China’s “zero COVID-19” policy is unscientific, inhumane and autocratic. It has caused great human suffering and economic havoc, and resulted in many unnecessary fatalities. The latest incident was a fire at a high-rise apartment in Urumqi, Xinjiang.
A COVID-19 lockdown prevented the residents from escaping the blaze and the firefighters from reaching them. Local officials say that 10 were killed, including three children, while nine were injured. Many believe the number of casualties is much higher.
Demonstrations erupted throughout China. Students at Beijing’s Tsinghua University held blank sheets of paper to show their disgust with government lies and censorship.
Song Dynasty poet Su Shih (蘇軾) wrote a poem to express that helpless feeling: “No words to ask; only tears in thousands of lines.”
The “Blank Paper Movement” appears to be the biggest nationwide protest in China under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in recent history.
The “zero COVID-19” policy has been intrusive, thoughtless, reckless and heartless. The majority of college students in China today have known nothing of college life, just COVID-19 lockdowns. Many low-income workers have been unable to feed their families, or care for their old and young. Youth unemployment has reached 20 percent. Worse yet, people have been deprived of freedom. Not surprisingly, protesters chanted: “Give me liberty or give me death.”
The curse for Chinese has been a totalitarian regime. Will this be the magical moment that finally breaks that curse?
Protesters have simple demands: democracy, freedom and for Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and the CCP to step down. Clearly, public opinion is turning against the CCP as a legitimate government.
However, the movement is a spontaneous outpouring of emotions that does not have leaders.
Moreover, given that Xi is willing to jail or kill anyone who opposes him, one can expect few political concessions.
Regardless, when historians review these events, the movement might be recognized as the beginning of the end of the CCP, and a social movement of awakening for Chinese to seek liberty and justice, and to secure freedom and democracy, by revolution if necessary. How long it will take is anybody’s guess.
For the sake of humanity, the international community must ensure that Chinese get the help they need. Anyone who orders the shooting of protesters should be immediately prosecuted for crimes against humanity.
The Internet should be maintained to prevent the government from blocking and isolating the protests. Businesses, including Apple, should consider moving out of China as a form of economic sanction against the CCP’s tyrannical actions.
There is no recipe for a revolution to succeed, but nothing can be accomplished without good planning.
An opposition party should be organized to lead the negotiations. While the CCP’s 20th National Congress granted Xi another five-year term, the public has not. Xi should get five years as a transition period, while cities and provinces hold local elections in two years, and national elections in another two.
As American journalist Elmer Davis said: “This nation will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave.” Bravery loves company. A lone figure with two banners on a highway overpass in central Beijing on Oct. 13 denounced Xi as a “despotic traitor.” Since then, tens of thousands have chanted the same.
While with “no words to ask; only tears to speak,” the movement in China has made history with its breadth and depth. Let history show that humanity will overpower tyranny.
James J.Y. Hsu is a retired professor of physics.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS