the 31 children attacked actually died. This is despite reports circulating on the Internet that actually a number of children did die. There is video footage of parents demonstrating and shouting the slogans: " we want the truth, we want our children" after they were not allowed into the hospital which was close to them as part of a news blackout.
This shows the success of the official suppression of bad news which coincided with the Shanghai Expo.
This shows the success of the official suppression of bad news which coincided with the Shanghai Expo.
History Repeats Itself
The popular online history teacher Yuan Tengfei (袁腾飞） has been sanctioned according to official media. His popular online videos have been deleted and he has been forbidden from continuing his online history teaching.
Yuan has compared Mau's mausoleum with the yasakuni shrine, and said that there should be a monument in Tiananmen Square to the victims of the Chinese regime from 1949 to 1978. He as compared China's spending on nuclear weapons development during the 1960s famine which killed over 30 million people with the present regime in North Korea. (According an estimate in Jung Chang's biography of Mao, had that money being spent on food instead, it could have prevented all those famine deaths.)
Yuan was initially promoted by Party media who liked his popularisation of history study. The timing of this censorship seems to be connected to his plans to publish a book which has attracted attention from his critics who have publicised his dissident views.
The episode echoes the treatment of history professor Yuan Weishi (袁伟时）who questioned the official version of the Boxer Rebellion in an article which led to the closing of Freezing Point magazine in 2005。
Yuan's lectures are still available on youtube
Yuan has compared Mau's mausoleum with the yasakuni shrine, and said that there should be a monument in Tiananmen Square to the victims of the Chinese regime from 1949 to 1978. He as compared China's spending on nuclear weapons development during the 1960s famine which killed over 30 million people with the present regime in North Korea. (According an estimate in Jung Chang's biography of Mao, had that money being spent on food instead, it could have prevented all those famine deaths.)
Yuan was initially promoted by Party media who liked his popularisation of history study. The timing of this censorship seems to be connected to his plans to publish a book which has attracted attention from his critics who have publicised his dissident views.
The episode echoes the treatment of history professor Yuan Weishi (袁伟时）who questioned the official version of the Boxer Rebellion in an article which led to the closing of Freezing Point magazine in 2005。
Yuan's lectures are still available on youtube
2010年5月9日 星期日
Kenengba and 1984BBC blogs blocked
Two mainland China blogs have been blocked again; Kenengba and 1984BBC. In the case of Kenengba, this may be because Kenengba recently published a survey of Great Fire Wall jumpers, their attitude to censorship and motives for jumping the GFW. Kenengba blogger Joseph Ng who conducted the survey found out that 80 percent of wall jumpers do so merely to access google.
Propaganda instructions to media leaked to RJF
Last week, che International Federation of Journalists - www.ifj.org - released copies of leaked instructions from China's Communist Party Central Propaganda Department. These include instructions to the media to restrict coverage of the recent spate of school and kindergarten mass murders, the real estate bubble, the visit of North Korea leader Kim, political trends in Taiwan and certain aspects of the Shanghai Expo. However, according to RFA's Zhang Weiguo, these topics are all hot on the Internet, so the Central Propaganda Department's attempt to restrict coverage may be weakening.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)