This is a big year for anniversaries in China. On Saturday, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) commemorated the centennial of the May Fourth Movement, the student-led protests in front of Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in 1919 that marked the birth of Chinese nationalism.
Then, one month later, on June 4, will come the 30th anniversary of the violent suppression of pro-democracy student protests at the same site.
This milestone, by contrast, will not be officially acknowledged, much less commemorated, in China.
The 1919 demonstrations are immortalized in stone on the Monument to the People’s Heroes in Tiananmen Square. Referring to the same ideals of science and democracy, the protesters in 1989 also presented themselves as loyal to the nation.
However, the 1989 movement ended in what is known outside China as the Tiananmen Square Massacre, and within China as the “Tiananmen incident.” The events of three decades ago are a taboo subject in China, scrubbed by the authorities from the Internet and largely unknown to the country’s younger generation.
It is a persistent contradiction that the Chinese state claims the mantle of May 4 while repressing the memory of June 4.
The students of 1919 are celebrated as outspoken patriots, in keeping with a long Chinese tradition that places the intellectual in a role of social responsibility. The ideal student of imperial times took great risks to speak truth to power, to expose official corruption and spur reform.
University students in the early 20th century inherited this legacy. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) actually has its roots in the May Fourth Movement: Student periodicals spread Marxist ideas, a Marxist study group was founded at Peking University and Mao Zedong (毛澤東) himself embraced Marxism-Leninism as a student worker in the library.
As the May Fourth Movement has broad and popular resonance in China, the student protesters of 1989 — sporting long hair and blue jeans, rather than long gowns and pleated skirts — consciously referred to it.
As their predecessors did, they emphasized their patriotism, pointing out official corruption and the economic inequalities that had resulted from the post-Mao economic reforms.
Yet the Chinese state branded the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest a “counterrevolutionary riot,” and blamed a handful of conspirators for misleading the people.
Despite the world’s attention, the movement ended in a crackdown, followed by official silence and a public amnesia that worsens by the year.
The June 4 anniversary nonetheless remains politically sensitive, and the Chinese state always goes into high alert in the lead-up to it. In what has become an annual ritual, foreign journalists in China are blocked from covering the anniversary — as Louisa Lim (林慕蓮), a former BBC and National Public Radio Beijing correspondent, has said.
Since 1989, the CCP has made every effort to bind young people to the Chinese state and its priorities. Children take lessons in “patriotic education,” fidelity is cultivated through the Young Pioneers of China and the Communist Youth League, and universities have developed elaborate systems to guard against political deviance and reward political loyalty with jobs.
To a large extent, such efforts have made Chinese youth apolitical. The May Fourth legacy has effectively been divided, with patriotism cleaved apart from protest.
Yet the state has not entirely succeeded in co-opting China’s students. Last year, students who support the CCP’s own Marxist ideology became the latest generation of protesters to run afoul of the authorities.
Last summer, groups began organizing factory workers in southern China, calling attention to abuses and helping workers to form an independent labor union. Presenting themselves as loyal to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the students launched campaigns in the field and on their university campuses.
The state has detained dozens of them. Videos show Peking University officials attempting to block student organizations, and witnesses have confirmed the disappearance of Marxist student leaders at the hands of plainclothes police.
The irony is that China is repressing leftist students whose words and deeds embody the CCP’s original ideals. Just like the party’s earliest leaders, including Mao, they champion exploited workers and seek to organize them, sometimes even engaging in factory work themselves.
As their classes in Marxism and Mao’s writings have taught them to do, they investigate social conditions and question China’s deep inequalities. Like their May Fourth forebears, today’s young Marxists see themselves as loyal students speaking truth to power.
This year’s anniversaries of the 1919 and 1989 movements therefore carry particular weight.
The May Fourth legacy is one of patriotism and enlightenment. Born of those claims, the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989 ended in violence and silence.
Foreign observers will doubtless point to the Chinese authorities’ contradictory attitudes toward May 4 and June 4, and conclude that China now has the power to shape its own historical narrative.
However, the case of the Marxist students last year highlighted the continued potential for a loyal opposition. As the PRC looks ahead to the 70th anniversary of its founding this October, it must continue to reckon with its own history.
Denise Y. Ho is a professor of history at Yale University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers