Must-Read Articles on 1989 Protest
Tiananmen killings: Was the media right? from BBC News by James Miles
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8057762.stm
There was no Tiananmen Square massacre, but there was a Beijing massacre. The shorthand we often use of the “Tiananmen Square protests” of 1989 gives the impression that this was just a Beijing issue. It was not. Protests occurred in almost every city in China (even in a town on the edge of the Gobi desert).
Tiananmen at Twenty from The Nation by Jeffrey Wasserstrom
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090615/wasserstrom
How long can the regime keep expressions of discontent from snowballing again into something that threatens its power? This remains an open question, especially in light of the global economic downturn, which has not hit China as hard as it has many other countries but has led to a staggering number of factory closings and prompted an urban-to-rural migration of many workers who are not happy to be heading home. This is a phenomenon to watch, since economic frustrations were a crucial spur to action in 1989 and are likely to figure centrally in the next big challenge the leadership faces from below.
For now, though, the long series of high-growth years provides the regime with a buffer, allowing many who are struggling to think they could do well in the future. The party’s real difficulties will come when the memory of the recent upward surge has receded and a broad cross-section of people who have been left behind start to lose hope of prosperous times ahead. This is bound to happen eventually, but not yet. And we should not underestimate the ability of this regime, which has been so effective at defying the odds, to further delay its long-predicted demise.
Also noteworthy are comment from The Guardian: Lessons from Tiananmen (”The best way to remember those who died in the Tiananmen massacre is to reaffirm the Chinese people’s right to civil liberties”) and an interview with Wang Dan (Wired) on the importance of IT to the political awareness of young Chinese citizens, in which Wang Dan called on Western governments to civil society in China.
Buchimifan (@buchimifan) roamed to the Square 3 or 4 hours ago. According to his tweets, to the East side of Tiananmen Square, “It looked harmonious and there were more police cars than mosquitoes.” Policemen checked his bag politely. “Taking photographs was OK. Some took a lot of photos of policemen.” See the photos taken on the Square by Buchimifan (on Flickr).
All: Chinese book Great Chinese Famine history reading
by Crane Wang
leave a comment
Reading Chronicle of Dingxi Orphanage
Chronicle of Dingxi Orphanage, Chinese book, written by Yang Xianhui / 定西孤儿院纪事，杨显惠
Like most tragic events in Chinese history, the Great Famine that happened between 1958 and 1961 in this country is not mostly forgotten. If anyone still remember sad old stories like famine, violence in the Cultural Revolution or careless killing of “capitalist liberals” in the early 1980’s, the government will try its best to persuade it didn’t do anything wrong — if there was indeed any wrong, the government always has a good excuse.
The Great Famine is officially called “Three Years of Natural Disasters”, “Three Years of Difficulties”. Although it is proven that there wasn’t widespread natural disasters, and all the difficulties happened only because wrong industrial & agricultural policies from the Great Leap Forward.
If in Tombstone (墓碑), senior journalist of State news agency Yang Jisheng (杨继绳) gave an elaborate, comprehensive and rather academic study on the Great Famine, Yang Xianhui’s (杨显惠) narration in this book is more individual. In his calm narration, Yang Xianhui let the characters recount their own stories in a truthful and forceful way. The excruciating experiences of starvation, death and cannibalism can only be understood more deeply in such a style.
Whole villages of people died of starvation. Some survived on grass, barks. And yes, some ate their children to survive. How could such horrible situation ever come on this Earth?
In the 5-thousand year long Chinese history, such terrible famine would about violent uprising, then a new dynasty. But in the three years of famine, and after that, the hungry people of this People’s Republic didn’t know what the hell is really going on in their country. They knew nother and were always piously worshiping Red Sun Chairman Mao, they were always obsessed with the fantasy of another world war.
This government doesn’t want to be responsible for anything wrongdoing that itself has heartlessly done. The Communist Party tend to call the Great Famine a natural disaster, and the Cultural Revolution a political catastrophe. The trick here is no one is actually responsible for disasters and catastrophes. Truth is the real bad guy will never take any responsibility in this country.
What if any tragedy happen today? Without freedom of the media, without allowing people to talk about whatever is really going on, without any restraint of irresponsible government behavior, similar thing will take place for another time, maybe in a smaller scale. Think about SARS, government cover-up only made more damage. In the end an unlucky guy was picked as scape-goat (later that guy was quietly promoted). Let’s see what happens in the government if avian flu become a big problem.
Signs of Political Reform Since 1970’s
This is an interesting article introducing the signs of political reform since 1970’s. Here’s a brief introduction.
Original Title: 政治规则确立的30年 (in Chinese)
Original URI: http://www.douban.com/group/topic/4219342/
The 30 years since Reform and Opening Up has created a new political order in China. Several decisions and political arrangements made in these 30 years will influence this country in the 50 or 100 years to come.
To a single person, 30 years is too long a time that brings half a life away. Yet it is very short time for the political system to have a significant transition.
As our current political system does not have a constitutional ground, these unwritten rules shall be accepted as a conventional way of politics to ensure a peaceful development of this country.
In these 3 decades, the following rules has been or is being established and accepted:
- Bottom line of political struggle: the loser won’t lose their life.
- Civil officials shall govern, military power exits political spectrum.
- Maximum tenure of political leadership is 10 years.
- Rule of choosing a successor is set.
- The power of Premier is on the rise.
No. 1: Bottom line of political struggle: the loser won’t lose their life.
This rule is set when the Gang of Four was crushed. In the history of political struggle of Communist Party, usually the underdog would lose their life. Some lucky people could keep their life on exile or banishment (e.g. Lin Biao, Liu Shaoqi, etc.) However, the Gang of Four were all Politburo Standing Committee members, and they were only sentenced to jail instead of being killed after they’d totally lost the political combat.
This doesn’t seem a significant change, but it is really important for the political system. This gives a message that political struggle no longer matters that much as before, it is no longer something so important as to be linked to one’s life. Such message was confirmed on the 40’s anniversary of the foundation of China PR (1989). It was yet again clarified that you won’t lose your life even if you made a severe “political mistake”. (People did die in 1989 on the Square, however political figures [e.g. Zhao Ziyang] was put in house arrest instead of killed.)
Therefore the armed clashes or assassination that was previously possible is no longer a regular strategy. Politics no longer means blood, war or coup d’état. This is a foundation of peaceful transfer of political power.
No. 2 Civil officials shall govern, military power exits political spectrum.
Army controled by State government is the next step. For now, it is more important to contain its power by any means. Currently there is no army presence in Politburo, and the Army is controlled military committee of Communist Party. In retrospect, the Communist Party used to boast it’s a “regime of guns”, power of military forces used to be beyond the Party itself. An army under control of civil officials (though from Communist Party) is a remarkable development per se.
No. 3 Maximum tenure of political leadership is 10 years.
So there wouldn’t be another dictator like Mao.
No. 4 Rules of choosing successor is set.
Hu Jintao was appointed as a successor of Jiang Zemin by Deng Xiaoping when he was alive. And Xi Jinping, who is expected to be the next president (and party boss), is believed to be a result of compromise between factions in the Communist Party.
In short, the 3rd leader would have been decided in the time of the 1st leader, and 4th would have been decided in the time of the 2nd leader. If this were in US, Barack Obama would have been chosen during Bill Clinton’s Administration, and G. W. Bush would have been appointed during his father’s presidency. Well, this is far from anything like democracy, but at least there won’t be coup d’état or assassination or another cultural revolution any more.
No. 5 The power of Premier is on the rise.
China’s Constitution defines Premier as the leader of Administration (State Council), and President is only a symbolic position. Now, the Premier Wen Jiabao is more and more exposed to the public and appears to be much more powerful than before. It is expected that Premier be more influential and powerful in the coming years.
