In his 2016 book The Perfect Dictatorship: China in the 21st Century, Norwegian political scientist Stein Ringen described contemporary China as a “controlocracy,” saying that its system of government has been transformed into a new regime radically harder and more ideological than what came before.
China’s “controlocracy” now bears primary responsibility for the COVID-19 epidemic that is sweeping across that nation and the world.
Over the past eight years, the central leadership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has taken steps to bolster Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) personal authority, as well as expanding the party’s own powers, at the expense of ministries and local and provincial governments. The central authorities have also waged a sustained crackdown on dissent, which has been felt across all domains of Chinese social and political life.
Under the controlocracy, Web sites have been shut down; lawyers, activists and writers have been arrested; and a general chill has descended upon online expression and media reporting.
Equally important, the system Xi has installed since 2012 is also driving the direction of new technologies in China. Cloud computing, big data and artificial intelligence (AI) are all being deployed to strengthen the central government’s control over society.
The first COVID-19 case appeared in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei Province, on Dec. 1 last year, and as early as the middle of the month, the Chinese authorities had evidence that the virus could be transmitted between humans. Nonetheless, the government did not officially acknowledge the epidemic on national television until Jan. 20.
During those seven weeks, Wuhan police punished eight health workers for attempting to sound the alarm on social media. They were accused of “spreading rumors” and disrupting “social order.”
Meanwhile, the Hubei Provincial Government continued to conceal the real number of COVID-19 cases until after local officials had met with the central government in the middle of last month. In the event, overbearing censorship and bureaucratic obfuscation had squandered any opportunity to get the virus under control before it had spread across Wuhan, a city of 14 million people.
By Jan. 23, when the government finally announced a quarantine on Wuhan residents, about 5 million people had already left the city, triggering the epidemic that is now spreading across China and the rest of the world.
When the true scale of the epidemic became clear, Chinese public opinion reflected a predictable mix of anger, anxiety and despair. People took to the Internet to vent their rage and frustration, but it did not take long for the state to crack down, severely limiting the ability of journalists and concerned citizens to share information about the crisis.
On Monday last week, after Xi had chaired the Standing Committee’s second meeting on the epidemic, the CCP’s propaganda apparatus was ordered to “guide public opinion and strengthen information control.” In practice, this means that cutting-edge AI and big-data technologies are being used to monitor the entirety of Chinese public opinion online.
The controlocracy is now running at full throttle, with facial, image and voice-recognition algorithms being used to anticipate and suppress any potential criticism of the government, and to squelch all “unofficial” information about the epidemic.
On Friday last week, Li Wenliang (李文亮), one of the physician whistle-blowers who tried to sound the alarm about the outbreak, died of the coronavirus, which unleashed a firestorm on social media. The Chinese public is already commemorating him as a hero and victim who tried to tell the truth. Millions have taken to social media to express their grief, and to demand an apology from the Chinese government and freedom of expression.
For the first time since coming to power, Xi’s high-tech censorship machine is meeting intense resistance from millions of Chinese Internet users. The controlocracy is being put to the test. Most likely, though, the outbreak itself will be used to justify even more surveillance and control of the population.
Xi is an unabashed dictator, but his dictatorship is far from “perfect.” His obsessive need to control information has deprived Chinese citizens of their right to know what is happening in their communities, and potentially within their own bodies.
As of yesterday, the outbreak had killed 1,383 people and infected another 64,449 in more than 25 countries. For all its advanced digital technologies and extraordinary economic and military power, China is being governed as if it were a premodern autocracy. Chinese deserve better. Unfortunately, they and the rest of the world will continue to pay a high price for Xi’s high-tech despotism.
Xiao Qiang, founder and editor-in-chief of China Digital Times, is a research scientist at the University of California, Berkeley’s School of Information.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS